Stunning
A quarter are already dead and this is being dragged out. Why they extended the deadline for two years in September 2020 to 2022 is anyone's guess. Six months later the low offer, and more wrangling and begging letters causing delay.By the sounds of it many of the trafficked children might be dead by now seeing as it happened years ago. There's no excuse for not paying out to the elderly ones who are still alive though.
I find the whole thing baffling in that I don’t understand why it’s even a charitable issue. The horrific crimes were not something the Prince’s Trust was responsible for so why did they ever take it on? The compensation has been determined by two government enquiries, both here and in Australia and I thought the Australian one had already paid out tens of millions? It was all sanctioned and supported at state level by all accounts, despite both governments being aware of what was going on decades before putting a stop to it. The government here should have stepped up, not handed it off.Giving you what I read from EmilieHRH (a young, sometimes petulant, well informed journalist on Instagram):
- Fairbridge society has been accused of enabling the sexual abuse of 277 children;
- In 2012 Charles absorbed this charity, only in 2018 these findings were exposed;
- In 2018, Charles pledged to pay compensation to all victims and established a Fairbridge restored company;
- In November 2022, the High Court determined a reasonable amount to each victim to be 204.000 pounds;
- Charles charity told victims they would only pay 1% of that.
This is murky for several reasons:
1. All crimes were prior to KC3 absorbing the Charity;
2. But why go public and say he would pay for all compensation? PR clout?
3. I get that it is a lot of money, as we are amounting to 56.5M in compensation. But given that we know how easily KC3 has been working the Russian, Qatar, and others for charity money, I would expect he could be more generous towards the victims;
4. In the end, he was not in charge, however he does come across as opportunistic for PR reasons.
Then again, this is her side of the story, haven't read it anywhere else yet - which is strange in itself.
"Philanthropy manager"
Breastfeeding a 33 yr old had me in stitches
Good for you sticking to your guns. Hopefully in a month or two once your settled and earning some money this will all be a distant memory as you will be too busy with your own arts and crafts and a job you can fulfill. They can wait for their next narc moan
Sending tattler good wishes and hugs
Sorry the spoiler isn't working and as someone said earlier the bloomin ads are fixed at the bottom so messing up posting and liking postsHave we been Markled
And in the replies is one for George.Stunning
Interesting piece of clarification, I wasn’t aware of the intricacies of it.Sorry if this has already been said in relation to the POW family business- media reporting company has gone bankruptcy- incorrect in English Law only a person can be made bankrupt. The Company didn't go into Liquidation either. Going by the administrator 's report the firm contacted specialist help in March of this year and got an administrator appointed. The purpose of the administrator is to see if the business can be saved - there has been a pre packaged sale of the business and money generated from this. The administrator will see what assets they can realise to see if they can bring in anything more to pay out to creditors. It's too early at this stage to know if this will be possible. The bank accounts and transactions will be foresenically analysed as they are in all insolvency cases so if there is anything awry its investigated. Creditors can claim bad debt vat relief on their debts and majority will have insurance for these kind of scenarios. The firm is no different to many others who couldn't keep things going cos od covid/cost of living. I'd say the same if it was the harkles.
Exactly - once an administrator is appointed Carole can’t actually contact anyone or answer emails, just direct them on so she hasn’t done anything wrong. If she had sold up before the pandemic she probably would have made a lot of money and probably won’t now.Sorry if this has already been said in relation to the POW family business- media reporting company has gone bankruptcy- incorrect in English Law only a person can be made bankrupt. The Company didn't go into Liquidation either. Going by the administrator 's report the firm contacted specialist help in March of this year and got an administrator appointed. The purpose of the administrator is to see if the business can be saved - there has been a pre packaged sale of the business and money generated from this. The administrator will see what assets they can realise to see if they can bring in anything more to pay out to creditors. It's too early at this stage to know if this will be possible. The bank accounts and transactions will be foresenically analysed as they are in all insolvency cases so if there is anything awry its investigated. Creditors can claim bad debt vat relief on their debts and majority will have insurance for these kind of scenarios. The firm is no different to many others who couldn't keep things going cos od covid/cost of living. I'd say the same if it was the harkles.
Sounds more like damage limitation and the poor kid that gets this donated bike will no doubt get paraded like a show pony to show their ‘generosity’ to the poor and needySo, after all the negative comments about giving Archie a bike when they should have given one to a child in need Mad Dogs and Englishmen Bike Shop are now donating a bike to an underprivileged child.
Secured creditors (bank/mortgage etc) and preferential creditors like HMRC and employees always get paid first with remaining going to unsecured creditors such as trade creditors if anything is left. The sale has realised monies which wouldn't have been generated in a liquidation.Interesting piece of clarification, I wasn’t aware of the intricacies of it.
Would I be correct in assuming that sale from administration is actually the better option for small creditors? In traditional liquidation the preferential creditors, HMRC & banks, come first and take all that they can, but in this route all lose out but smaller creditors actually get something?
Oh okay. I've been jumping all over the thread and not reading it completely so missed that. That sounds interesting, the site should be able to fix this though. I'm considering changing my device soon, will see if that helps.Yes, me too Chaotic. I mentioned it to the Mods in the Site Help thread because I have floaters and flashers so they were driving me mad. In the end I took my mobile into Vodafone yesterday and they've installed something FOC which has stopped them..
Once again the east coast is slightly overcast and yet full of midges... a boringly acceptable 23cMay I just say today, it’s as hot outside as a pair of balls encased in wool underbritches
They did George a bit of a dirty when he’s 44 tbh looks like William with an exaggerated nose-And in the replies is one for George.
Looks like they'll both be gorgeous lads. I can see Catherine's genes coming out more in this one.
View attachment 2232855
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?