feather wrote: No accounts yet, but the shareholding is on record from day one, if you check the images

diforumreject wrote: But they're only nominal £1 shares.

nominal or not, they are the only shares in existence, which means the company is owned 100% by DI and Sean

Can you explain what i see in those images please, dif?
They're pictures, not pages or headed documents. Where do they originate?

diforumreject wrote: It won't be interesting until there's audited accounts available showing the income streams and expenditures.

I appreciate what you're doing, I just don't think you'll get any bang for your buck atm.

diforumreject wrote:
I believe DI won't have a share no he is no longer director.

When a Ltd company is created, a nominal share is created and given to each director (you can think of them as fake shares really).

There are no shares that can be traded on the stock market which would enable somebody to become a majority shareholder and take control of the company and view its books in detail. Its completely private, owned by sean and has such a small turnover and number of regular staff that complete broken-down books with individual receipts will not be required to be submitted by law. We will get an overview of income and expenditure come year end which won't tell us anything.

They usually are £1 at the outset. It's the fact that they're both listed as share holders that's relevant, since Icke specifically said that Sean's the sole director and there are NO share holders. It shows an intention for both to be eligible to recieve dividends.

That may not have happened as yet, but the facility is in place, and Icke lied about it.

*edi* That's if Icke is a listed share holder, which I'm not sure about coz I can't see that link.

You do not have to be a director in a limited company to be a share holder.

knobmeup wrote:
extracts from the official records held at companies house

Icke didn't really lie Gilly, it's all a matter of what was said when.



Icke was a shareholder, then he wasn't, which will have left Sean as current sole shareholder/director.

they are not fake shares, I have ran several companies which I owned by way of "nominal" £1 shares and can assure you all the profits ended up in my back pocket!!!!! If you dont go public, £1 nominal shares work just fine to own a company.

its not owned by Sean, its owned by Sean and David 50/50

DI no longer being a director has nothing to do with the shares, there has been no re-allocation of shares recorded at companies house

nope, being a director and being a shareholder are completely separate



edit - messing up my posts here meant to quote specific posts and reply but messed up:-) but if you read back I'm sure it will make sense

diforumreject wrote:
They were obviously expecting the shares to increase in value .. No?

feather wrote:
Its all info...save it all..

I'm not a director of my husband's company, or even an employee - I have no link with the company whatsoever, but am a registered share holder, purely so that I can get dividends.

Gilly wrote:
In a private Ltd company, to become a shareholder you either have to be a director, or, the director has to sell you a share. In a PLC, you can just buy shares, the director has no say in who buys them. IE: You can't get a share in TPV unless Sean specifically decides to sell you one.

SilvaRizla wrote:
So you think he has handed the keys of the Porche over to Sean?...No way..

feather wrote:
Icke remains a shareholder according to companies house, but is no longer a director

Gilly wrote: My apologies for getting that wrong.

You capitalist pigdogs!

diforumreject wrote:
Well, if you know that they were both directors and will both have a nominal share, what are you trying to do?

We've known since the outset it was a Ltd company.