Jump to content

Lingerie tycoon looks set to make IOM her new home


Aristotle

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Cueey Lewis And The News said:

The Medpro structure as laid out though is pure shadow control using employed directors and even giving one a 1% profit share in the structure for taking the risk. Then it all filters out to other arms length trusts and structures not owned by Barrowman but certainly controlled by him through other employees or service providers. 

Yeah but he's admitted to making a profit out of it, so I would have thought any kind of 'arms length' arguments would be moot. Usually with cases like that, it would have to be proven that he's benefitted.  He's admitted that in an interview he paid for! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Still...there are quite a few employees of theirs here maybe under other companies? Something like 150 people?

I've heard that there has been a big segregation at the company between the real third party clients and Doug's Personal stuff.  They've even moved into different offices. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for clarification a director is jointly and severally liable for any criminal offence by the company.  Ignorance is no excuse, for instance saying that he was finance director so I did not know what was going on will not wash. Equally there is no such thing as a nominee director or non executive director.  In Manx law/a/director is a director.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, NoTail said:

Just for clarification a director is jointly and severally liable for any criminal offence by the company.  Ignorance is no excuse, for instance saying that he was finance director so I did not know what was going on will not wash. Equally there is no such thing as a nominee director or non executive director.  In Manx law/a/director is a director.

Yeah but the company I don't believe has actually committed a criminal offence. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NoTail said:

Just for clarification a director is jointly and severally liable for any criminal offence by the company. 

The company hasn’t committed any crime. It’s a supply company that supplied the product it was contracted to supply. There were claimed defects in that product which may be the subject of a commercial dispute with the DHSC but it hasn’t done anything illegal. It’s Mone herself who lied and didn’t declare her connection in order to secure a contract.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Cueey Lewis And The News said:

The company hasn’t committed any crime. It’s a supply company that supplied the product it was contracted to supply. There were claimed defects in that product which may be the subject of a commercial dispute with the DHSC but it hasn’t done anything illegal. It’s Mone herself who lied and didn’t declare her connection in order to secure a contract.

It looks on the surface as if either Mone or Barrowboy or both were really controlling the Company. If so they may be deemed shadow directors. JW will be able to elucidate on the implications. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hocus Pocus said:

If this all means there is a predicate crime in UK, then have Barrowman and Mone committed POCA crimes here for laundering the proceeds? Answers to be found by asking the Constabulary and IOMFSA who knew all along and did not freeze the money when it was here.

Does it have to be here in order for it to be frozen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Hocus Pocus said:

If this all means there is a predicate crime in UK, then have Barrowman and Mone committed POCA crimes here for laundering the proceeds? Answers to be found by asking the Constabulary and IOMFSA who knew all along and did not freeze the money when it was here.

It's a commercial dispute regarding the PPE.

Mone is probably in some sort of breach of House of Lords interests stuff. 

Morally wrong, probably.  Criminal, I'm afraid not. 

POCA and any freezing of assets is therefore irrelevant. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, NoTail said:

It looks on the surface as if either Mone or Barrowboy or both were really controlling the Company. If so they may be deemed shadow directors. JW will be able to elucidate on the implications. 

They don’t seem to want to deal with shadows here unfortunately. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...