ATTN JMS: Wolf 359 Conventions Limited
Charlotte Banfield
I was considering attending a forthcoming Wolf Events convention
over here in England, and being a suspicious person, checked the
company out on the companies house web site before sending my
registration off. The site said that the accounts for Wolf 359
Conventions Limited were overdue since November 1998. I then sent
an email to the enquiries desk at companies house asking if this
was normal, or whether I had reason to be concerned.
They replied within 3 hours saying that the company was "in default"
and was "in danger of being struck off".
Presumably if this happens, they will not be able to hold events,
and people like me who had sent money stand a good chance of
losing the lot.
Is there anything that can be done over on your side of the Atlantic
to warn the stars who might be thinking of attending one of these
events to make sure they don't get dragged into the mess when it does
all go bust?
Sorry if this is not really your territory, but you are the only
approachable person in this business that I could think of.
The companies house web site is http://www.companieshouse.co.uk -
check under "free information" and search for "wolf359". Please do
not take my word for this - feel free to check it out with Companies
House yourself.
Thank you.
Charlie.
--
--
Veggie B5: We Live For The Quorn, We Die For The Quorn
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jms at B5
>over here in England, and being a suspicious person, checked the
>company out on the companies house web site before sending my
>registration off. The site said that the accounts for Wolf 359
>Conventions Limited were overdue since November 1998.
Just for my own understanding, can you clarify what this means, what accounts
are you referring to here, and what is a "companies house?" Does this have
something to do with being a supposed charitable convention?
> I then sent
>an email to the enquiries desk at companies house asking if this
>was normal, or whether I had reason to be concerned.
>They replied within 3 hours saying that the company was "in default"
>and was "in danger of being struck off".
>
I have to say that I'm not surprised that this is the case.
>Presumably if this happens, they will not be able to hold events,
>and people like me who had sent money stand a good chance of
>losing the lot.
>Is there anything that can be done over on your side of the Atlantic
>to warn the stars who might be thinking of attending one of these
>events to make sure they don't get dragged into the mess when it does
>all go bust?
>
I don't have much day to day contact with the cast, I'm afraid, since
everyone's pretty much gone on to do their own things after B5 concluded.
Perhaps others can relay this to the fan clubs of the various actors.
I also try not to get between the cast and their activities.
>Sorry if this is not really your territory, but you are the only
>approachable person in this business that I could think of.
>
I try.
>The companies house web site is http://www.companieshouse.co.uk -
>check under "free information" and search for "wolf359". Please do
>not take my word for this - feel free to check it out with Companies
>House yourself.
>
Thanks for the info.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
Iain Rae
:>I was considering attending a forthcoming Wolf Events convention
:>over here in England, and being a suspicious person, checked the
:>company out on the companies house web site before sending my
:>registration off. The site said that the accounts for Wolf 359
:>Conventions Limited were overdue since November 1998.
: Just for my own understanding, can you clarify what this means, what accounts
: are you referring to here, and what is a "companies house?" Does this have
: something to do with being a supposed charitable convention?
Paul can answer this better than I can so followups set to umtsb5, as I
understand it, and I'm probably wrong, anyone wishing to trade as a business
in the uk, particularly a limited company has to lodge their financial
accounts with companies house i assume as a protection against fraud etc.
NB from their website:
You Fail to Comply With Your Legal Obligation
The absence of legally required information prevents the business community
from making properly informed commercial decisions and denies everyone the
protection they are entitled to by law when dealing with a limited company
If you fail to comply with your legal obligations it may lead the Registrar
to believe that the company is no longer in business or operation. This could
result in the company being dissolved.
In addition, company directors may:
be prosecuted;
end up with a criminal record; and
be fined up to 5,000(ukp) for each and every offence.
:> I then sent
:>an email to the enquiries desk at companies house asking if this
:>was normal, or whether I had reason to be concerned.
:>They replied within 3 hours saying that the company was "in default"
:>and was "in danger of being struck off".
:>
: I have to say that I'm not surprised that this is the case.
:>Presumably if this happens, they will not be able to hold events,
:>and people like me who had sent money stand a good chance of
:>losing the lot.
:>Is there anything that can be done over on your side of the Atlantic
:>to warn the stars who might be thinking of attending one of these
:>events to make sure they don't get dragged into the mess when it does
:>all go bust?
:>
<snip>
: Thanks for the info.
: jms
<stir>
I would guess that companies house may be the people to contact if anyone
had any queries about....say accounts referring to charitable donations etc.
Though you may have had to have been contractually linked with the company.
NB I am a SysyAdmin/retread Astronomer, not a lawyer or accountant.
Paul......sickem :)
--
| Iain Rae | Tel: 0131 449 5111 Ext 4406 (Day)(but I'm never in)|
| Computing Officer. | Any Opinions I am able to form are my own and in no|
| Civil & Offshore Eng. | way reflect those of my employers. |
| Heriot-Watt University.| Well that's my opinion anyway. |
Paul Harper
>Paul can answer this better than I can so followups set to umtsb5, as I
>understand it, and I'm probably wrong, anyone wishing to trade as a business
>in the uk, particularly a limited company has to lodge their financial
>accounts with companies house i assume as a protection against fraud etc.
>
>NB from their website:
>You Fail to Comply With Your Legal Obligation
>The absence of legally required information prevents the business community
>from making properly informed commercial decisions and denies everyone the
>protection they are entitled to by law when dealing with a limited company
>If you fail to comply with your legal obligations it may lead the Registrar
>to believe that the company is no longer in business or operation. This could
>result in the company being dissolved.
>
> In addition, company directors may:
>
> be prosecuted;
>
> end up with a criminal record; and
>
> be fined up to 5,000(ukp) for each and every offence.
>
>
>I would guess that companies house may be the people to contact if anyone
>had any queries about....say accounts referring to charitable donations etc.
>Though you may have had to have been contractually linked with the company.
>
>NB I am a SysyAdmin/retread Astronomer, not a lawyer or accountant.
Iain,
Since I am *far* from an expert in UK company law, I have just sent
the following email to companies house asking for some clarification.
I hope they don't mind me asking what must be fairly basic questions
(it would be expected that if we were interested in stuff like this
that we'd hire a lawyer / accountant) but here's hoping...
Quote:
Sirs,
There has been some speculation on the internet concerning the ongoing
viability of Wolf 359 Conventions Limited (company no. 03198158) which
has been in default in posting its financial statements since November
1998.
Since nobody on the forum in question is an expert in UK company law,
I would very much appreciate it if you could clarify a few points for
me?
1) In the case of a company like this which has defaulted on its
accounts for a significant period of time, what is the process from
this point? Is there an automatic legal procedure that gets triggered,
or does someone have to make a complaint before action is taken?
2) Where accounts have not been submitted, to what extent are the
directors personally liable for amounts paid to the company in advance
of goods or services being supplied?
3) Does the company secretary (as listed in the companies house
register) have the same financial and legal responsibilities as the
directors?
4) If someone has a suspicion that money collected in the name of
charity has been used for other purposes, what should the procedure be
to get this investigated?
5) If an official of a company has been spending the company money on
trips abroad that might be considered in excess of those strictly
required for company business, is there a personal tax position for
the company official?
Finally, I would like to thank you for taking the time to answer these
questions.
Best regards,
Paul Harper
p.s. I have posted this message onto the forum, and would like your
permission to post your response to it as well. If you would prefer I
did not do this, please feel free to let me know.
End quote.
--
A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
" . . . SFX is a fairly useless publication on just
about every imaginable front. Never have so many jumped-up fanboys done so
little, with so much, for so long." JMS.
Iain Rae
: On 24 Feb 2000 06:12:10 -0700, Iain Rae <ia...@civ.hw.ac.uk> wrote:
<snip>
: Iain,
: Since I am *far* from an expert in UK company law, I have just sent
: the following email to companies house asking for some clarification.
Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you did but you're tagged in my brain
as "resident expert in the going's on in wolf 359" and I thought you'd
know.
: I hope they don't mind me asking what must be fairly basic questions
: (it would be expected that if we were interested in stuff like this
: that we'd hire a lawyer / accountant) but here's hoping...
At the very least they ought to let us know if it falls in their remit.
NB forgot to put in the original post, Charlotte if you do a Deja search
for posts by paul in rastb and a thread with "propose" or "proposal" in the
subjcet line you should get a potted history of Wolf's goings on
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Iain Rae | Tel: 0131 449 5111 Ext 4406 (Day)(but I'm never in)|
| Computing Officer. | Any Opinions I am able to form are my own and in no|
| Civil & Offshore Eng. | way reflect those of my employers. |
| Heriot-Watt University.| Well that's my opinion anyway. |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Harper
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 14:00:51 +0000, Paul Harper
<pa...@harper.netNOSPAM> wrote:
>Since I am *far* from an expert in UK company law, I have just sent
>the following email to companies house asking for some clarification.
To which I received the rather disappointing reply from
enqu...@companies-house.gov.uk :
Quote:
Thank you for your enquiry.
Late filing penalties were introduced in 1992 to encourage directors
of limited companies to file their accounts on time because they must
provide this statutory information for the public record. Section 242A
of the Companies Act 1985 says that penalties will be imposed on any
company that delivers its accounts to Companies House after the period
allowed for filing. ('Statutory' means by law.)
How much are the penalties?
That depends on how late the accounts reach the Registrar, as shown in
this table:
Length of delay, measured from the date the accounts are due
Public company Private company
3 months or less £500 £100
3 months and one day to 6 months £1,000 £250
6 months and one day to 12 months £2,000 £500
More than 12 months £5,000 £1,000
If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Regards,
E-mail Enquiries
Companies House
Ref: SJS
End Quote.
Ah well. Perhaps I'll try the same enquiry list to the inland revenue
while I'm at it - I wouldn't mind knowing the answers to these
questions.
Anyone else got any suggestions or know a house-trained company
lawyer?
Paul.
Jms at B5
moderators are okay with it, since it does refer to a B5 related situation, and
it mainly a fact-finding situation that relates to many folks in the group who
might be affected by it. So yeah, keep me in formed, thanks.
jms
>Since I am *far* from an expert in UK company law, I have just sent
>the following email to companies house asking for some clarification.
>I hope they don't mind me asking what must be fairly basic questions
>(it would be expected that if we were interested in stuff like this
>that we'd hire a lawyer / accountant) but here's hoping...
>
jms
Paul Harper
to my list of questions:
>1) In the case of a company like this which has defaulted on its
>accounts for a significant period of time, what is the process from
>this point? Is there an automatic legal procedure that gets triggered,
>or does someone have to make a complaint before action is taken?
I believe that the Registrar initiates striking-off procedures where
statutory requirements aren't met. Even if this is so, it does no
harm to point out any such default to the Registrar, who would be
obliged to take action once informed of such default.
>2) Where accounts have not been submitted, to what extent are the
>directors personally liable for amounts paid to the company in advance
>of goods or services being supplied?
I don't think default in filing statutory returns of itself triggers
legal liability as regards the company's debts and defaults; a
compulsory winding-up by the Registrar would, of course, lead to the
normal scrutiny of the company's liabilities by the liquidators, who
would (in the case of insolvency) notify all known creditors and
place advertisements in the London Gazette citing a date
by which all creditors' claims must be registered with them
As regards personal liability of directors and company officers; it's
at the heart of the limited liability system that the shareholders of
a company aren't liable for the company's debts on failure beyond the
extent of their capital investment.
However, where directors and officers of a company have allowed the
company to continue trading, either knowing or having reason to
believe that the company is insolvent, they are liable to both civil
and criminal penalties, and may be held personally liable by
creditors.
>3) Does the company secretary (as listed in the companies house
>register) have the same financial and legal responsibilities as the
>directors?
The company secretary is an officer of the company and therefore
subject to liability in the case of a company knowingly trading while
insolvent
>4) If someone has a suspicion that money collected in the name of
>charity has been used for other purposes, what should the procedure be
>to get this investigated?
Contact the Charity Commissioners, who will perform a preliminary
survey before placing the matter in the hands of the police or the
Attorney General (depending on whether criminal fraud is suspected)
if so advised
>5) If an official of a company has been spending the company money on
>trips abroad that might be considered in excess of those strictly
>required for company business, is there a personal tax position for
>the company official?
If the officer has been receiving benefits in kind (ie trips abroad)
as part of his emoluments of employment, these will be subject to
income tax.
Hope this helps,
End quote.
PCH: Well - plenty of food for thought there...
Jms at B5
>>charity has been used for other purposes, what should the procedure be
>>to get this investigated?
>
>Contact the Charity Commissioners, who will perform a preliminary
>survey before placing the matter in the hands of the police or the
>Attorney General (depending on whether criminal fraud is suspected)
>if so advised
>
That's interesting, because at the very last Wolf convention I attended, I
pulled Brian Cooney aside at a gathering just as the con was starting. We went
out on an open walkway to talk, and I told him I was concerned that no
statements or books had been forthcoming on charity contributions, despite
promises made to that extent.
He then stated to me, quite openly, that of the first two or three such B5
related conventions, very little of the money got to charity, unless the check
was specifically written out to the charity by the con-goer. (During the
Vorcon gathering, I heard from many folks in email that they were not allowed
to make out their checks to the charity in question, they had to make it out to
Wolf or it wouldn't be taken.) He said it went to pay actors fees and other
expenses.
Which, for me, was when the alarm bells began going off, leading to my decision
not to get involved with any further Wolf conventions. I also heard from some
folks who had been involved with the cons who said that the books were either
badly kept or not kept at all, though I have no way of personally confirming
that.
That's the extent of my knowledge on the situation, so perhaps someone over
there can contact these Charity Commissioners to get a clearer picture in case
anything changed or if those statements, as presented to me, were not correct.
Obvioulsy I cannot personally state them as fact, I can only pass on what was
stated to me.
Tom Holt
The message <20000226184942...@ng-fj1.aol.com>
from jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) contains these words:
> He then stated to me, quite openly, that of the first two or three such B5
> related conventions, very little of the money got to charity, unless the check
> was specifically written out to the charity by the con-goer. (During the
> Vorcon gathering, I heard from many folks in email that they were not allowed
> to make out their checks to the charity in question, they had to make it out to
> Wolf or it wouldn't be taken.) He said it went to pay actors fees and other
> expenses.
Or is it an ordinary commercial company which claimed to be donating
a certain proportion of specified profits to charity?
In either case, reference to the Charity Commission would seem to be
the appropriate course of action; the question is whether the alleged
breaches would, if proven, constitute infringement of charity laws,
ordinary fraud or a breach of trading standards regulations. This in
turn would affect the question of who would conduct any
investigation/lawsuit/prosecution that might be deemed necessary; the
Commissioners, the DTI or the police.
Jms at B5
>these notes to the UK discussion groups for B5, Star Trek and SG1 to
>let people start asking their own questions?
>
Certainly there's nothing much that can be done on this side of the pond; it
really is a UK-based problem, so that may be the best solution in terms of
getting more information.
BRETNTRACI
>these notes to the UK discussion groups for B5, Star Trek and SG1 to
>let people start asking their own questions?
Yea like why do Voyager suck..
sorry resistance was futile