hoosn Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 its there in black n white , all was going no too bad til the planning dept stuffed it up , SIC shot theselves in the foot, plain n simple. SIC being told how to run itself by hollyrood, hollyrood in turn being told to meet budgets by Westminster, Westminster itself bein swayed by fat cats , so the circle goes into circles. Gi it a rest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Just what sort of terms are the council giving these "high risk" loans on, that allowed Judane to be in a position to refuse an offer for something that they owed their backer more than its apparent market value. Should "high risk" investment not be accompanied by a clause that, if the debtor owes more than the market value of the asset that any and all decisions concerning said asset have to be agreed jointly between debtor and investor. Why was much more pressure not put on the debtor to accept the T&N offer which almost met the debt amount. "Take the offer, give T&N the shed, give the Royal their pound of flesh, and give us the balance, drop the insurance claim against planning, and we'll write of the rest". Would have been a much more palatable sum to swallow than £400,000, if as previously reported the T&N offer was only +/- £50,000 short. Adding the provisio that the alternative to not agreeing was to apply for the bankruptcy of the company. Alternatively, they could have gone with "Give us the shed, drop the insurance claim, and we'll take over what you owe the Royal and write off your owings to us", with the same non-agreement provisio as above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosn Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 cos the sic are clowns , maybe not by choice as i said , maybe they are opperating in some kinda effed up beaurocratic mess, all said n done they need to take it on the chin n learn from it. The world n its wife are after cleaning out the trust funds, and whoever gets grants or loans seemingly has to take some considerable jealous stick. What would these self appointed geniuses do wi it if actually was theirs? please their own agenda!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ll Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Given the situation with Judane, it is surprising that six figure grants were paid out to buy a 'tour' boat costing around quater of a million pounds to the same person.With the fact it is like the olympic flame (it never goes out), they stand to pocket quite a bit on this come time to sell, as it has hardly been used.Maybe we can look forward to a series of Dragon's Den in the Town Hall in the future, as well as being an alternative pantomine venue to the Garrison? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosn Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 the council is a panto yes , dont think anybody can dispute that. Is amazing how they never learn, and not amazing theres loads of conspiracy theories, but what noo, whats the way ahead then ? and will it make much odds whats said in this thread, erm , nope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 ....and will it make much odds whats said in this thread, erm , nope That depends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HatMan Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Given the situation with Judane, it is surprising that six figure grants were paid out to buy a 'tour' boat costing around quater of a million pounds to the same person.With the fact it is like the olympic flame (it never goes out), they stand to pocket quite a bit on this come time to sell, as it has hardly been used.Maybe we can look forward to a series of Dragon's Den in the Town Hall in the future, as well as being an alternative pantomine venue to the Garrison? Funnily enough, I hear that the boat is indeed going on the market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Well! What a surprise.....Judan,s Debt is to be written of..Obviously we should all have the Millers solicitors to hand if between them they managed to back the Council into a corner over this one ... I persoally find it disgusting that in one statement this week in the ST we were all hearing about how strapped the Council is for cash and in this press release we are told that the Millers can walk away from this one ...This stinks and I am sure I am not the only one to think that!! I have just had a survey form from the SIC asking If I think I get good value for money from the rent I pay,and an intimation that the rents will go up by nearly £2 per week...So it seems that I along with many others are about to foot the bill to cover this debacle.... This gets more like the "Goons Show" every day.... Wonder if the SIC would afford us lesser mortals the same arrangement I think it would be prudent now fot the Millers to stand down as councillors as they hold no credibilty now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulb Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 if they were bankrupted how could they sue the council. they would have no money to pay the lawyers. does the council not have insurance against being sued they must have. would there claim have reached 400000 i very much doubt it. is madame miller going to stand down owing and losing so much public money should debar her from the council be bankrupted would. think who else we would have lost if people who owed cash to us were not allowed to stand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icepick239 Posted December 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Business failures are never nice, except perhaps for Accountants and Lawyers. One wonders, was this action really the best solution for Shetland or was it for expedience sake, prior to The Accounts Commission arriving for their so-called 'Drill-down Audit'?Has there been 'Openess and Transparency' in this decision. Being 1st Preferential Creditor, how much is really owed to RSB?The insurance Claim being spoken about, just what might be the possible damage? What is the laid-down procedure between Officials and Council prior to deciding to write-off a Bad Debt?Who or what department then physically writes it off?In regard to Loans etc, just what is the Policy in regard to SIC Loan Security?Is it decided (for example) on each individual case?Why was there not a 'Lien' placed on any Commercial Buildings as well as Product and Marketing that was used to secure the Loan?Ring-Fencing of Personal Assets should be a No-No, especially in connection with 'High-Risk' Business Loans. I 'Posted' previously, that the Lender thinks it is their money to lend and that the Borrower thinks it is theirs once they have received it, but what sometimes gets conveniently forgotten, is that the money actually belongs to the people of Shetland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosn Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 ....and will it make much odds whats said in this thread, erm , nope That depends.na na , can assure you it wont , and am no purposely bein inflamatory wi that statement, the trust money will always be very hard to manage, and even wi sweeping changes it will either turn into a "little hitlers bank" or vanish oot the sooth mooth (of Lerwicks harbour). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulb Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 so whats your idea then that we should let certain people walk with the money. i find that a joke. writing off debt is usually only done when its not recoverable. with the property still being there it is recoverable. if they have done this deal to hide the fact that the planning dept messed up then that sound very close to maladministration. this again is why the trust must be totally independent of the council. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosn Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 maladministeration is pretty much at the forefront yes, thats a planning dept internal issue n little or nothing to do wi local councillers really, am pretty sure the trust has dealt wi this pretty much as monopoly money and it is a bit of a scunner considering the funds are all on the way down. It appears that best (business)man wins. Not that all the various depts of local govt working against each other is very good at business Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeemsieJ Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Ho ho ho !!! Happy Christmas to the Millers indeed !! [mod] Please refer and adhere to the Terms & Conditions [/mod] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Styles Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 Gary Robinson is trying to get an enquiry before the money is written off, atleast on councillor seems to have some sense! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.