Psychic Press to go into creditors voluntary liquidation

Hi Public Eye

Welcome to the forum

I like your heading on the post

Trade Mark of Psychic News, or is it.

It is a very interesting question, I feel pretty sure that if the NEC thought their claim to the Masthead and Archives was watertight they would have driven this through a while ago.

I hope we will get the chance to find out and the liquidator tests the matter properly for all of the creditors especially the staff.

Oh well at least many of the people who were actively involved with Psychic News have pooled their resources at the Spirit of PN supported by many of the contributors.
http://spiritofpn.wordpress.com/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog

I am reposting here a post by PublicEye which was in the Welcome section of the forum. I feel sure what is in the post will be of interest to many.

Quote: "If SNU, plan to put Psychic Press (1995) Ltd into creditors voluntary liquidation, then why have the SNU registerd for the name to be trade marked on the 6TH of October 2010, Class 16, new application, certication mark, Publishers of newspaper and periodicals on the internet and hard copy magazine[printed.
Proprietor: Spiritualist National Union,
Redwood , Stansted Hall , Essex.
And no hidden agenda????????

Also Psychic News Ltd, is not owned by Psychic Press (1995) Ltd, or SNU. It is a Private Limited Company in Scotland, that has nothing to do with SNU or Psychic Press (1995) Ltd."

On the basis of this I sent the following email

Dear sirs,

I notice that my emails do not merit a reply.

I am extremely concerned about events concerning this purported Liquidation, you have all received my earlier communications. This covers, especially the ownership of the masthead of the newspaper Psychic News and the Archives. Clearly the ownership of these, the only valuable assets of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd is still in dispute. There is a clear belief amongst the other Creditors that the Spiritualist National Union, the owners and possibly major creditors of Psychic Press (1995)Pty Ltd are manipulating events.

Then I discover the following from an anonymous poster on my forum
“If SNU, plan to put Psychic Press (1995) Ltd into creditors voluntary liquidation, then why have the SNU registered for the name to be trade marked on the 6TH of October 2010, Class 16, new application, certification mark, Publishers of newspaper and periodicals on the internet and hard copy magazine[printed.
Proprietor: Spiritualist National Union,
Redwood , Stansted Hall , Essex.”
http://spiritualismlink.forumotion.com/psychic-news-under-threat-of-closure-f37/psychic-press-to-go-into-creditors-voluntary-liquidation-t917-15.htm#4703 bottom of the last page

As a creditor this attempt to place a key asset out of reach of creditors is an appalling act. I hope that at this time the CIB copied in to this will choose to act. This appears entirely in keeping with all of the other acts of this organisation.

Regards

Jim Warwood

Roy Stemman at www.paranormalreview has posted an interesting article on the launch of Spirit of PN and on the attempt by the SNU to trade mark the name Psychic News.

The article is found on this link:

http://www.paranormalreview.com/articles/20101104

An interesting post by Geoff Griffiths from Roy Stemmans blog.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave . . . At first they said they had to liquidate Psychic Press 95 Ltd because it was insolvent. This meant that they had to discontinue Psychic News. Then they suddenly say that PN can be stripped out of PP95 Ltd as it always belonged to the Union. If PN was really the SNU's properety all along, they could have subsidised it years ago, rather than leave it in a sinking ship. They could have put it in a safe place within the bosom of the Union, brought in some marketing nous to support the improvements brought about by Susan Farrow and taken PN on to greater things.

As things have panned out, it really does look like they had an agenda all along. If not, what is the alternative explanation? One could be gross incompetence.

As an SNU enthusiast, I am hoping that another explanation exists. But I am not holding my breath."

Lets hope other SNU members have their eyes open like he does.

Dan

It appears that the liquidators are trying to establish whether the subscribers to PN, who have lost money from issues paid for in advance but not delivered, have a right to be Creditors. They are seeking legal advice on this, maybe it is because the Admin here irritated the previous Liquidator.

Whatever occurred the previous liquidator, a very well credentialled firm specialising in this field, accepted our claim and allowed the debt and the appointed proxy.

It seems the NEC and its pet liquidator may be trying to reverse this situation now. Remember when we subscribed it was after the date that the NEC and the key Directors knew that Psychic Press was trading insolvently. Therefore they knew they would be unable to fulfill their legal commitments to provide the service we had paid for.

This is one single subscriber, there were 4,000 even at that stage, many subscribed and paid for multiple issues to be onsold at their churches.

On a scale of probabilities one quarter re-subscribed after the directors knew PP(1995) was insolvent. There could well be over 1,000 pounds of debt the NEC and Liquidators are trying to exclude. I suspect most of these fall in the same legal situation as those the NEC refunded money too, i.e the pre paid tickets to events, knowing it was an act that was probably illegal.

These people, the NEC, with their tame advisors are a disgrace, as is the legal system that allows it to happen regardless of complaints. To see a system in which liquidators suggest, by their company adverts, that a liquidation is a cheap way to buy back assets and get rid of debt is abhorrent to me

Please start your complaints, claim your rights

Andrew c/o enquiries@marshhammond.co.uk
The SNU C/o charles_coulston@yahoo.co.uk
and of course notify your loss to the Companies Investigation Bureau
enquiry@cib.gsi.gov.uk

There is little time now SO ACT QUICKLY TO LODGE YOUR CLAIM.

Jim

Hmm, it does appear that the liquidators tried to contact me. They responded to Lis yesterday and sent copies of 3 emails thay had sent to me.

I fear my email address must have the same aversion to correspondence received from this liquidator, as it had to the ones that Berley sent me. I will accept both of these parties word that these emails were sent but in both cases neither even made it to my Spam box.

Confirmation is given that they are not accepting claims from subscribers to quote

"Details of your claim have already been noted and will be dealt with subject to the outcome of legal enquiries as to the options available to the Company and its shareholders."

This is passing strange as this is a Creditors liquidation so I fail to see what rights the "Company and its Shareholders" have. Of course it could be a double entendre based upon their potential right to take action upon my emails and this forum.

However that would seem unlikely because it would bring all the matters listed into public view. We have been posting these as matters of public interest in an attempt to ensure that all issues are brought into a final resolution of this unhappy saga.

Certainly we subscribed at a time when the President of the SNU, both the Chairman and Executive Director of PP, plus Andrew Hadley, the fourth working party member, had decided to recommend liquidation to the Board of PP. By that stage they should have known it would be an insolvent ending to the Company. It would be hard to understand how this would not be an amount which should be treated as a creditor.

How on earth can subscribers not be creditors? They have paid for goods and have not received the full order. This surely means they are entitled to a refund - therefore they are creditors.

What is going on here? Are the liquidators suggesting that all subscribers cannot claim to be creditors? Surely this is too close to the creditors' meeting for it to be legal? Shouldn't they have written to all subscribers who are due a refund? Does this latest information mean that they haven't contacted the subscribers? Ergo, does this mean that Monday's meeting will no longer take place. What a farce. What sleaze.

Hi Inspiration,

Of course in normal terms subscribers who failed to get what they paid for would be creditors. Unfortunately, it appears that the SNU is trying to find a way to exclude such subscribers from the creditors list - perhaps by trying to claim that in the 'terms and conditions' they are able to exclude responsibility for not providing the goods purchased.

I have personally been informed by the proposed liquidators that the issue of subscribers as creditors is under legal advice - though not told what that legal opinion is likely to be. Given it is now very close the the date of the Creditors Meeting and subscribers have not been informed I fear that we subscribers will be excluded from our presumed rights by default.

Not only has Psychic Press (1995) Ltd, the company that is being put into liquidation, not written to subscribers, it would seem that the SNU, the parent company, is also determined to exclude as many people as possible from the proceedings regardless of the legitimacy of their claim as creditors.

I say this because I have become aware that there are other creditors, people and companies, that have legitimate claims for significant sums of outstanding debt owed by PP (1995) Ltd who have not been notified, or given an opportunity to lodge their claim, and/or appoint a proxy to represent them at the Creditors Meeting, despite being accepted as creditors with proxy rights by the previous proposed liquidator.

The documentation proving their claims are available but it seems that the SNU which is certainly handling the whole affair have not passed on to the new proposed liquidators a list that includes those previously recognised creditors.

One must ask why? Well one possible reason might be to reduce the apparent number of creditors (and their combined debt) so that the SNU can appear to be the major creditor thus ensuring they are appointed to the Committee of Inspection at the Creditor's Meeting. In other words, perhaps the SNU doesn't want anyone else, or any group of genuine creditors to have a say in what they want to achieve by this liquidation process.

It would not surprise me if this is the case. The SNU have certainly done all in their power thus far to exclude, deny, and refuse, the rights of those who have been harmed by their action in closing Psychic News.

Whatever may be the outcome of the Creditors Meeting on the 15th, it is clear that the reputation of the SNU has been seriously undermined by their actions in this matter. There are many people who have watched and have formed their opinion and I fear that the damage done by the current Executive of the SNU, and those who have been most directly involved in what has been done, may be much greater than the SNU may wish to admit.

There is no doubt that around the world the actions of the SNU are viewed with shock, horror and disapproval. There are people who have been staunch supporters of the SNU that are turning away, resigning and making clear to all they can, why.

Perhaps people will find this latest "NEWS" posted on the SNU website on 10 November 2010 of interest.

"The Spiritualists' National Union, as the majority shareholder of Psychic Press (1995) Limited, is concerned that the creditors’ voluntary liquidation of this company will result in creditors being unpaid. The Spiritualists' National Union is a separate legal entity from Psychic Press (1995) Limited and has no express power to provide assistance to Psychic Press (1995) Limited's creditors.
Nevertheless, the Directors of the Spiritualists' National Union recognise that Psychic Press (1995) Limited was run on a profit making basis for the Spiritualists' National Union over a long period of time and that many long standing customers stand to be adversely affected by this liquidation.


The Directors are therefore making an application to the Charity Commission for authorisation to provide financial assistance to the creditors. The success of this application is not guaranteed and the outcome will be announced on this website in due course.

If you have any questions please contact:
Marsh Hammond & Partners LLP on 020 7220 7892 or, via email, to notification.contact@marshhammond.co.uk

(Added: November 10th 2010)"

I will add my comments on this latest move shortly.

Here is the creditors notice, this is a public document so to help spread knowledge of what to do I include it for all of you


You will notice it says any Creditor can claim. Marsh Hammond have clearly received an incomplete list of creditors from the SNU so it is very important that all creditors immediately lodge proof of debt and a proxy form
You will all be aware of the news letter I sent out which reads as follows

At long last the SNU have posted details about this
http://www.snu.org.uk/news/pp1995ltd.html
http://www.snu.org.uk/news/pp1995-cvl01.htm
It appears the pressure may be telling, or else the risk to the directors, for their actions in running the company, are beginning to become more apparent. I note this because the second link shows that they may be considering trying to pay out creditors from within the SNU.
I wonder just how much this debacle is really costing the SNU, now they are paying two liquidators, sought other professional advice and are getting legal advice. Oh and they have refunded ticket holders for various events that were cancelled by the closure of Psychic News already.
The first link provides all the forms you need to lodge your debt and appoint a proxy BUT this must be done today. Then send them direct to a senior partner of the liquidators. Print the documents then scan them to a PDF format to send with an email
patricia.marsh@marshhammond.co.uk
This is very important because it appears the liquidator is not notifying subscribers who are owed money for undelivered issues of PN. This is pending legal advice but by the time that is received it will be too late to get the forms out before the Creditors Meeting so lodge these now.
Equally we are aware Creditors, accepted in the previous aborted liquidation, have not been included on the list used to send out notifications. Therefore anyone who is owed anything from Psychic Press (1995) should also just fill these forms in immediately and lodge them by email.

Jim

Lis wrote:The Directors are therefore making an application to the Charity Commission for authorisation to provide financial assistance to the creditors. The success of this application is not guaranteed and the outcome will be announced on this website in due course.

This is very interesting, surely the SNU have been paying out already, for liquidators, for legal fees, for accounting fees and to refund ticket monies which had been taken and used within Psychic Press (1995). Would that not mean a breach had occured already in their duties. The other issue is, if the Directors had traded insolvently as the evidence surely indicates, why should the SNU cover these debts to creditors. This should be a personal liability of the Directors and the NEC who have clearly taken on a directoral role of late. It may appear that the NEC are trying to use the SNU trust funds to safeguard their personal position. Of course these matters require investigation which is why a full and independent Liquidation is necessary.

By the way I say the evidence because they continued to purchase goods and accept subscriptions after the date that they had decided the Business must be Liquidated.

"I wonder just how much this debacle is really costing the SNU, now they are paying two liquidators, sought other professional advice and are getting legal advice."

Or one might say "I wonder how much SNU funding is being wasted....etc."

Funds that should have done something useful....one despairs.

I would suggest that no-one holds their breath expecting that the 'guilty parties' will get their just dues...

Pound to a penny they'll scoot out unscathed.

I will be interested to see how the SNU report all these financial expenditures in their Annual Report next year. Will they declare them, itemising every expenditure with a clear indication of why these costs were incurred or will they fudge the issue and 'hide' some (or many) of the costs under general headings which would make it impossible for any SNU member to establish exactly what had been spent on the disaster associated with the closure of Psychic News and the liquidation of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd.

I would hope that a number of SNU members will request that the costs involved in all of this are clearly identified as a specific item in the accounts.

This would include all of the liquidators, accountants and legal advice cost. Any amounts repaid to ticket holders. Any amounts repaid to any other creditors for any item. Any amounts that they injected into PP to keep it going (including any money put in by the Arthur Findlay College (AFC).

These are direct payments but what about any extraordinary purchases made by the SNU or the AFC that could have injected funds to keep PP going. For example did the AFC book shop buy an extraordinary volume of books in the period ? I know that they would eventually sell them but it would have been extra costs to teh SNU up front in this whole sorry and painful (especially to the staff) event.

On top of that if the AFC college did buy books it would almost certainly be ones which PP never paid i.e. the company who supplied the books remained unpaid at the time of liquidation. Clearly approval for this would be at a senior level, so someone who would have been aware of all the circumstances too.

So SNU members ask for a full costing and an explanation of the benefits the SNU will reap from hanging on to the Masthead and Archives. Then contrast this with the fact they would have received money for PP and seen the debt owed to them by PP repaid not as now being written off.

The membership can then do a cost benefit analysis of their own, maybe up to 20,000 pounds received by selling PP versus the cost of retention which must already be over 20,000 pounds with experts costs. Quite probably 40,000 pounds to date and rising.

Then consider the other events, the bad press the SNU has received over this affair, the ill will that has been created in the general Spiritualist community and the risk the SNU has been placed at.

Risk, yes because unless the Staff are paid out the Government, once they have met the amounts due can come back and seek redress from the liquidator maybe even require a further investigation. The NEC must realise that the department that deals with the payments wil be fully apprised of what has transpired to date.

I would think the Charities Commissioners may even ask some awkward questions as they realise that the NEC of the SNU was so active in running a company that met its end insolvently.

Lis wrote:I will be interested to see how the SNU report all these financial expenditures in their Annual Report next year. Will they declare them, itemising every expenditure with a clear indication of why these costs were incurred or will they fudge the issue and 'hide' some (or many) of the costs under general headings which would make it impossible for any SNU member to establish exactly what had been spent on the disaster associated with the closure of Psychic News and the liquidation of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd.

in light of the behaviour thus far, one might expect that such honesty is pretty unlikely to be forthcoming.... Wouldn't auditors request missing details though?

Or am I in cloud-cuckoo land?

I don't like political wrangles,tend to stay out of them.

But yes,Auditors should request all documents to be shown.
From what I remember from my years in accounting,all such paper work going back to a certain date must be catalogued and produced.
Petal

Hi Petal,

Yes political wrangles can be nasty but this goes well beyond any of that. Undoubtedly politics has played a part in what they did but the way they did it is just plain wrong.

As a senior financial manager in the commercial world I am shocked at their actions, even stunned at the way they have failed to act according to the rules in insolvent situations. As a Spiritualist I am appalled at their lack of honesty, ethics, morality and of course Spirituality.

As you may understand I just don't like what they have done, it really irks me.

My feelings would have been different had they communicated with subscribers and Spiritualists the problems they faced. We know the level of support, including money, they were offered once the news leaked out. This support can also be seen in the very positive response to the new Spirit of PN.

This would have given them time to try and restore the companies fortunes whilst ensuring they could properly deal with creditors and staff if teh efforts looked like failing. Then I would have respected their actions even if, subsequently, the independent PN was lost.

Yes probably a nasty piece of politics, as you say, it is hard to see a commercial benefit in anything they have done. This then has been pulled off very badly, to the detriment of many, especially their staff and Spiritualism

It's like a lot of companies that go into liquidation,it is not announced until too late for any customers to retrieve their money.
Same thing happened to us once but on a smaller scale.
We spent over a £1000 once on washing machine,etc,little knowing the company was going broke.
Unfortunately we paid by cheque instead on credit card,so couldnt claim full amount back.
Then they had the cheek to offer us half compensation but in vouchers which were only redeemable in their store. I actually emailed the Fair Trades people who said there was nothing they could do to help in any way. So much for them
it still hurts now when ever I ever think about it.

Petal

Well the liquation of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd is going ahead and a Committee of Inspection has been appointed.

As soon as possible a report of the Creditor's Meeting will be posted on this site.

[Leslie Price preliminary report from London

At a creditors meeting on Monday 15 November, it was agreed to liquidate Psychic Press (1995) Ltd and to appoint Marsh Hammond as liquidators. Claims totalling over £130,000 were included in the information made available to the meeting although these would be subject to confirmation. There were also updated accounts and an expanded history of events leading up to the meeting. This is expected to be posted on the SNU web site.

Creditors included numerous psychic bodies and churches, employees (£33500) and the SNU (£40,000). It was noted that the Charity Commissioners had been asked to confirm that subscribers (£10,700) might be repaid by the SNU itself, although in general creditors would not be paid by the Union, because of charity law.

A committee was appointed to assist the liquidator where necessary, consisting of an STF representative (Geoffrey Craggs was at the meeting, in the absence of Roy Stemman abroad); an SNU rep (to be decided) Susan Farrow and Leslie Price (both proxy reps of creditors). One other member was to be confirmed.

Susan Farrow reminded the liquidator of the latest offer by JV Trust to take over the business, and provided her with details of the disputed assets (the title and archives of PN etc). The liquidator began her enquiries immediately after the formal meeting.

The SNU was represented at the meeting by David Bruton, Charles Coulston and Graham Hewitt. Susan Farrow was proxy for one of the creditors.

Following the liquidation, all possible haste will be made to obtain the statutory government help for employees, before Christmas.

movement - at last

Why can't the SNU, do the decent thing, except that there plan to take controll did not work. They could just back down, give Psychic News over to J V Trust and The team of editors, then maybe they could all have a relaxing christmas. I wonder if the SNU have looked at the fact that any acusations that they have made against me will be held in Scottish Courts and not under UK court ruleing. as I have regiserd with Companys house Scotland. And it is comon knoledge, that this company is not a letterhead, with me. I think any spiritualist person would give the employees a thought, especialy when they must have been told by their legal advisor that they have not got a leg to stand on, Thats if they have any idea of what my company is going to do, and that is not enything to do with the paper that we are refering to.
Please just stop this nonsence of, If I can't have it no one can, and let the people get on with their jobs, it is very clear what you were planing to do, and by doing any of these things it will not even come into the legal action SNU v McFadden, if my company is stopping the newspaper getting back out, please let me know, I can always find a new name for my company, but I will not back down to bullies or anyone trying to keep people out of a job, or stopping me with my company plans.
At the end of the day, they will get it anyway and you know that. all this is acheiving is stalling and costing people there jobs, but at least it is fueling a great story line for people who want to purtray Spiritualists in a bad light, lets just hope that some of the SNU comitty can bring themselfs to think of the people they put out of work and the efects that has on them, but it is comming up to a Christ Mas.

May I draw to everyone's attention the latest posting by Roy Stemman on

http://www.paranormalreview.com/articles/20101116

Of particular interest is the information that as "a result of discussions that took place at that meeting, the following statement has been issued, under the heading "Asset realisations":

"The Spiritual Truth Foundation (STF) and the Spiritualists" National Union (SNU) have agreed to discuss the identity and the ownership of the disputed assets with the Joint Liquidators and further updates will be provided in due course."

I am sure that many will follow with great interest the progress and outcome of such discussions.