Frankly Mr Shankly Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 We bought a tractor for up to "a maximum sum of £9.000." in March 2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted January 21, 2015 Author Share Posted January 21, 2015 So the Trust confirm they own the shares and that's not good enough? Issues with the chairman aside. Didn't their finance guy get jailed last year? Sounds like he is responsible for unfiled accounts? I haven't seen what the trust has said yet. I gather something's in the pipeline. It's all ifs and buts at the moment. Is it enough if the trust says their legal advisers say the trust owns the shares? Not necessarily. Advice such as that can be wrong or dubious for any number of reasons. That analysis in the original post is 100% independent. A guy is doing us a favour out of the goodness of his heart. He has nothing to do with the club or the trust. I gather that the previous finance director was Mike Maloney. It doesn't really matter. That level of nonsense comes from the top and nowhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Do we? I recall it being spent on things like groundkeeping equipment and a youth tea bus. Hard to see those as inappropriate Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the loan of Luke Beckett at the back end of the 2004-05 season funded by the trust at the time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Am I right in thinking Leeslover came up and independently looked at the books a few season ago? Apologies in advance if it was not for Trust finances, but for something else, can't rember the outcome. Can you confirm for me LL? Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorvik_latic Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 So the Trust confirm they own the shares and that's not good enough? Issues with the chairman aside. They've confirmed a lot over the years and it looks like they've pulled the wool over people's eyes. I think it's time for independent confirmation. Didn't their finance guy get jailed last year? Sounds like he is responsible for unfiled accounts? Nope, he had nothing to do with that as he was only involved fairly recently. Something similar did happen apparently but nothing was made public... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Am I right in thinking Leeslover came up and independently looked at the books a few season ago? Apologies in advance if it was not for Trust finances, but for something else, can't rember the outcome. Can you confirm for me LL? Cheers That was the Club. Latins and England and myself had a top level look at them with Corney, Blitz, Joy and Hardy. No Trust involvement (part of Barry's affection for me stems from then). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Am I right in thinking Leeslover came up and independently looked at the books a few season ago? Apologies in advance if it was not for Trust finances, but for something else, can't rember the outcome. Can you confirm for me LL? Cheers It was the club's books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 No, before his time. They've confirmed a lot over the years and it looks like they've pulled the wool over people's eyes. I think it's time for independent confirmation. Nope, he had nothing to do with that as he was only involved fairly recently. Something similar did happen apparently but nothing was made public... http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/oldham-athletic-supporters-trust-finance-6230807 Nuttall, of Samuel Street, Levenshulme, took over the position at Oldham Athletic Supporters Trust, which was set up by fans to help the club, in 2009.Says he started in 2009 so he is liable for at least three of the seven years? He is clearly untrustworthy so he could have told the Trust he had done it and didn't submit them to stop some accounting discrepancies coming out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Cheers guys new it was some books Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) Some people were made Honorary Lifelong Members (HLMs) of the Trust, because they had paid monthly the annual membership fee, thereby being many years in credit. Even if there is no list of members, those HLMs will have membership cards to prove their status.. Edited January 21, 2015 by singe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Some people were made Honorary Lifelong Members (HLMs) of the Trust, because they had paid monthly the annual membership fee, thereby being many years in credit. Even if there is no list of members, those HLMs will have membership cards to prove their status.It was my understanding I was one of those. I have not found my documentation yet. All the excellent work that you have done LL & 24, thank you. And I will try and find it with increased vigour. Very tempted to cancel my subscription, but I want to know I have a vote first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Is this enough to ring the police? If not, what would be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 It was the club's books.Funny how OAFC private co is seemingly more open and transparent with its financial arrangements than the Supporters Trust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 We bought a tractor for up to "a maximum sum of £9.000." in March 2008 The often-wrong Wikipedia says: The Trust has helped the club with some costs over the last few years. These have included the purchase of a mini-bus in October 2004 which is loaned to the club on an ongoing basis in a donation worth £20,000. In April 2005 Trust Oldham contributed a further £20,000 towards the signing of Luke Beckett on loan from Sheffield United. And in April 2008 the trust bought a new tractor for the club groundsmen. Over the course of its existence, Trust Oldham has donated on average £1,000 per month to Oldham Athletic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Dear all I have flagged this as an immediate concern to the committee and have asked for a response quite quickly with regards to 7 years worth of audit able accounts. I am hoping this will be clarified sooner rather than later Thanks for your patience Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latics and England Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 I am not playing any of this down but I am not sure any of this is new news. It is on public record that the Trust went several years without submitting accounts. In addition, over this same period of time the Trust did not hold annual general meetings in line with its own constitution. Similarly, whether the Trust legally still holds the 3% shareholding in the club or not, let's not kid ourselves that that shareholding was ever worth the paper it was written on. The Trust has never had voting rights through its shareholding and ultimately the seat on the board is at the discretion of the Board of Directors. If Simon Corney wants, or is prepared to accept, a fan on the board we will have one, if he doesn't we won't. Whether the Trust owns the shares or not is unlikely to be a key factor either way. The accounting problems experienced by the Trust are a symptom of the lack of engagement in the Trust from the wider fan base. Whilst I understand that there are good reasons why many of us, myself included, have felt we were unable to get involved the lack of people on the committee means that the wrong people were potentially put in positions of power and there was a lack of control over these positions. This is not a justification of what's gone on by any means but we need to appreciate the circumstances. The lack of external audits to uncover problems is unforgivable though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c.hill12 Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 We have asked for all the issues within this thread as a matter of urgency. There will also be a public meeting next month to discuss these concerns aswell as any others you may have. I have done abit of research though and company house still have us down as 3%shareholders with the correct company number from what i can tell. Also the police were heavily involved in our accouns during the fraud case so i'm sure any discrepencies would have arisen then. As a trust we are awaiting something official back from the legal advisors and as soon as we have this it will be released and the public meeting arranged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorvik_latic Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Also the police were heavily involved in our accouns during the fraud case so i'm sure any discrepencies would have arisen then. Which one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 (edited) Similarly, whether the Trust legally still holds the 3% shareholding in the club or not, let's not kid ourselves that that shareholding was ever worth the paper it was written on. The Trust has never had voting rights through its shareholding and ultimately the seat on the board is at the discretion of the Board of Directors. If Simon Corney wants, or is prepared to accept, a fan on the board we will have one, if he doesn't we won't. Whether the Trust owns the shares or not is unlikely to be a key factor either way. I don't believe this is correct. The way Oldham Athletic 2004 Association Football Club Ltd is set up guarantees the owners of the shares a seat on the board. While there may be not votes (if there were a 97-3 defeat would be likely anyway) Corney has no choice but to accept the nomination of the Trust (assuming the organisation in it's current form is the rightful owner of those 3 B shares). Corney and the rest of the club's board don't appear to have any rights to block the Trust's appointment. They can, if they want, ignore every contribution made by that appointment. That appointment can also make it very clear to supporters that he / she is being sidelined. Quite happy for somebody to dig out the paperwork to verify this one way or the other. Edited January 22, 2015 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted January 22, 2015 Author Share Posted January 22, 2015 I am not playing any of this down but I am not sure any of this is new news. It was news to me. I shouldn't have played down the expertise and independence of the guy who looked into it for us. I did so only to make it clear that any foul-ups are mine.) What's happened in the past is roughly that someone finds something out or believes something unpleasant about the trust. Barry et al then simply say it's not true or slightly or mainly wrong. This time it's different because someone not connected with the club or the trust has looked into it from a genuine due diligence standpoint. (Meaning, my client thinks she wants to buy this company. What's my advice to her?) That hasn't happened before. The accounting problems experienced by the Trust are a symptom of the lack of engagement in the Trust from the wider fan base. Let's not blame ourselves. There are lots of factors, but a lack of accountability basically wrote shabby accounting into the trust's constitution. Not everyone has the time for unpaid, unloved work of that type. Probably very few people do. The ones who do have the time and inclination should do better though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 We have asked for all the issues within this thread as a matter of urgency. There will also be a public meeting next month to discuss these concerns aswell as any others you may have. I have done abit of research though and company house still have us down as 3%shareholders with the correct company number from what i can tell. Also the police were heavily involved in our accouns during the fraud case so i'm sure any discrepencies would have arisen then. As a trust we are awaiting something official back from the legal advisors and as soon as we have this it will be released and the public meeting arranged. I wouldn't assume that the police have given the ok unless they have specifically addressed the issue. It's likely that any audit they would have done would have been targeted towards the fraud rather than checking the overall governance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 (edited) The accounting problems experienced by the Trust are a symptom of the lack of engagement in the Trust from the wider fan base. Whilst I understand that there are good reasons why many of us, myself included, have felt we were unable to get involved the lack of people on the committee means that the wrong people were potentially put in positions of power and there was a lack of control over these positions. This is not a justification of what's gone on by any means but we need to appreciate the circumstances. The lack of external audits to uncover problems is unforgivable though. Sounds bang on to me ----> http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/oldham-athletic-supporters-trust-finance-6230807 Nuttall did this from 2009, christ knows who went before him but you only need new people in those positions because someone has left it. Either way it certainly sounds like he did nothing to rectify the issue and has made it worse. The lack of external audit is worrying but that also sounds like its expensive? Are the Trust actually required to do that? If not, how much fans money should be spent on that service? Edited January 22, 2015 by blueatheart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcmetty Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 The lack of external audit is worrying but that also sounds like its expensive? Are the Trust actually required to do that? If not, how much fans money should be spent on that service? One of the benefits of being a SD member is reduced costs for things like that, due to partnerships SD has put in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 I don't know much about SD but if they are good and affordable it could be what we need. A clear structure with back up and audit, if embraced, might have helped avoid the problems in the past and safeguard the future. Supposing say that the current board and new joiners get things straight and moving forward we shouldn't be relying on everything relying on what they do or know - something working well doesn't always mean you have good systems in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Added to which can we afford not to get some help in? The financial and reputation as costs of past mistakes are hard to count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.