Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Unless there is any way it could be argued that the deposits were ringfenced or held on trust by the company, those who have paid deposits will be unsecured creditors in the liquidation of the company.


The liquidator should write to all known creditors of the company, asking them to submit claims in the liquidation. You can contact the liquidator, which according to Companies House is Mr Hasan Mirza, Alexander Green, Curzon House, 64 Clifton Street, London EC2A 4HB Tel: 0207 183 9500, and ask for the relevant forms. The liquidator uses these forms to establish who should be paid what out of the assets of the insolvent company. What you will receive will depend upon what money the liquidator realises, and how many other creditors there are and whether any of these other creditors have secured or preferential claims, as these rank ahead of the unsecured creditors.

HMRC and the majority of employee claims (other than (1) salary claims - up to ?800 per employee (2) employee holiday claims, and (3)certain unpaid pension contributions) are not preferential, so would get put in the unsecured pot with everyone else, but it is true that these claims would water down what is available for unsecured creditors.

Sorry that people are having problems.


Peckhamgatecrasher - Forest Hill is run by a separate company. They liquidated what was Bojangles (with no declared assets) and set up two new companies, one for Dulwich and one for Forest Hill. Details earlier in this thread. Presume that the Dulwich one may have now folded.


Parents were told that deposit money had been "ring fenced", but if this was done it wasn't declared in the liquidation.


Might it be worth seeing if Ms Adams / Mrs Narramore(as directors of Bojangles and, in Ms Adams' case, what was the new company for Dulwich) will personally honour the deposits (as many have been paid and gone through)? Addresses are given in the establishment papers for the new company (somewhere in the Companies House links above).

Hi all,


I contacted the administrator and he will be sending some forms to add me to the list of creditors.


During the conversation he said that there is in excess of ?200,000!! in creditors and this is rising. He also confirmed that the deposits were not held in a separate bank account and the account that does exist is overdrawn.

He suggested that any legal action against the director (Sonia Adams) would be a waste of money as the company is liable. He will decide if there has been any impropriety of the former directors in running the company and make recommendations to the DTI regarding possible prosecution (or something like that - was fuming at the time!).

It seems the only way we may see money back is if Sonia Adams pays this personally. As she is no longer returning calls this is becoming less likely. I was going to write to Sonia and ask her to honour this debt, I hope she is receptive. The only address I have was obtained for her is via Companies House for the new company set up (see earlier posts for details).

For information


"What is Wrongful Trading?

When sometime prior to winding a Director or Shadow Directors knew or ought to have known there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding Insolvent Liquidation.


What are the signs?

When the Director or Shadow Directors acted unreasonably or negligently by entering in to contracts with knowledge of the companies affairs and avoiding the facts.


How can it be proved?

When the Director or Shadow Directors act outside the expected reasonable standards of skill, knowledge and experience - This is known as the objective test.

If the Director or Shadow Directors in question possess professional qualifications they must meet expected standards - This is called the subjective test.


What is a Director or Shadow Directors defence?

That the person took every step to minimise potential loss.


What is the penalty?

The Director or Shadow Directors have to make a contribution, without limit from personal funds, as the court sees fit. This is to enable compensation, not to punish those concerned.

There is also the likelihood of a directors disqualification for up to 15 years."


Where to make a complaint:


CIB

We paid a deposit to FH Bojangles in July but cancelled our place in Mid August, we a re still waiting for them to return our calls, we are awaiting the paper work from companies house.


Reading the post above I have noticed that they went in to liquidation in June 2009, but we did not pay our deposit until July 2009, also none of the paper work that has been supplied say Bojangles Nursery Ltd (the Ltd is distinctly missing) The Bank account details we were given are for Barclays in Catford.


Does any one know if this was were the main company account was?


Thanks

Thanks Smiler,


Have be in contact with Alexander Green yesterday. I looked at our invoice closely and although it has Bojangles across the header it has Little Fingerprints name and co number in very small writing at the bottom. Alexander Green have asked for a copy on the invoice and said that they are not allowed to trade using the name Bojangles. Our cheque was also made payable to Bojangles Nursery. Will be issuing a small claims court summons to Little Fingerprints Ltd on Monday morning, hopefully we should be able to get our money back.

Hi StevePC,


I am also owed the deposit for our child who was due to start at the nursery in may 2010. We paid our deposit using our debit card. Is it possible to take Little Fingerprints to small claims court as a group? or does have to be done individually?

Dps, if you paid by visa debit card you may be able to get money back under s.75 rule, where your bank approaches their bank directly to get money. I used my visa debit card earlier in the year to order a tv online, the company went into liquidation and I waited a few months but Barclays was able to get my money back. However it's better to use credit card these days than debit card especially when paying large amounts. At the time I was told by the adminstrators and trading standards that I stood no chance of getting anything back but luckily Barclays proved them wrong. Its not worth going to court individually I think, when I checked it out at the time it was costly and no guarantee that the other party would turn up. However you might be able to gain some headway by taking legal action as a group. It is a sad situation to be in at the moment I can sympathise with all of the parents involved.

Dear all,


Just to let you know we have received our money back! - paid into my account on the 1st Oct.


So it seems Sonia is trying to honour these debts.


I know this is no consolation to those still waiting, but at least you know there are funds out there.


Hope you all have a good result soon.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Thank you for clarifying, James. So why would anybody want to take this on as a franchise if it is staying in this building? If it is now to be a sub office, does that mean that much of  the space could be used as a different kind of business altogether, with just part of it being used as a sub Post Office? Because if it is all to remain solely for Post Office business, (albeit as a sub Post Office it won't be providing all the services which it currently does) I can't see who would want to take it over? If it isn't profitable as a Crown office, how could it be  profitable running just as a sub office, even if staff are being paid less and it's opening for longer hours? Because presumably all the other overheads such as rent will remain the same?
    • Girobank was genuinely innovative, regarding the addressed customer base (significantly the previously unbanked) - but this would have been an ideally outsourced operation to an existing bank which already had the operational systems (and the regulatory experts) to manage a bank for someone else at marginal cost. The Post Office - when you consider the issues over the Horizon software - never originally designed by ICL/ Fujitsu for the application it ran - is a very good reason why the Post Office being involved in banking was long-term a bad idea.  To get back to the topic of this thread, the Horizon debacle is still not over (the software system is still in place) - most of the wrongly penalised sub-postmasters are still out of pocket - I'm not sure I would be leaping to take on the franchise being offered in Lordship Lane.
    • Otherwise in Bellenden Road are brilliant! They’ve made me stage dresses, restructured vintage finds and are working on remodelling my late brothers huntsman tweed suit for my modern husband! Not cheap and rents have meant they are moving premises at mo.
    • Penguin, I broadly agree, except that the Girobank was a genuinely innovative and successful operation. It’s rather ironic that after all these years we are now back to banking at the Post Office due to all the bank branch closures.  I agree that the roots of the problem go back further than 2012 (?), when the PO and RM were separated so RM could be sold. I’m willing to blame Peter Mandelson, Margaret Thatcher or even Keith Joseph. But none of them will be standing for the local council, hoping to make capital out of the possible closure of Lordship Lane PO, as if they are in no way responsible. The Lib Dems can’t be let off the hook that easily.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...