Judane

[Ghostrider]

^^ Exactly, a number of things make no sense.

 

Miller claims RBS were aware the Judane firm was producing income (Hodgies rent), were aware that income was being redirected to Miller using an account that had nothing to do with Judane and was being used to pay other creditors of Judane who were of lesser preferential status than themselves, and had no problem with that. Yet still refused to allow the same transactions to be processed via Judane's RBS account.

 

Maybe I've missed something here, and Banks by their nature are extremely strange beasts, but why would RBS knowingly approve of income to a company of which they were No.1 creditor being redirected to other less preferential creditors. I've yet to meet a bank who didn't pursue, take down and capture any money they got a whiff of that they might get their clammy mitts on.

 

If, as Miller is trying to make everyone believe, RBS are the exception to the rule, and RBS are a benevolent and relaxed bank who were happy to say, "Oh, So, you're getting £X rent per month, and you owe us £YYY, but thats okay, we don't really want it, you can pay off others with it..... (Oops, just had to duck for that low flying pig). Why would they not have made avaiable limited withdrawal facilities on the Judane account,in exchange for say Judane agreeing that the rental payments were paid directly in to the Judane account by Hodge himself. Supplying limited withdrawals in the form of Bankers Drafts and/or direct transfers still left them in ultimate charge and would have given the same end result as now, but able to change their minds and keep the income for themselves at any time they chose. The way Miller claims RBS operated is not good banking practice (although given that this is RBS we're talking about, that may well be no surprise), as they were effectively signing off any claim to however much rent Hodge paid for however long.

 

Banks may do some dumb things, but I'mhaving a very hard time believing they'd pass over such an obvious income stream.

[Shoogler]

Such as? Give us a specific one.

 

It was always going to be the case that the bank was calling trhe shots with a downtraded business. They obviously felt they could get something out of the directors or they would have moved to liquidate the assets of the company when thewy ceased trading.

 

I do agree it is rather odd that the RBS would let other creditors be paid via a different acount, however these may have been Inland Revenue and other statutory creditors, i.e. redundancy liabilities.

[Shoogler]

^^

That was a Q to oddtablet sorry

[icepick239]

Sorry Mrs. Miller,

too often your lawyers, too long with your response to public concerns, and altogether it just seems a peerie bit too pat.

Perhaps it is the RBS influence?

What was demanded by the RBS in how to handle these receipts from Hodges is something I found extremely odd and somewhat unprofessional..

It is also very strange that Northern Isles Knitwear (once it became active again) didn't have to be declared on your Members Register of Interests?

 

I believe that all necessary relevant information is to hand somewhere within the edifices of the SDT/SIC.

Is it not time to take a fresh look at the whole scenario.

If this be so, it should be finalised and reported on by an independently appointed person.

 

I would suggest that Caroline Gardner, the 'Controller of Audit' of the Accounts Commission (or someone from her Office) be asked to review the whole case-scenario (A-Z), in addition to the other duties that necessitates her coming to Shetland in the first place.

[Shoogler]

^^

and i'm sure she has all the time in the world to spend on Shetland - after all there are no other major pressing issues in Scotland at the moment.

 

The real issue here is not Mrs Miller but the incompetent actions of various SIC officials, both in planning and legal/administration. Start digging the bodies out of these de[artments if you are really wanting to make a positive contribution.

 

The way the Shetland media reacts to business people and entrepreneurs in Shetland is bad for the islands. THe SIC policy of supporting higher risk enterprises has led to many successes over the years and should be applauded. The only thing that is missing is a higher level of professionalism and expertise in key areas of the Council (starting at the Town Hall).

[MuckleJoannie]

The way the Shetland media reacts to business people and entrepreneurs in Shetland is bad for the islands. THe SIC policy of supporting higher risk enterprises has led to many successes over the years and should be applauded.

 

I agree. The media seem to get into a feeding frenzy when any SIC investment fails. They tend to forget the hundreds of businesses that have had a loan and repaid in full. At one time my job included collecting repayments for the various SIC bodies and I can assure you failures are a rarity.

[Teenie3]

Fair enough but I think the thing that sticks in the public throat is the fact that much of the time it's the same faces that know how to 'play the game' very well when it comes to applying for public money, and do so to their full advantage. (not that I see their faces as my peerie car is too low on da road to see into their 4WD's )

[Ghostrider]

^^ Fair enough, and if all SIC (whatever hat they're wearing) investment in local enterprises were publicised far more heavily, folk could judge such things for themselves. Whether thats the SIC's fault for not blowing their own trumpet loud enough, or the media's for ignoring all but the failures, which then can then sensationalise, I wouldn't know. The fact remains though that the only successful investment I can recall getting any publicity anytime in the recent past was that Burradale had paid off their loan, and done so early.

 

However, that said, it does seem that there is a high proportion of large investments that fail. Just how many local enterprises does the SIC have investments in from around £500,000 and upwards, it cannot be all that many. Yet in the last few years we've had SSG, Smiryl, Malakoff, Judane, to name but a few. Its the scale and frequency of the losses that are the worrying aspect, no investment fund can sustain this indefinitely.

 

While the fact so many of such value have failed in such a brief timeline *may* be coincidence, the logical conclusion tends to suggest that there are fundamental flaws within either the assessment and vetting procedure, or in the judgement of the SIC when they give approval. aka. somewhere within the equation there are people who can only do peerie sums.

[cardinal's cat]

Another soft interview from John Johnston of BBC Radio Shetland. The irony is they didn't even run the original story. It was broken by the Shetland Times. Even Shetland News followed it up, but the snooty BBC didn't touch it. Yet they were happy to lap it up when Caroline Miller came calling - she got her lawyers to send letters to the Shetland Times and Shetland News. She must have thought the BBC would give her an easy time. She was right. Johnston's most glaring failure was not to challenge her when she said the company wanted to pay back every cent it owed: what about the £400,000 it has just trousered from the public purse? Eh? Was she saying Judane would pay that back too? He didn't follow up, he just moved on to the next question. Unforgivable.

Shamefully, given the fact that he had just piggy-backed in on his media colleagues' hard work, he also failed to challenge her claim about "press inaccuracies". What inaccuracies? The Times and the News only asked her to explain why the payments had been made through Northern Isles Knitwear. The fact that she failed to do so and allowed the percpetion to gain ground that there was something dodgy about it was her fault, not theirs, despite what she said about the "confidentiality agreement". If she was able to speak out about it last night, why not at the outset? Nothing has changed.

Ah, the craven BBC, you have to love em.

[Ghostrider]

^^ Exactly the reason I stopped listening to Radio Shetland in 1980 something. Not that he was brilliant at it, but any chance of folk being subject to difficult probing questions, and being put on the spot to explain themselves went out the Radio Shetland door with Wills when he left.

 

In interviews ever since, especially political ones, I've always felt the interviewer was on the interviewee's side rather than the listening audience's, and was offering up semi-credible scenarios to the interviewee as possible "outs", rather than the "WTF do you shower think you're trying to do now" attitude they should have had.

[tlady]

And he also failed to ask her if the rumor was true that the "deal" with T&N Joinery was back on again ??

 

Right after the company were "let off" with paying back all the money they owed !!

[Ghostrider]

^^ If T&N end up buying the shed anytime soon, after everything that has gone down, this will start to have all the appearances of the modern day equivalent of burning widden drifters.

[icepick239]

Since T&N's apparent excellent offer was rejected back in April, 2009 by Mr Miller (who stated at the time, that the deal was dead in the water as far as he was concerned) one wonders what progress has been made in the 7months since that meeting?

One wonders how rejection of the offer could have been an option in the 1st place?

 

Any deal contracted must be in the interests of the people of Shetland

With the renewed rumours involving T&N Joinery and Judane (Shetland) limited possibly resurrecting or writing a new deal, maybe a comment by Frank Miller and Judith Miller (the sole Directors of Judane (Shetland) Limited) might be a sensible move on their part.

Let's also hope the arrogance of his 'dead in the water' comment is now confined to the the past.

[hoosn]

The way the Shetland media reacts to business people and entrepreneurs in Shetland is bad for the islands. THe SIC policy of supporting higher risk enterprises has led to many successes over the years and should be applauded.

 

I agree. The media seem to get into a feeding frenzy when any SIC investment fails. They tend to forget the hundreds of businesses that have had a loan and repaid in full. At one time my job included collecting repayments for the various SIC bodies and I can assure you failures are a rarity.

am still insisting the main stirrer/s are on a vendetta and this is a personal grudge being nitt picked n offered to the media on a plate, good god theres folk being paid to sort this out

[Ghostrider]

^^ If the folk that are employed to sort it out appeared to be doing so to the public's satisfaction, there would be no story for the media to do anything with.

 

As it is it appears from what has entered the public domain that the people who are employed to supposedly sort it out, are doing next best thing to beggar all to salvage as much of the public's funds as possible from it.

 

At the end of the day Judane is just doing what they're about, they're a business, and if they smell an earner, they're going after it, such is the nature of the game. They're understandably copping flack as as far as folk can see they're sweeping the board, having their cake and eating it, call it what you will. The real issue of contention is why the SIC and RBS appear to be happy to let them get away with it, some might even be tempted to say, helping them get away with it, the way the SIC has handled everything.

 

Whether there are folk with agendas handing the media the story on a plate really doesn't matter, what does is that among them Judane, the SIC and the RBS owe the Shetland public a plausible explanation for everything that has occured from 2005 to present, and why that has led to a situation where the public's funds cannot recoup its original principal invested in Judane, yet Judane apparently still owns the building in to which that money went and apparently are more or less free to do with it as they will and pocket whatever they might get from it in any sale.

 

Bottom line, if how things stand right now is the best outcome for the SDT, then they have been outsmarted and out-maneuvered by Judane and/or RBS, that being the case neither the trustees nor the paid staff are up to their jobs and heads need to roll. If there is an alternative which would bring a better eventual return to the SDT, then why in the name isn't it being pursed