Thread: new mystery

Originally Posted by Trax

Consider the following from companies in the UK

TRACEY SAVILLEAppointment terminated as director on 26 Jan 2011 (Document)
MRS TRACEY JAYNE SAVILLEParticulars Changed as director on 28 Apr 2010 (Document)
MR DUNCAN JOLYON BURDENParticulars Changed as director on 28 Apr 2010 (Document)
MRS TRACEY JAYNE SAVILLEAppointed as director on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
MR DUNCAN JOLYON BURDENAppointed as secretary on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
MR DUNCAN JOLYON BURDENAppointed as director on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
CLAIRE BURDENResigned as secretary on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
GLYN BENNETTResigned as director on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)

.....

Trax,
Just from experience of being involved in a couple of companies, sometimes the accountant or whoever become the temporary 'directors' / 'secretary'. Normally done when it's not sure how the company will be split and done just to get the company up and running. The 'temporary' directors then step down at the first board meeting and the new 'official' directors/appointments made.
That could then explain the opening moves.
After that D seems to be the sole person responsible. It could be that D intended to resign, but couldn't being the only director (it presumably would have meant the company would have closed) - so maybe the just stepped aside, rather than resigning (you have to lodge specific forms at Companies House to resign - it's not just send ing a letter saying 'I quit'). By doing that though, he would still have had legal responsibilities re the 'proper' running of the company.

Again, I'm not trying to justify what was said as opposed to what happened, just saying what may be a reasonable explanation of what you're seeing.

Originally Posted by jlockest

Originally Posted by Trax

Consider the following from companies in the UK

TRACEY SAVILLEAppointment terminated as director on 26 Jan 2011 (Document)
MRS TRACEY JAYNE SAVILLEParticulars Changed as director on 28 Apr 2010 (Document)
MR DUNCAN JOLYON BURDENParticulars Changed as director on 28 Apr 2010 (Document)
MRS TRACEY JAYNE SAVILLEAppointed as director on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
MR DUNCAN JOLYON BURDENAppointed as secretary on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
MR DUNCAN JOLYON BURDENAppointed as director on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
CLAIRE BURDENResigned as secretary on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)
GLYN BENNETTResigned as director on 03 Feb 2009 (Document)

.....

Trax,
Just from experience of being involved in a couple of companies, sometimes the accountant or whoever become the temporary 'directors' / 'secretary'. Normally done when it's not sure how the company will be split and done just to get the company up and running. The 'temporary' directors then step down at the first board meeting and the new 'official' directors/appointments made.
That could then explain the opening moves.
After that D seems to be the sole person responsible. It could be that D intended to resign, but couldn't being the only director (it presumably would have meant the company would have closed) - so maybe the just stepped aside, rather than resigning (you have to lodge specific forms at Companies House to resign - it's not just send ing a letter saying 'I quit'). By doing that though, he would still have had legal responsibilities re the 'proper' running of the company.

Again, I'm not trying to justify what was said as opposed to what happened, just saying what may be a reasonable explanation of what you're seeing.

he allegedly said through many sources he resigned (mate i can appreciate the various intricacies of the actual running of the enterprise if he took a back seat) - BUT no record of it. Did he lie? Untill its official is all i am saying..

Originally Posted by Trax

.....
he allegedly said through many sources he resigned (mate i can appreciate the various intricacies of the actual running of the enterprise if he took a back seat) - BUT no record of it. Did he lie? Untill its official is all i am saying..

Trax,
He may (I'm not him so can't say for certain what happened) have had every intention of resigning, but then couldn't.
How many times do you (or I) say we're going to do something, and then don't - and are they always for good or bad reasons? A mixture? Sometimes you don't 'do' something to be awkward, other times you intend to do something and then can't or don't because circumstances change.

Maybe, just maybe, Tracey didn't want to be left as the sole director - I don't know.

Conjecture is a bit pointless as you can make up a myriad of scenarios, from conspiracy to forgetting to send in the forms.

All that is 'known' is that he said he would, he didn't. No idea as to why.

well where to start, and dont get excited as it more confusion coming............

TRAX, mum went to 28, long lane ind est, and it is banhamgraham, it used to be simpson and rolfe, a sue rolfe is a partner there, their web page

Sue Rolfe

shows she read a BA and an MA in Modern European History. ( v interesting)

ive also got a reply today from companies house, see cut and paste below :-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Ref
Our Ref 05428246/D J
Date 24/02/2011

Dear Mr Jxxxxxx

PRIORY PUBLICATIONS (GB) LIMITED

Thank you for your email of 22 February 2011.

The above company’s registered office was changed on 6 September
2010.

I believe the address for Banhan Graham is Thorpe Road, Norwich, which
is not the registered office currently shown for this company.

The company continues to file small accounts and annual returns and is
therefore required to remain on the register.

You can of course contact our Enquiries Unit to do a company search for
both the new registered office address and the last accounts filed.

Yours sincerely
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

now banhamgraham head office is Norwich, but on the link (sue rolfe) above go to the "who are we " then "great yarmouth" and its 28 longs ind est. pic shows the stairs my mum moaned about lol,

The company continues to file small accounts and annual returns and is
therefore required to remain on the register. so they have not registered as bust yet.

I have mailed back to co. house to see if PP changed address FROM po box 1313 loddon to 28 longs ind est. or the other way round.

can you have a company head office as a po box ?

still not sure whats going on but something aint right IMHO

rich

Rjuk,
I'm lost. If the address on Companies House is the NR31 6NE one, and that was changed (what to that?) on 6th Sept, then presumably whoever is at that address (typically an accountant) is acting on behalf of PPubs. So are you saying that the current occupants of that address are denying knowledge of PPubs?

JL, yes my mum went there and they had never heard of PP or DB either as previous tennants or clients

OK just got another reply from co. house cut and pasted below :-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Richard,

Thank you for your email.

Company Number: 05428246
Company Name: PRIORY PUBLICATIONS (GB) LIMITED
28 LONGS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, ENGLANDS LANE
GORLESTON
GREAT YARMOUTH
NORFOLK
ENGLAND
NR31 6NE



The was changed from 'THE HARRIERS, LODDON RD' to the PO Box address on 4th February 2010.
The address was changed to 28 LONGS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, ENGLANDS LANE (from the PO Box ) on 6th September 2010.


You can access this information in the filing history of the company on our web check service. I hope this has been of help.

Yours faithfully,
Gillian Witchell
Companies House Contact Centre
enquiries@companies-house.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

omg another previous address, and lets not forget there was a Frostenden road address when this started in 2006

still none the wiser if they are bust or not

rich

so if the po box was chamged on 6th sept why was this given as the submission address for the prize

lots of moving about for a company though

Originally Posted by rjuk

so if the po box was chamged on 6th sept why was this given as the submission address for the prize

lots of moving about for a company though

Rjuk,
No not at all.
The registered address that Companies House has is basically a 'device' used so that official notices can be served. In my case it's my accountants address. It is not (or does not have to be), the main trading address of the business.
So to have a PO Box as your business address and a different registered address is absolutely fine.

The fact that the registered address changed, could have been forced (ie as you/Trax? pointed out), if say the accountants changed (Simpson Rolfe change to...blah) - maybe D stayed with one of the partners - who knows?

The odd thing is that the registered address denies knowledge of PPubs - but again I know no more than you - so I haven't a clue (and don't really care) who D is using for his accounts. The only thing I would say, is that someone pointed out that Companies House details have been updated recently - so I would assume that is being done by an accountant and not D.

I'm not quite sure what is trying to be achieved - does that make sense? D has said they are going (have gone) into liquidation. Lets assume:
1) That's true. Then what he says also then follows - ie that 'someone' (accountants) will be winding down the company and trying to get something from the assets to pay any debt. That may include selling the 'final pdf' if it is assessed to be of worth (think of it like the formula for Coke, and what that would be worth if Coca-Cola went bust).
2) It's not true. And? Doesn't it imply that D has just given up on this? And if that's the case, finding out what's happened to the company financially won't solve the puzzle.

So to me ( and I know we all react differently) knowing the financial/liquidation state of PPubs is neither here nor there (fine I can see it gives 'closure') - but for me, the important bit is still trying to fathom what all this is about.

I'm also more than slightly concerned about D. Personally, the bloke came across as being OK to me. The fact that he's gone quiet and what he must be going through to see the project fail like this, just doesn't seem to be brought into the reckoning here.

Again, I'm not saying anything apart from my personal opinion - and I may be the biggest gullible fool of all - but I still think D needs a chance.

yeah i agree JL, DB has always seemed ok, in 2006 i could not get a LRB and mailed saying i lived in lowestoft where he did and where could i get a book, he phoned me and said to meet and he would give me a book, this bever happened as i worked in london and we could not tie up at the week end, then i got one on line, so yep hee seems ok.

all im trying to find out is wether PP have ceased trading or wether they are just avoiding paying out because someone was so close.

i should be used to this as before i got the LRB i started on "can you crack the Enigma code" by richard belfield, the prize was a ww2 enigma machine worth approx 250k, soon after he anounced that he had sold it else where, dont know why but i suspect por book sales and that was 18.99 pounds, lol

so just to recap, i hold no grudges to DB or PP, as to put it bluntly shit happens, ive learnt much from the last 5 years, and main thin ive learnt is dont give up when you hit a dead end.... SO IM NOT giving in till i know the truth

i just want to know the real answer to the puzzle as the PDF was a half answer or less

and is it true they have gone bust or are one of the other theories here correct and with respect posts from anyone here aint gonna prove nothing, co. house or an announcement in a news paper or similar will

so im off with my shovel to find the TRUTH

rich

Fair comment Rich - I just don't see how you'll get the 'truth' via PPubs accounts!

I would also like to know if I've been conned - of course I would - but, at this point we're a couple of days in. IF D had wanted to do a runner, he had 5 years. He could have changed his name and been living the life of Riley in Bangkok by now.

D still has that final PDF - to me the only benefit I can see of knowing if they (PPubs) are actually in liquidation is to make the administrator an offer for that (as if it's an asset, it will be for sale) - so maybe there is a benefit of going that way. But I still hope that D wants to release it (as he implied) and that it's just the legal side that's stopping him at the moment.