Nov 22 2011, 05:26 PM
……….a substantial amount of money and assets has been recovered since the case was first raised. Also the claim for the balance has not been dropped it has simply been pursued in the way the Trust has been advised to proceed. I dont expect it to be sisted indefinitely, however, even if the case is dismissed with costs awarded or not to either side, the Trust claim will still be on the table. Thats it IMHO. ………………….FT
McColl loves to quote chapter and verse of the Trust ‘Bible’ – but only the parts which suit his particular ends. His posting on Bell’s Comic is diametrically opposed to the truth
‘A substantial amount of money has been recovered.’
Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; Danny Goodwin; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
I am in an absolute state of shock with regards your E-Mail accusing me of fraud to the tune of £4759.00
Before presenting the figures I had went over them with a company accountant that I know to verify that I had used the correct layout format and how I should present them.
Again this morning I have went back over them and she has said the way I have detailed it out seems quite straight forward but for some reason further explanation / understanding was required to the Trust Accountant.
I have sent an E-Mail to Gordon to meet with him as he is the Trust Accountant and hopefully he will understand the way I have set-out the figures.
To the best of my knowledge there has been no deliberate wrong doing on my part, although you obviously think differently.
Can you also please forward the Sort Code and Account No and I will bank what is left.
CC: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 11:27:16 +0000
Let me be very specific, by Monday 7th December this will be out of our hands and any future correspondence on this topic will be with Strathclyde Police.
‘A substantial amount of assets has been recovered’.
McColl alludes to a quantity of unsold alcohol and soft drinks stored in Mr. Gallacher’s flat immediately after the ‘Stars’ event. That was done out of necessity, and ONLY because he was left on his own to do the final clear up. Where were those others with their cars and garages? Who in his right mind wants to clutter up a small flat with somebody else’s problem?
To make matters worse, for fully nine months (during which Mr. Gallacher was regularly portrayed as a criminal on Bell’s Comic) the Trust committee made absolutely no attempt to uplift the stock, and to add insult to injury, in a meeting with Mr. Gallacher’s solicitor in August 2010, Nicholas Robinson the Trust accountant stated that he planned to ‘invoice’ the former!
Ultimately it was agreed (and confirmed in writing by Trust secretary Christopher McCorkindale) that the Trust would uplift the stock, but six months later, after several tentative arrangements had fallen through, Mr. Gallacher PERSONALLY delivered the items, along with a full inventory, to the Trust’s registered address.
‘Also the claim for the balance has not been dropped.’
THE ‘BALANCE’ Mr. McColl? THERE IS NO BALANCE!!!
Didn’t you mean to say ‘The claim for what Mr. Robinson claims is a balance’? No ‘balance’ can be found in the independent accountant’s report prepared for court.
‘I dont expect it to be sisted indefinitely, however, even if the case is dismissed with costs awarded or not to either side, the Trust claim will still be on the table.’
Nonsense Mr. McColl. That sounds like yet another devious attempt to deceive the Trust membership.
There is every possibility that the sheriff will insist (in the interests of justice) that the proof hearing proceeds. Mortonjag recommends that you check that out with a properly qualified solicitor rather than listening to Robinson and McCorkindale who have misled the membership almost as much as each other!
Moreover, as the Trust has formally requested that its ‘claim’ be adjudicated in court, should that ‘claim’ be dismissed (ESPECIALLY if that is at the Trust’s instance), it will by definition no longer ‘be on the table’.
Mortonjag is puzzled by Mr. McColl’s abbreviation ‘IMHO’.
‘Intoxicated – must hurry off’?