A profanity filter is employed. Please use a valid e-mail with your message and a valid name if at all possible.
Please keep to the posters subject.
|
RICHMOND WATCHDOG OPEN FORUM
|
|
| Subject: Railtrack |
Author: Anthony P Berend
Date: 10/10/2001 12:18 am WEDT
|
Cllr Mann you are wrong. [see posting under Interesting Times]
Railtrack is not bankrupt. One company in the group is in administrative receivership. No the same thing at all as Cllr Mann, a solicitor well knows.
If the group had been bankrupt the Directors would have been forced to put the company into liquidation. If they had not they would have been liable to prosecution. If there were any truth in what Cllr Mann said the Government would have acted against the Directors.
What does bankruptcy mean? It means that the total debts of the company are greater than their assets. In the case of Railtrack their assets are greatly in excess of their liabilities. What then is the position and why has the Government stepped in.
The cause of Railtrack’s problems lie entirely with New Labour. Railtrack have a cash flow problem which relates back to a decision made by John Prescott in 1998. In 1998 the transport supremo band all disposals of assets by Railtrack.
For years the British Rail Property Board had been funding the maintenance and renewal of the track by the sale of unused and a surplus land. This was stopped at a stroke by Prescott’s action in 1998. To fund the necessary repairs and maintenance Railtrack had to borrow from the Banks. These borrowings were in reality unsecured therefore limited and costing material more in interest charges. Repairs were therefore in part scaled back by necessity - one of the unreported causes of the Hatfield crash.
With no possibility that the Government would withdraw their restrictions the banks have called a halt on further borrowings. Hence the problems.
What has really happened is that the Government is stealing shareholders funds. [The non railway assets of the Company]. Clearly the Minister has been planning this for a considerable period. Having obviously discussed the proposals with both political colleagues and Civil Service advisors the correct legal term is “Conspiracy to defraud”.
Not something that the Ass: of Railtrack shareholders – 36% of the total or their legal advisors will have over looked. Remember one of the largest shareholders is Fidelity of US. If I was Mr Byers I wouldn’t be visiting the USA ever – American businessmen do not pull punches on this sort of thing.
Don’t worry Cllr Mann my wife will not [at this time - caveat] take action against you for your inaccurate and deflamatory statement that could in law be detrimental to her interest in the company. As a Solicitor you know what I mean.
Anthony P Berend.
|
|
| Topics |
Author |
Date |
|
|
|
  |
Railtrack |
|
|
Anthony P Berend |
10/10/2001 12:18 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Cllr Laurence Mann |
10/10/2001 9:31 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Richard Meacock |
10/11/2001 7:59 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Anthony P Berend |
10/11/2001 10:28 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Cllr Laurence Mann |
10/11/2001 11:27 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Anthony P Berend |
10/12/2001 8:35 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Laurence Mann |
10/12/2001 9:11 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Anthony P Berend |
10/13/2001 8:59 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Cllr Laurence Mann |
10/14/2001 4:24 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
R H |
10/14/2001 6:13 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
R H |
10/11/2001 9:46 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Richard Meacock |
10/15/2001 8:38 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Trevor Clarke |
10/15/2001 10:46 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Richard Meacock |
10/15/2001 11:52 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Laurence Mann |
10/15/2001 1:34 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Richard Meacock |
10/16/2001 8:33 am WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Cllr Laurence Mann |
10/16/2001 7:23 pm WEDT |
|
|
|
|
Trevor Clarke |
10/17/2001 11:23 am WEDT |
|
|
|
Sexist, Racist, Rude or unnecessary messages will be removed. Tolerance to anonymous messages will be at the discretion of the administration body. Anyone who insults the owner of this forum will be barred for life. No adverts permitted. |
