Replies (9)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
There is I think a not subtle distinction between ...
... "a decision not to proceed" (as described in the body of the narrative) on the one hand and on the other "the respondent being cleared" (as the header suggests).
With kind regards
Clint Westwood
[EDIT] subject header has since been edited rendering this post otiose.
But equally
But... equally if there is no case to answer then it should not leave a stain on good character.....Wanting to pursue and being able to find anything to pursue are also important?
have not checked yet but may be available on charity commissioners website for free?
.....will have a read!
There are some shocking reports filed at companies house, some of which are just the filing of evidence of criminal offences under the companies acts and or the taxes acts.
There are many fictitious directors and company secretaries or at least using pen names...which is quite amazing in this day and age.
You are quite right Companies house and HMRC do not care..as they have always had sufficient willing contributors of tax to satisfy their wasteful requirements.
Maybe someone will soon take the deficit seriously and wake up to the gold mine available by looking at the accounts. Although I think it is because they do not understand the accounts combined with general apathy which leads to the problem.
Either that or there is corruption within....perhaps there is another news of the world type story to come out. After all if you can make payments to police officers then why not HMRC?
I have just received my copy of Economia, issue 13, in which I note that Nick Land proudly states that he is a non-executive of the FRC. He also chairs the Audit and Assurance Council, the successor to the APB. Of course, he needs no introduction, having been executive chairman of Ernst & Young for 11 years.
FRC drops Lehman case against Ernst & Young
The subject line above is the topic to be covered here. Who the hell cares about your case?