Psychic Press to go into creditors voluntary liquidation

Psychic Press (1995) Ltd.

Following consultations with the Union's professional advisers, it has been agreed to put Psychic Press (1995) Ltd. into creditors voluntary liquidation.
- The National Executive Committee of the Spiritualists' National Union. October 10th 2010

My god! At very, very long last....

What a shambles from beginning to possibly an end - and a total disgrace to all who had any input or failed to do what they should.

Those individuals should hang their heads in shame. If karma were real, they'd have a lot for which to atone.

Mac, are you suggesting karma isn't real?

zerdini wrote:Mac, are you suggesting karma isn't real?

I know, I know..... I'm spoiling it for the folks who believe it is. I'd be getting my wrists slapped again by the moderator on that certain website where it happened before.

Telling things straight isn't allowed - you have to sugar coat it for those who can't deal with directness....

jeeeezzzzz......

What are we to make of this? First the SNU is liquidating. Then it dumps its staff, dumps its creditors - the liquidation is called off. Now, hey presto, it's liquidating again. What on earth is going on?

Interesting too that the SNU wrote on their website:

Psychic Press (1195)Ltd.
Important announcement.

As Mac said what a shambles, their first attempt was obviously an incorrect attempt at a Members Voluntary. They pay out that liquidators fees then they go ahead anyway.

They really have no idea what they are doing. I suspect that there is something that has spooked them into acting whilst they are the majority creditor and can control matters.

I do believe if they do nothing something, like the amounts owed to Staff were coming along and would overwhelm there control of matters.

I suppose at least when this happens the staff will, belatedly, gain access to the Government funds. This is a pittance to what they are truly owed and the treatment of staff should make the NEC resign en masse.

Oh well more emails to go to the new liquidator and the Companies Investigation Bureau. Lets make sure the NEC's claims of ownership of Masthead and Archives are properly tested. After all the next Liquidator will want something to sell or some Directors to act against to get paid.

By the way the Directors of PP never cancelled the previous liquidation. As that was not a Members Voluntary the NEC has no standing in PP affairs. So their calling off and then calling back on the Liquidation has no standing in Company Law and could involve them directly in meeting the debts of that Company.

Really by now the SNU members must realise they have leaders who rate themselves very highly but are truly incompetent as business managers and show no moral or ethical leadership.

Jim

This is interesting after that announcement there is only a limited time that they have to get their notices out to creditors and to notify/advertise elsewhere as required by the act.

So far we have no notification of who the liquidator is either. Clearly they intend to ensure individuals have the minimum time to react and lodge proof of debt this time.

I think they will present a list of assets and liabilities to the liquidator which excludes the Masthead and Archives obviously. It will appear there is no way the liquidator can be paid so they must have some idea of how that matter will be dealt with.

I am sure they will be relying upon speed and stealth to try and stop the new Liquidator getting the full range of information that Berley's received.

Oh well if anyone sees who the intended liquidator is put the details on the forum please.

It is urgent that enough time is gained to ensure he is aware of the other side of the picture to the one the SNU will present him with.

Word has begun to circulate that the new liquidators that the SNU will be using is a company by the name of Marsh Hammond. Confirmation regarding the appointment of this firm will be posted as soon as possible.

In the meantime information about this company can be found at:

http://www.marshhammond.co.uk/page/our-practice

Also of interest is that the Spiritual Truth Foundation has issued a statement regarding Psychic News. This will be posted on their website, and has been posted on Roy Stemmans Paranormal Review site as well with some further remarks.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110711191747/http://paranormalreview.com/articles/20101018
The STF Statement is as follows:

"IMPORTANT STATEMENT

In view of continuing speculation about the demise of Psychic News and the intentions of the Spiritualists' National Union (SNU) with regard to its title and other assets, the trustees of the Spiritual Truth Foundation (STF) – previous owners of Psychic News – met in London today to discuss the matter. They wish to make it very clear that:

1. The assets of Psychic Press Ltd, the original publishers of Psychic News until 1995, were transferred to the SNU in that year to ensure that the weekly newspaper could continue as an independent voice of Spiritualism.

2. It was agreed between the parties – STF and SNU – that those assets, which included the newspaper's title, its bound volumes, its newspaper archives and its photographic library, would be transferred to a new company, trading as Psychic News. Other items, including portrait paintings of the newspaper's founders, were gifted to the SNU to be kept in its museum.

3. The SNU's newly-established company, Psychic Press (1995) Ltd, has published the newspaper ever since, until the SNU took the decision to cease publication with the issue of 24 July this year.

4. The SNU has now decided, after conflicting statements of intention, that this company will be put into voluntary creditors liquidation.

5. The STF is concerned that, during discussion about the newspaper's future, the SNU appears to have informed a respected third party, which was interested in saving the publication, that the newspaper's title and other assets were not part of the business that was to be liquidated. As a result, no agreement was reached and no lifeline has been thrown to the newspaper, which had been published weekly for almost eight decades.

6. The STF advises the SNU that, if it is claiming ownership of the assets, then this is contrary to the agreement that was made with the STF in 1995.

7. The STF calls upon the SNU to confirm immediately that it does not own the Psychic News title and other assets, that they belong to Psychic Press (1995) Ltd – the company it is now liquidating – and that the liquidator will include these in discussions with any interested party wishing to purchase the newspaper and re-publish it.
The Trustees of the Spiritual Truth Foundation
18 October, 2010"

A copy of this statement will also be sent to members of the NEC of the SNU and the Liquidator.

I'm confused.

Were there no legal documents relating to this....? "It was agreed between the parties – STF and SNU – that those assets, which included the newspaper's title, its bound volumes, its newspaper archives and its photographic library, would be transferred to a new company, trading as Psychic News."

Unless the agreement was formally, legally documented, each party will have their own version of any 'agreement'....

It seems to me that it would not be necessary for the SNU "... to confirm immediately that it does not own the Psychic News title and other assets...." if there were a legal agreement and asking for them to say they don't own the assets is hardly likely to succeed...although I guess it's worth trying?

I think one needs to look at the wording very carefully Mac. It is suggesting that the terms of the agreement were that the assets (newspaper title, bound volumes, archives and photographic library) would be transferred to the new trading company, that is Psychic Press (1995) Ltd.

In 'politely' calling on the SNU to confirm that it does not own the Psychic News title and other assets the STF may be firing a warning to the SNU that the STF could challenge the claim made by the SNU that it owns the assets.

Bear in mind, that in sending this statement to the liquidators, it must suggest that the STF is prepared to stand by its claim as to what was agreed when it sold PN back in 1995. This might well suggest that the STF have clear evidence and supporting documentation to support their statement.

One might also point out that one of the trustees of the STF is Eric Hatton, who was at the time of the transfer, President of the SNU, and he would surely be aware of what actually took place and what was agreed. The statment from the STF is endorsed by all the trustees, which includes Hatton. That is quite a strong statement I believe.

Well I hope it's as strong as you're feeling, Lis. (oops sorry!)

I did read carefully what was said but why bother being polite towards the intransigent SNU officers after all the shenanigans thus far if the STF has the legal agreement documents?

To judge by the SNU officers' stance thus far, I'd assess they won't be too fazed by a challenge from the STF - either they are plain daft or think they can get away with what they are trying to achieve. I accept that the STF are confident about their case but without legal documentation, the SNU may just chance its arm and go to law - what, now, have they to lose? Their integrity?

I accept that Eric Hatton knows what was intended all those years ago but I'm of the view that the SNU officers will have taken legal advice as to their position now. The STF trustees may be playing the same game as the SNU officers..... one of the parties will lose out, or maybe even both.

Hi Mac I will join in now. What the STF have done is ensure that the liquidator is aware of an issue concerning the only valuable asset that PP owned.

This is not what the NEC wants at all, I am sure it is uneasy about the legality of the claim and they entered Liquidation initially to drive it through so quickly that no one could reacted. Their own hesitation has now brought the matter well and truly into the open (as well as showing how badly they are prepared to behave).

They have got rid of one liquidator howevre now something has driven them to try their luck with a new company. Clearly other matters must also be in motion that none of us know about.

Once again they are trying to control things. I would assume they have agreed a fee with this liquidator as well. Maybe not and the fee is to come from the non existent assets of PP.

If the first it is a strange situation where the owner and major creditor pays for a liquidator especially because they cannot clear it by offering to buy the remaning assets which must surely just be some elderly office furniture. Or that is the view they will give to the liquidators of all that is left in the company, which has been stripped of masthead and archives from its inception by their account.

I am fairly sure that the type of information given to both the liquidator and to the Companies Investigations Bureau would ensure he would quickly realise the conflict of interest he may have in being paid by the owner/major creditor. It would be too transparent that this was aimed to smooth the liquidation and persuade him not to look too deeply for problems.

Now if it is the latter possibility, he has no pre agreed fee, then, unless the NEC nave ensured, by some means, there is a nice little sum of money in the bank account of PP to pay his fees, the liquidator will look around to find out how he can be reimbursed.

One of the most promising avenues for him to find money is to look closely at these two assets, the masthead and archives, especially if he thought they could be quickly sold. We know he will have received the two versions of what happened originally. My money would be on the veracity of the STF information but I would expect he would run the information past counsel for an opinion. It will spend some money but he may feel it well worth while if the sale would give him adequate renumeration, after paying the legal counsel. However, a liquidator may take the action I suggest next, in advance of this.

The obvious source for his payments are the Directors. There can be no doubt that they traded the company long after they were aware that the debts could not be met when it ceased trading ..insolvent trading.

Now this is a very interesting one because by their actions the NEC have effectively taken direct control of the board of PP since May 22nd. I doubt that 2 of the 4 original directors have any real idea what has gone on since then. So an action would be against the Directors individually with the original 4 now augmented by the ranks of the NEC as acting Directors self appointed by the Owner and Shareholder the SNU.

He may also think that the involvement of the NEC have placed the SNU in some direct role in this saga because of their direct association with ensuring an insolvent company continued trading. This may give the possibility of a separate action against its assets.

Interesting thoughts and the liquidators I have known have always been happy to put a little seed capital into returns. A contested, extended Liquidation earns them so much more money, provided they can identify the areas where they can recover money. I suspect there may be enough in this to enable them to take out insurance to cover the cost of his legal actions. Amazingly there are speciality firms that cover this work, so it is pointless to believe that just because a Company is insolvent the liquidator will do very little.

Equally some early brutality upon the Directors and they may feel willing to pay up just for him to go away without court action on insolvent trading. This would be a short and profitable liquidation. However, it could then be extended by using the funds received to make a legal challenge for the assets thereby extending the time to earn fees and maybe recovering more money.

To put this in context, at a guess I would expect that the 4 directors and the two NEC members who were on the working party would be happy to pay 15,000 pounds per person for the insolvency issue to go away. I doubt a liquidator would have to break much sweat in producing a very scary dossier to lay before them showing just why they would lose out in court. This would include the loss of reputation, legal costs, the risk of losing, paying damages and being fined or struck off as a suitable person to be a director.

I note this would just require one of his senior associates extracting all the company records and re presenting them to show in how many ways they failed to act appropriately. Give me the job with all the records and you would look as guilty as sin within a week, however well you thought you had behaved.

Who knows, done well and the liquidator may be able to get his hands on the masthead and archives as a bonus. All without court action ever taking place.

In honesty if this Liquidation does take a life of its own I would, if it was not for the appallingly unethical and immoral behaviour of the key NEC players, feel a little sorry for them. They can have very little idea of what they may have brought upon both themselves and the SNU by not selling everything to the JV Trust and moving on.

From a practical experience of a very costly, successful, 6 year defence against a liquidator hunting a Company Guarantor, normal expectations must be ignored. However well they believe they have been advised the actual events are astonishing and beyond understanding. A Liquidator on the prowl has amazing legal standing as a Court Officer and can be a quite intimidating prospect especially as they can bring Directors into court to be examined by their Barristers in front of a judge.

So all we need to do is to ensure that the NEC have not found themselves a tame pussy cat, who they have offered a small sum to try and ensure that matters will proceed within their control. We need to bring out the natural predator, lying just beneath the surface of all liquidators, by ensuring he is fully informed of all events to date and let him know that the Companies Investigation Bureau is also fully updated to help in singeing their tail to get action.

Once again I urge everyone with a debt, even if it is a small one for a few editions, to let me know by personal message so that I can help them to register their debt and appoint a proxy. Registering and appointing a proxy costs nothing except a little time and you just need a pdf of proof of purchase or a subscription payment acknowledgement off the internet.

I urge everyone to ask about amongst their contacts for those who have lost money. I believe (Name removed at the request of forum member Jock MacArthur) failed to receive several weeks of the multiple copies they had prepaid for to sell at the centre. We only need to gather a few of these together and the money builds up. Trying to register a debt to recover it could not be seen as a direct challenge to the SNU by anybody. Neither could seeking true answers at a creditors meeting.

It is important we assemble as much debt as possible for the Creditors Meeting so that it could influence events, even maybe prevent the NEC forming the Committee of Inspection.

Remember we all have to relodge our debt again and appoint new proxies. This is a chance to add more numbers to strengthen the hand of the proxies at the one place where everyones feelings can be expressed to the Liquidator, when he is appointed, at the Meeting Of Creditors.

For those wishing to know more about the new liquidator.

Marsh Hammond & Partners LLP
Peek House
20, Eastcheap
London EC3M 1EB

Telephone: 00 44 (0) 20 7220 7892
Fax: 00 44 (0) 20 7283 0144
Message Desk: 00 44 (0) 7981 176 911

Email Address enquiries@marshhammond.co.uk

Our Partners:
- Clive Hammond
- Patricia Marsh
Our Associates:
- Alpa Raja
- Barrie Harding

About Us
We are a firm of Licensed Insolvency Practitioners, business advisers and consultants led by Clive Hammond and Patricia Marsh.

We are a ‘boutique’, full service insolvency practice and our structural independence means that we are unencumbered by conflict issues.

We are able to provide the full range of business recovery, turnaround and insolvency services for both individuals and corporate clients, from informal discussions concerning payment difficulties or restructuring, right through to accepting formal appointments as trustee in bankruptcy or liquidator.

We are innovative and passionate about finding the optimal, most pragmatic solution in each case.

We are able to provide speedy, decisive support to both advisory and executory teams.

Sometimes you really don’t need a superhero; just the right team of professionals.

http://www.marshhammond.co.uk/page/about-us

thanks for this explanation, Jim. On the basis that the STF are working to ensure the best chance of a positive outcome for PN (what remains of it) then I feel a little more reassured about their actions. As a layperson it appeared they were on a hiding to nothing, but seemingly not.

I, too, might feel some sympathy for the officers of the SNU were it not for their uncaring, high-handed attitude and behaviour towards something which ought to have been cared for like a child who is ill - with the utmost care for their health and welfare. And I despise their dismissive attitude towards the staff of PN - that makes my blood boil.

Even now I find myself amazed by their actions and if they 'get it stuck up 'em' for their unprofessional, obstructive and uncaring attitude, well I for one won't have a scrap of sympathy....

The behaviour of all involved - actively or passively - is beneath contempt. If they are eventually financially penalised, they will have brought it upon themselves.

We can only hope that something workable is left of PN at the eventual end of this sorry business.

I would like to make a request upon here that if anyone has lost money on the closure of Psychic Press they take action on registering their debt with the liquidator and appointing a proxy to represent them at the creditors meeting.

Remember...... a debt could be because all of the Psychic News you paid for were not received. You are a creditor for the value of editions not received. For Advertising paid for but not published because of the closure or for books purchased and not received or books sold to PP and not paid for

Details of the Liquidator are on this thread. If you need any help send me a private message.

People can join ths forum and message me to try and get help for a proxy or maybe go direct to Roy Stemman at Paranormal Review. It is vital that the maximum non SNU debt be assemled to ensure a proper review of events is conducted
Jim ....Having irritated the last liquidator from all the way down under I must maintain the standard with the new one

I will post this both on the new thread about the creditors liquidation and teh original liquidation thread.

Two working days ago I sent an email to the company who is believed to be the intended liquidators. I have as yet received no reply, I believe that confirms their involvement I suspect I would have received a denial by now from any other firm.

Once I do receive a reply I will supply details about who to contact and how to do this as quickly as I can.

I have already posted all of my email exchanges with berleys so I will also post this for your information.

"Dear sirs,
Re Liquidation of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd Co No. 02978126
I understand that you are intended to become the liquidator of the above company in a Creditors Voluntary Liquidation. I am writing to ask details about the intended Creditors meeting and the necessary forms to prove debt and appoint a proxy. It seems strange to have to do this a second time for a new liquidator because the previous decision to liquidate was called off just before the creditors meeting.
Would you please provide the necessary information urgently. I am concerned that, apart from a brief notice on the Spiritualist National Unions web site (PP's owners) stating the intent to liquidate, no further information has become available.
At the informal creditors meeting that was then held I believe that my previous correspondence with the first liquidator was regarded as irritating. I suppose this was not helped by the fact all correspondence was copied to the Companies House Investigations Bureau, indeed I intend to continue this by copying them into this email as well.
I still have grave concerns about the events surrounding this matter and the poor way that the owners have handled the whole matter. My concerns are shown in the emails below, which form my original correspondence with Berleys and the CIB. I believe that for your complete records you should have a chance to read these.
For completeness I note that, since that correspondence, those who had paid monies for future events have been fully refunded by the owners the Spiritualist National Union. I also note they have been open in claiming how the owners came to own the masthead and archives. However, this is a matter of dispute by the original sellers the Spiritual Truth Foundation. Of course the "asset transfer" stopped an intended purchase of Psychic Press which would have benefitted all of the parties that have now lost money.
On top of this it is quite clear the directors knew, from as far back as April, that they would be unable to meet the debts on liquidation.
Please let me know the details of how to prove my debt and lodge a proxy. As it now appears the Directors, or more correctly the National Executive Committee of the owners, have realised the company has to be liquidated maybe this time some serious questions and investigations may take place.
Kind Regards

I guess I will maintain my record as an irritant in this matter.


Jim

I believe that we all need to do something quickly,

I sent the following email to the CIB, intended liquidator and to Charles Coulston Company Secretary of Psycic Press and General Secretary of the SNU.

Note the final area about the requirements of directors and what they must do in 14 days. The NEC have been behaving very badly on this issue and it is a strong possibility they may be blind siding us all on this. We may find that they have appointed a liquidator believing that " no other debts exist" after that we will all find it almost impossible to stop.

Please write to all of the adressees included urgently, maybe the NEC intend to behave correctly but this safeguards this

FW: Re Liquidation of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd Co No. 02978126


From: Jim Warwood
Sent: Wednesday, 27 October 2010 8:28 PM
To: 'enquiries@marshhammond.co.uk'
Cc: 'enquiry@cib.gsi.gov.uk'; 'Charles Coulston'
Subject: FW: Re Liquidation of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd Co No. 02978126
Importance: High

Dear sirs,

I sent an email to you on Sunday for your attention, it is copied below. Please urgently reply regarding appropriate registration of proof of debt and registration of proxies. You will notice the time scales involved and the responsibilities of the directors or quasi directors of Psychic Press.

I also notice that this is the second time a liquidator was expected to be appointed . The first liquidation was apparently a Members Voluntary decided by the original directors of Psychic Press, on May 22nd but without any Statutory Declarations of Solvency. Now we all can realise why that was because the company is entering liquidation in an insolvent manner, i.e the staff and creditors are not being paid out in full.

All of the events surrounding this apparent Liquidation are unsatisfactory.

From the instructions of the Companies House I draw attention to the requirements in a Creditors Liquidation (stated below my writing) and note that at this stage the Directors have failed to notify any Creditors, I also remind you the failures now date back to May/June this month as the owners resolved upon liquidation upon June 12th.

At this stage I believe that the majority of creditors debt is being denied its rights by the major creditor, who happen to be the owners, the Spiritualist Union of Great Britain.

Regards

Jim Warwood
Creditor of Psychic Press with his wife Lis Warwood

The relavant points are

To this end note the imperative rules imposed by the companies act for Directors in a Creditors Liquidation
The resolution must be:
advertised in the Gazette within 14 days; and
sent to the Registrar within 15 days.

A meeting of creditors must be held in the next 14 days after passing the resolution. Notice of the meeting must be sent to the creditors at least 7 days before the meeting. Also, the directors must prepare a statement of affairs for consideration at the meeting, and appoint one of themselves to attend and preside over the meeting.
When the liquidator is appointed, the directors must provide him or her with a statement of affairs and otherwise co-operate with the liquidator.
7. Does the company have to advertise notice of the meeting?
Yes. The meeting must be advertised in the Gazette and in two newspapers in the area where the company has its principal place of business.

And my earlier comments upon this
It is quite a list of items which the Directors of Psychic Press have failed to do but I would feel they must have believed they were constrained by the NEC, representing the owners, Psychic Press's major creditors, who had appointed them to their roles. Sadly that does not protect them if the CIB take action it will also fail to help them if the Fleet Street tabloids get onto this story.

Kind Regards

Jim Warwood

I am not surprised 5 working days and no answers but it does concern me, what else could they possibly be up to

Companies House still have no record that this Company is being Liquidated.

I Notice the annual accounts are now one month overdue
Name & Registered Office:
PSYCHIC PRESS (1995) LIMITED
REDWOODS
STANSTED HALL
STANSTED
ESSEX
CM24 8UD
Company No. 02978126


Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 12/10/1994

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
9305 - Other service activities

Accounting Reference Date: 31/12
Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/12/2008 (FULL)
Next Accounts Due: 30/09/2010 OVERDUE
Last Return Made Up To: 12/10/2009
Next Return Due: 09/11/2010

Last Members List: 12/10/2009

Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
14/08/1995 PRIESTGATE SERVICES (NO. 116) LIMITED

Hmm Rumours are circulating that the Liquidation has once again been put back. What are these clowns doing now??

I have now heard a date of 15th November, maybe people will contact the liquidators and ask them. Is this the Creditors Meeting date I wonder? If so we do not have much time to get our proof of debt in or the Proxy.


Liquidators Email Address enquiries@marshhammond.co.uk

Oh Well I am hugely bothered by all this delay.

In a legal sense the timings are becoming critical so I have sent the following email.

From: Jim Warwood
Sent: Wednesday, 3 November 2010 9:38 PM
To: 'enquiries@marshhammond.co.uk'; 'Charles Coulston'
Cc: 'enquiry@cib.gsi.gov.uk'
Subject: Liquidation Of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd Co No. 02978126

Dear sirs,

I am surprised that I have received no reply to my previous emails.

I understand that the Liquidation is now delayed to the 15th November 2010. At this stage I have no real idea what this actually means. Is this the date that the Creditors Meeting occurs to appoint the liquidator, or is the date that the Directors of Psychic Press decide the Liquidation should start, therefore 14 days prior to the Creditors Meeting.

You would all understand that this is critical to all of the Creditors involved and there appears to be no prior notice given to the creditors. My understanding of Companies Law is this is essential notification.

Personally I am still amazed about what is happening here and the way the UK law seems to be allowing events to happen. I am astonished that Insolvency Practioners’ may suggest that a liquidation allows Directors/Owners a cheap way to buy back assets. Personally, as an accountant trained in the UK and a very senior financial manager/company secretary I am shocked at what is occurring.

I am also astounded at the many delays and the change in liquidator. Nothing appears to me to be at all right in the current circumstances. I also remind everyone, this is a religious body, registered with the Charities Commission, yet with everything they are doing they prevent all of the dedicated staff from accessing Government funds to replace the entitlements that a solvent company would have paid them.

Personally I am looking at following up this matter with the Charities Commission who, I am sure, would not be impressed with the events that have unfolded.

Regards

Jim Warwood