 Wednesday, 3rd Oct 2012 09:00 by Micah Hall Questions, questions. Since Portpin's arrival on the scene, the longer they hang around, the more questions there are. Here's the latest batch Portpin fail to answer, despite being given every opportunity to do so. Since Portpin's decision to appoint Tavistock Communications as their PR company, we at least have someone to ask the questions of. I have so far collected in excess of 100 questions suggested by inquisitive Pompey fans. If there's a question you want us to ask, please send it hallrightnow@pompey-fans.com and we'll try to ask it. I have now sent two batches totalling 23 questions to Tavistock and I publish their reponses to questions 14-23 below. The answers so far remain none too illuminating of course. However, I will continue to ask the questions and publish the reponse at approximately ten at a time. Click here to read questions 1-13 sent to Portpin and their responses. 14. In the Independent on 6th May 2010 Mr Chainrai said: "I had no involvement at all in the running of the club between October and February, when we were forced to take over the club to protect our investments." The Executive Director of Portsmouth Football Club was Mark Jacob, who was employed and paid solely by Portpin. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 15. Portsmouth FC operated from Oct 6th until Feb 10th from Portpin's client account at Fuglers over which Mark Jacob had complete control. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 16. Portpin's solicitor Mark Jacob also held a proxy over Ali Al Faraj 90% shareholding. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 17. Portpin's solicitor Mark Jacob gave Portpin a solicitors undertaking that parachute payments due in December 2009 would be paid straight to Portpin. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 18. On February 2nd and 8th Mark Jacob transferred £2m to Portpin despite the explicit written instructions of Ali Al Faraj to the contrary. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 19. Portpin had to approve all major expenditure from their client account in accordance with the Solicitors Regulatory Authority rules on client Accounts. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 20. Portsmouth FC continued to operate from the Portpin client account at Fuglers instead of seeking a validation order for use of the clubs existing bank account. A validation order would have enabled HMRC (as the originators of the winding up petition) to see all transactions in and out of the bank account. Was this done to prevent outside scrutiny? Portpin: No comment. 21. Between mid October 2009 and December 23rd 2009 there was no winding up petition in place, yet for most of this period the club continued to use the client account at Fuglers when there was ostensibly no need. Clearly, this was in order to maintain operational control over the company's cash. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 22. Between October 6th 2009 and February 10th 2010 Portpin controlled the clubs Executive Director who was sole director allowed to engage with financial matters. Tanya Robbins, previously director, resigned because she was not being allowed to see financial transactions and nor was any other director. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. 23. Between October 6th 2009 and January 9th 2010 Portpin controlled the clubs Executive Director, 90% of the shares, the clubs money, it's bank account and its major asset. Do they still maintain they had no operational control? Portpin: No comment. I have sent the next batch of ten questions to Tavistock and hopefully I will be able to bring you some answers to those on Thursday. Click here to read why PFC owe Portpin absolutely nothing... The views of Micah Hall are his own and don't necessarily reflect the editorial view of pompey-fans.com. Any proceeds of this column are donated to Action Aid. Click here to sign up for an account and reserve your username! You can then post on the Forum and add your comments to articles The Pompey Supporters' Trust is still seeking pledges from Pompey fans to back their bid. Information can be found here Photo: Action Images Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.
You need to login in order to post your comments |
   Blogs 31 bloggersColchester United Polls[ Vote here ] |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
