• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Annual accounts

Thats possible as is proceedings being taken against the directors.


The NL have quite stringent regulations regarding financial matters they are sticklers for the correct information being submitted alongside being up front and 100% transparent when it comes to matters like VAT, PAYE and NIC.

The charge is often levied against the NL administrators that they are incompetent and that’s probably fair comment but one thing they won’t do is afford is any extra concessions if things like failure to file statutory information continues

Exactly ! It's THAT important. Meanwhile the supporters groups are more concerned with asking questions regarding news kits etc.
 
Exactly ! It's THAT important. Meanwhile the supporters groups are more concerned with asking questions regarding news kits etc.
Apart from the fact we have asked the question about the accounts in every single meeting we have attended.
 
Apart from the fact we have asked the question about the accounts in every single meeting we have attended.
At least Tom acknowledged the question on the last video call. I just fear he's not going to get answers to the questions, either.
 
Come Saturday the latest accounts to be shown on Companies House website will reflect a 12 month period that ended three years ago.

Now we don’t know Hong long it takes for the accounts once filed to appear on CH website but those 2018 accounts were signed off on 30/4/2018 which is the day they are said to have been filed.

To be honest if the NL were to impose an embargo nobody surely would seriously be surprised
 
At least Tom acknowledged the question on the last video call. I just fear he's not going to get answers to the questions, either.
This is why I really have doubts about the need for a CEO. When you have a hands on chair and a nonentity BOD the post seems redundant and an unnecessary cost. Maybe the sole reason Martin agreed to it was to have a human shield to take the flak which will inevitably come his way
 
Come Saturday the latest accounts to be shown on Companies House website will reflect a 12 month period that ended three years ago.

Now we don’t know Hong long it takes for the accounts once filed to appear on CH website but those 2018 accounts were signed off on 30/4/2018 which is the day they are said to have been filed.

To be honest if the NL were to impose an embargo nobody surely would seriously be surprised
Wasn't he in Hong Kong Phooey? :Smile:
 
The accountants have been published, on first glance it doesn't seem horrific
 
Does anyone know anything about the situation with companies house?

There are now 2 sets of accounts due for filing with no accounts since July-19…this is somewhat concerning that RM doesn’t seem overly bothered about this. Companies house will be issuing fines that I’m sure we can ill afford
 
For those that are interested I have just checked Companies House and the 2020 have still not been filed. I thought on one of the Zoom calls they were close to being complete.

The 2021 accounts are also overdue now, should have been filed by 30 April 2022.
Which begs the question why?
 
Which begs the question why?

Two reasons come to mind:

  1. The auditors don't want to sign off the accounts without huge qualifications in their report about the company's ability to continue as a "going concern". Despite the awful financial position that is possible if the directors/shareholders (ultimately RM!) provides sufficient guarantees.
  2. Does the financial fair play rules apply to National League clubs? If so I am guessing we would be in trouble
 
Two reasons come to mind:

  1. The auditors don't want to sign off the accounts without huge qualifications in their report about the company's ability to continue as a "going concern". Despite the awful financial position that is possible if the directors/shareholders (ultimately RM!) provides sufficient guarantees.
  2. Does the financial fair play rules apply to National League clubs? If so I am guessing we would be in trouble
Never rule out incompetence
 
Back
Top