Fundraising bosses disqualified for holding £ 5.8million

0

Doreen, Sean, Joanne and John Baker were all directors of Coin Co International Plc (Coin Co) based in Burgess Hill, West Sussex, providing money collection in transit services to local government, public agencies, charities, to other organizations and businesses. The company also provided counting and currency exchange services.

The company was incorporated in January 1995 and its cash transport services were provided under agreements stipulating that money collected, for example from parking lots, was counted, banked and returned to the customer.

However, Coin Co fell behind in payments of funds raised to its clients from at least March 2013, more than a year before it took office in November 2014, in violation of contracts it had entered into.

At administration, Coin Co had assets of £ 1,866,066 and liabilities of £ 11,397,211 and investigators examined the company’s activities, uncovering several instances of mismanagement.

In one case, Coin Co owed £ 5.8million to four different clients who had raised funds on their behalf but failed to return the money, in direct violation of previous agreements.

The directors did not dispute the findings of the investigation which, among other things, found that they:

  • retained £ 5.7million of clients’ cash, in breach of their contract
  • caused or allowed the company to break commercial agreements relating to a parts collection service provided to a number of customers
  • allowed the company to fall behind in payments of funds collected to its customers from at least March 2013

John, Doreen, Joanne and Sean Baker, have made disqualification commitments to the Secretary of State for Business, Energy, Innovation and Science, effective May 3, 2018, for eight years each.

Doreen, Sean and Joanne Baker were appointed directors on January 30, 1995 and John Baker was appointed director on January 1, 1998. Disqualifications prevent directors from being directly or indirectly involved in the promotion, formation or management of a company. company for the duration of their terms.

Robert Clarke, head of the Investigations Group at the Insolvency Department, said:

It is clear that companies that handle money on behalf of others have a duty to ensure that the funds collected are duly returned to the rightful owners, under the agreements reached. Directors who fail these duties will be investigated and removed from the corporate arena for an extended period of time.

Anyone registered as a director should be aware of the functions that such a position entails, and further that they are able and willing to perform these functions and ensure that the company of which they are responsible is managed in accordance with its obligations under the agreements made or they may also be disqualified in the event of failure.

Notes to Editors

Coin Co International Plc (company number 03015844) was incorporated on January 30, 1995 and entered into administration on November 27, 2014. At the administration level it had assets of £ 1,866,066 and liabilities of 11,397,211 £.

John (Date of birth: June 1947) and Doreen Baker (Date of birth: July 1946) reside in Hassocks, West Sussex. Sean Baker (Date of birth: June 1970) resides in Burgess Hill, West Sussex and Joanne Baker (Date of birth: February 1972) resides in Brighton.

In making their disqualification commitments, John Francis Baker, Doreen May Baker, Sean Baker and Joanne Baker did not dispute that:

  • they caused or allowed Coin Co International Plc (“Coin Co”) to violate commercial agreements relating to a coin collecting service provided to a number of customers, in that Coin Co did not pay the monies collected on behalf of clients, at least four of which entered into contracts specifically stating that the ownership of the funds raised was never transferred to Coin Co, resulting in an amount unpaid to these clients on the date of administration of at least £ 5,757,759 included in a total amount outstanding to all cash in transit customers of at least £ 6,154,948 which is significant for Coin Co’s deficit when administering £ 8,078,316
  • Coin Co has agreements with customers for the collection, counting and banking of coins received, for example, pay and display parking lots and charity collections
  • Coin Co has fallen behind with payments of funds collected to its customers from at least March 2013
  • at least four contracts with clients expressly stipulated that funds raised were not the property of Coin Co and had to be paid out to clients within a certain number of days. Coin Co would then bill the customer for the agreed service fee due to them. These four clients owed the administration £ 5,757,759 in respect of funds held by Coin Co not paid in accordance with the terms of their contracts. These sums dated back to collections made from July 2013 and had to be paid between four and ten days after collection.
  • from at least October 1, 2013, when the co-directors were in a dispute with a major client over Coin Co’s claim that historical amounts were owed to Coin Co by that main client for replenishments, they have caused or permitted Coin Co to act at the risk and to the detriment of clients other than the primary client (other clients) in that:

    • knowing that the primary client denied owing any money to Coin Co for replenishments, the co-directors did not keep the monies collected on behalf of the other clients, instead mixing up the monies collected on behalf of both the main client and others customers and making payments to the large customer of the sums thus intermingled
    • despite requests from other clients that sums collected on their behalf be paid in accordance with contractual obligations, Mr. Baker and his co-directors failed to make payments owed to other clients and otherwise preserve the sums collected from them, causing prejudice to other customers who at the date of administration owed a total of at least £ 5,688,133.

The effect of a prohibition order is that, without the express leave of a court, a prohibited person cannot:

  • act as a director of a company
  • participate, directly or indirectly, in the promotion, constitution or management of a company or a limited liability partnership
  • be a receiver of business property

Covenants of prohibition are the administrative equivalent of a prohibition order but do not involve legal proceedings.

Persons subject to an exclusion order are bound by a series of other restrictions.

The Insolvency Department administers the insolvency regime, investigating all forced liquidations and individual insolvencies (bankruptcies) through the official receiver to establish why they have become insolvent. It can also use the powers under the Companies Act 1985 to conduct confidential inquiries into the activities of limited liability companies in the UK. In addition, the agency authorizes and regulates the insolvency profession, deals with the forfeiture of directors in the event of business failure, assesses and pays legal entitlement to severance pay when an employer is unable or unwilling. not pay employees, provides banking and investment services for bankruptcy and liquidation funds. and advises ministers and other ministries on insolvency law and practice.

More information about the work of the insolvency service and how to complain about financial misconduct is available.

Media requests for this press release – 020 7637 6498

You can also follow the Insolvency Department on:


Source link

Share.

Comments are closed.