BDO move unsettles Sevco High Command

I’m told that there was in impromptu conclave of the Sevco High Command today.Apparently, the decision by BDO to take action against Administrators Duff & Phelps had caught the Blue Room chaps by surprise.

The mood of the conversation was reported to me as “perturbed” and “puzzled”.

There was only one week to go within the five years anniversary, and I understand that this is significant.

I then spoke to an insolvency practitioner in the UK.

His view was that this could get “messy and costly” in court if an Administrator were called upon to justify every single decision of the administration.

Perhaps Daniel Cousin will be called as a witness.

It is at times like this I miss my friend and expert witness Paul McConville.

He would have been all over this.

However, dear reader, I’m afraid that this is beyond the pay grade of your humble correspondent.

What I CAN report is that the news of this litigation has unsettled the Sevco High Command.

Developing story…

0 thoughts on “BDO move unsettles Sevco High Command”

  1. Grant Russell maintains there was no Relegation it was simply a transfer of the old Rangers Club SFA membership to the Charles Green new club.

    Grant maintains the top secret five way Agreement allowed Green to call it the same club because he got the old club’s membership. (This is unlawful).

    You couldn’t make this utter nonsense up.

    They’ve caved in on the club/ company pish. Five Judges laughed it out of court.

    Reply
  2. There is a great quote in the BBC report: “The joint liquidators consider that the former joint administrators failed to take actions which would have reduced costs during the administration period and realised additional value from the company’s assets over and above that obtained from the sale of the business and assets to Sevco.”

    Funny how the Daily Ranger and Scottish Sun failed to reproduce this quote – doubtless they have a blanket ban on the name Sevco.

    The fact is, the administrators failed in their duty to effect a sale of the club in order that it could continue, while maximising the return for the creditors. That was their function.

    More would have been raised for creditors if Ibrox and Murray Park were sold to developers. The whole Sevco deal smacked of corruption and should not go unpunished.

    Reply
  3. If as some people suggest, BDO are being driven by HMRC, is it possible that they are going to try and force the issue legally on whether it is a new club or not on the basis that if the court says it’s the same club, they can then go after the SEVCO ??

    Reply
  4. I ended up fighting kids over a box of Shreddies – Barry Ferguson.

    I recommend reading this “article” in the DR today.

    Barry, step back and take a look at youself, ffs….

    Reply
    • The guy really does make himself look even more of a knuckle dragger than anyone could wish for when kids can take the rise out of him and he goes nuclear on them…

      Barry if you are reading, “Step away from the cereal ya tagnut” before you get your baws handed to you by some young buck…

      Reply
  5. Having just read JJ’s article, the parts of the jigsaw fall into place.

    Gratuitous alienation. Or, Did D&P sell the assets at an unnecessarily low price. As JJ points out, £5.5 M then £22.2 m raised on them a short time afterwards.

    Apparently, they could be “confiscated” and sold to raise a more realistic sum for the creditors, remember them?

    The people running Sevco are supposed to be business men. How did any of them ever make a penny?

    Reply
  6. Clearly Grant Russell trips over himself to explain the same club myth. It’s his quest, his championing of the cause. He’s certainly not neutral on the issue.

    A question for Mr Russell: Grant do you agree that the SFAs decisions have previously been proven unlawful in the courts and overturned? What makes you think a transfer of membership sleight of hand is cosher?

    Neither Scots law, UEFA not FIFA accept your explanation of same club continuation via corrupt SFA membership transfer.

    Grant you’re clutching at straws.

    Is this the best defence you can conjure up after five years of deep thinking?

    It’s doomed if it relies upon the Russell defence.

    Reply
  7. Not surprised they are unsettled. It is my understanding that liquidator can claim back assets if they were sold undervalue. Can’t see their being a quick resolution to this one tho. “They are a loss making business without a credit line from a bank” may be able to add stadium to that quote.

    Reply
  8. Unless I am missing something , Rangers are still in liquidation right? The company has not been struck off yet so still exists.

    I wonder how common it is for liquidation to last this long

    Reply
  9. Increasing stories of massive investment in Sevco coming in from the Far East.
    Interesting, but the story emerged back in November that the investment would be inward bound in March.
    Begs the question. Why would a prospective investor wait nearly six months, during which time the debt for equity or loans increase month on month? Why not, if the figures are correct, come in right away and save costs by not allowing the internal debt to grow.

    Seems strange

    Reply
    • eh . whats the source of these rumours ? BFDJ by any chance ?
      Huge investment has after all been just over the horizon on a permanent basis since the early days of phils expose on the dead clubs impending demise . . according to the Big Fat apologist cheerleader and his fellow fantasists at any rate . . wah ha ha ha ha ha ooh ooh stoppit stoppit it hurts . .hee hee wooh . .. .

      Reply
  10. How apt that in just 5 days’ time, it will be the 5th anniversary of rangers’ death, and that a 5th anniversary is wood. BDO have just gifted them some wood on which they will all be crucified!! Such a pity that Clinton’s Cards don’t do a SORRY YOU’RE DEAD card, otherwise there would be a rush to buy them, with the envelope pre-printed with their address on Edmiston Drive!

    Reply
  11. The late and much lamented Paul often wrote about “gratuitous alienation” when describing the tawdry amount paid for the “basket of assets” and the fact that later redress may be enforced. Could this be what the basket of arses at sevco high command are worried about?

    Reply
  12. Yes indeed.

    How could regular Ibrox guests BDO possibly keep such a secret from the Sevco High Command?

    No nudge and a wink? Sevco Kept out the loop? Shocking truly shocking.

    It’s almost as though King, Murray and Sevco are irrelevant.

    I suppose £30m decisions are way beyond Sevco relevance.

    HMRC know if D&P get squeezed for £30m they might do a deal and squeal on the whole tax avoiding Admin business. Then we’re into conspiracy and criminal convictions.

    Reply
  13. Surely not Phil, you must be mistaken, everything down Ibrox way is just peachy…They are about to be over invested, inundated, with offers and cash…..

    I would say the sales of squeaky bum cream around Govan & Renfrew are about to go meteoric, I see an opportunity here for a entrepreneur to make a killing if they could get a supply strong enough to stop the Chelfonts of the Ibrox massive from shrieking…

    Yes it’s sad to say but I’m rather enjoying this, such a plot would have the late Peter Falk licking his lips…

    Reply
  14. Fearful that some of the buried secrets may not withstand a forensic examination. A court case would also have the capacity to expose the same club myth.

    Reply
  15. The 5 years is interesting. Actions for gratuitous alienation are 5 years back i.e. A Liquidator can challenge any transfer for undervalue for a period of 5 years PRIOR to the liquidators appointment not after it. The GA action can seek the recovery of assets sold/transferred or ‘other redress’ i.e. £20m+ if they can be quantified at that value.

    Then again, win or lose, BDO will still pick up £1m+ in fees for ‘dealing with it!’

    Interesting times ahead.

    Reply
  16. The sale was fine (probably) but the valuation was suboptimal. Not ideal for a company whose goal is to maximise value for creditors, but they came out in public and said their goal was the continuation of the company! (Which failed, but that is not relevant.) I think there should be professional sanctions.

    Reply
  17. If it makes sense to a crook to paint a rusty shed and use the shed as an assett to attract money then BandQ wins it.
    Will this delay Craigy Bhoys trial and lead to it been time barred once Donald makes his entrance.Is this the spoke in the wheel to halt all cases?

    Reply
    • Peter

      The statute of limitations is five years under Scottish Law. Whyte has been charged already so cannot be time barred. I hate to say it but all this Sevco stuff happens a lot and Craigybhoy knows how to play the game. Don’t expect anything dramatic. Probably a companies house censure

      Reply
  18. Indeed, Paul McConville was the first to spot the strange Sevco 5088/Sevco Scotland, er, “situation.” And other, ahem, “anomalies,” such as the insertion of “history” into the list of assets AFTER the CVA was rejected…and not in every paragraph which should have been so “enhanced.” He frequently referenced “gratuitous alienation,” too, which is a phrase of which I suspect we will hear again.

    Reply
  19. These impromptu conclaves are occurring with disturbing regularity and is seems the mood is usually ‘perturbed’.

    For the benefit of doubt I love your updates because they keep a smile on my kipper.

    Good man Phil.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

error: Content is protected !!

Discover more from Phil Mac Giolla Bháin

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading