Embedded Files
place holder
2016 research, white paper and related comms
contributors, editors pls get in touch, Custodian
or Our Simon Hobbs
(but not until after he has provided UBIQUS effort at an embargo'ed transcript 22.9.20 approx 3.40pm to 4.40pm for which JVM is responsible (Warrant to arrest MM as punishment for not attending secret afternoon hearing for which she had received no Witness Summons from Lavender J (nor even seen request for Witness Summons).
22.9.20 at 3.40pm was the opportunity for JVM and other hopefuls, as prospective TRD officers, to be heard for second time that day (but secret i.e. no notice or evidence.
This time they obtained arrest warrant prior to 24.9.20 TRD members proxy poll voting.
JVM had already been invited by 2012 Folio 336 to use his booked 10.30am 22.9.20 hearing
to ask for whatever he wanted, including someone's head, if he were so minded.
JVM was a no show at 10.30 am 22.9.20. He needed permission for a "second bite at the cherry" reasons served on notice in advance. Without he could not access the court further.
Jacob Dean was paid for another foray later that day (secret hearing, not listed) using TRD members funds but without their mandate. The Notice of members' meeting did not include notice of this secret hearing.
Q: Why did JMV do this?
A: Seemingly to avoid introducing himself in response to MM call May 2020 for same purpose. Had he done so, the votes of TRD Joint Principal Shareholders could be agreed in advance, thereby allowing JVM to cement consensus using the benefit of the Nov 2002 agreement. AMF's notes from meeting with MM (London Capital Club) remain witheld, together with "for your eyes only" board reports. JVM and others have no rights to access.
Breach of TRD November 2002 contract is a cause of action that was intentionally excluded from the ET1 ("For the avoidance of doubt......") (6.3.06).
Indemnity from Allianz metamorph'ed into 2012 Folio 336 for limitation reasons.
MM gave consideration for new contract Nov 2002, etc)
Transcript Our Simon Hobbs bought in regard airing at the end of the court day 22.9.20 has
yet to be provided by him, at 21 Dec 2020. This is despite "having conduct." This delay and obstruction is contrary to TRD interests; its ability to maintain a stable market without uncertainty; and get to know who its members are, keep records of their estates and maybe even answer the phone.
From: Parliamentary Archives <ARCHIVES@parliament.uk>
Subject: RE: 3264 - RE: ORDER CONFIRMATION Ms Claire Batley Re: Revised Framework for Insolvency Law, White Paper, 1984 (Cmnd 9175)
Date: 10 January 2017 at 17:29:12 GMT
To: Mira Makar <mira.makar@btinternet.com>
Dear Mira XXXXX
Thank you for your payment, for which I have just received notification.
I have sent the pdf of the Revised Framework for Insolvency Law, White Paper, 1984 (Cmnd 9175) to you via We Transfer.
Please look out for this email and do check spam/junk mail in case it is redirected there. The email will provide a link from where you can download the pdf.
I do hope that this helps with your submissions.
Kind regards
XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
Senior Archivist (Public Services & Outreach)
Parliamentary Archives
Houses of Parliament
London SW1A 0PW
United Kingdom
tel: +44 (0)207 XXXXXXX
fax: +44 (0)207 XXXXXXXXX
e-mail: archives@parliament.uk
web: www.parliament.uk/archives
online catalogue: www.portcullis.parliament.uk
From: Parliamentary Archives
Sent: 10 January 2017 15:41
To: 'Mira Makar' <mira.makar@btinternet.com>
Subject: 3264 - RE: ORDER CONFIRMATION XXXX Re: Revised Framework for Insolvency Law, White Paper, 1984 (Cmnd 9175)
Dear Mira Mika
Thank you for your email.
I’ve just sent you the money request for £13.50. If it does not arrive in the next couple of hours, please do check your spam/junk mail as sometimes these emails do get redirected. The email will come from paypal and provide instructions as to how to pay with a debit or credit card. Once you have paid we receive an automatic notification to let us know.
The imaging team have just informed me that they have already completed your order (as double spread). As soon as I receive the notification of payment I will then be able to forward the pdf to you. The pdf is too large to attach to an email so it will be sent using We Transfer which is a file sharing site.
Yours sincerely
XXXXXXXXX
------------------------
XXXXXXXXX
Senior Archivist (Public Services & Outreach)
Parliamentary Archives
Houses of Parliament
London SW1A 0PW
United Kingdom
tel: +44 (0)207 XXXXXX
fax: +44 (0)207 XXXXXXX
e-mail: archives@parliament.uk
web: www.parliament.uk/archives
online catalogue: www.portcullis.parliament.uk
From: Mira Makar [mailto:mira.makar@btinternet.com]
Sent: 09 January 2017 16:45
To: Parliamentary Archives <ARCHIVES@parliament.uk>;
IPRegulation.Section <IPRegulation.section@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk>; enforcement.technical@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk; policy.unit@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk; nick.howard@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk;
Vicky.Bagnall <Vicky.Bagnall@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk>;
intelligence.live@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk;
Michael.gibbs@insolvency.gsi.gov.uk
Cc: Mira Makar User <mira.makar@btinternet.com>; official.Publishing@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: ORDER CONFIRMATION Ms Claire Batley Re: Revised Framework for Insolvency Law, White Paper, 1984 (Cmnd 9175)
9 January 2017
Dear XXXXXX.
Thank you. I wish to go ahead. Please send the money order request. Does scanning as double page mean that the PDF comes out small print or can the scanner be set so it comes out page by page?
I shall notify the Insolvency Service running the Call For Evidence on Insolvency Practitioner Bonds that there can be an administrative delay. Of course if there is a faster route of attending and collecting, I shall do that.
It is important that This 1984 White Paper of the government is obtained because it comes from the DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY and was prepared by SENIOR CIVIL SERVANTS to counteract crime and ensure that there was an alternative to prison, if a trader, corporate or sole trader found themselves "fraudulently trading" through no fault of their own.
This could happen if a key customer went bust or a key supplier did not deliver or there was price escalation that could not be immediately passed on.
It was also to tackle the problem of phoenix operators plus ensure that the Official Receiver was taken seriously by prosecutors when he was discharging his duty to investigate before liquidating a company; when one was brought down; or someone, claiming to be a creditor, claimed that another was an undeclared creditor (i.e. had committed an act of bankruptcy), and all their creditors had to be held at bay, they could no longer look after them, whilst a receivership order in bankruptcy was enforced on behalf of those unidentified and not heard.
The OR of course has to enforce contingent assets which means going into court and cashing in on instruments that pay out on sight of fraud or dishonesty.
The DTI and government was strong, correctly so, in keeping the Revenue and Customs & Excise as preferential creditors. It was this alone that kept those attempting a rescue on their toes to avoid becoming a "shadow director" and personally liable.
I worked in this field from 1982 so I have personal experience of how effective the government's approach was, backed by the rigour of DTI Inspectors.
There was an attempt at the time to create an alternative world of voluntary agreements to deal with uncertain financial circumstances and for those who had been operating as asset strippers tolerated by those profiting, an attempt to make them "reputable" by saying a reputable insurer would be their surety and guarantor. They were vulnerable because they were taking jobs as "receivers" for banks and ignoring unsecured creditors of an estate owner, their contingent assets or anything that would resolve the situation with directors/owners still in situ. They did not understand the 1985 et sec acts and could not operate them (they said in Parliament).
Of course you cannot guarantee prospectively what someone has done retrospectively, and in any event prospectively only if it is their first time working without a history to worry about as the surety assumed the history of the individual, whatever it was.
In June 2013, the specialist department of the INSOLVENCY SERVICE, agency of BEIS, under the Chief Inspector of Companies, doubling as CEO, known as IP Regulation volunteered (or was volunteered, because no one else would do the job) to operate a gateway for those of the public to report where they suspected untoward activity. This could readily be spotted because if an insurer were to be surety (none have advertised themselves with a list of those for whom they are surety) the transaction had to be public to those affected, so they could rapidly object to the surety and it would not go ahead as the surety would not want to bring on trouble for themselves. IP Regulation now has three and a half years first hand experience and has discovered that this instruments have been used perversely by one group of people to bring down others and do do so anonymously.
Accordingly it has gone back to the White Paper 1984 to check DTI thinking in sponsoring the creation of a new industry of individuals, a new body of law, which was named "insolvency" for want of a better name, where the public was supposed to be indifferent on the honesty or dishonesty of the individuals because effectively there was a surety operating and therefore up front checking and notice.
In practice the public were not told, the surety kept their presence quiet, in fact not asking the FSA if they could be licensed, and paid out after the event, when the real damage was done and could not be recovered. Worse they attempted to limit exposure to an amount invented by the operator and kept all records off their balance sheet so their auditors (scheme operators) would not be on notice and bound to tell the directors, who as former scheme operators, in fact knew.
This was not envisaged by the 1984 White Paper or the January 1985 debates on early draft bills creating a new industry based on procedure instead of law. A debate is here:
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1985/jan/15/insolvency-bill-hl-1
In those days the public had protection via DTI Inspectors; the OFT; Trading Standards; Citizens Advice; local law centres; and operating county courts as well as local Land Registry and proper ID verification. This was largely intact until 2007/8, although the machinery for abuse (perversity instruments) was getting going.
You will appreciate therefore that this is urgent as the government which is now responsible from
June 2013 went to a CALL FOR EVIDENCE on 15 September 2016, closing 16 December 2016, referencing the WHITE PAPER 1984 as the benchmark of government thinking.
It is vital therefore that Parliamentary archives which provide ready access to HANSARD (debates not government thinking), can quickly provide the relevant paper.
Re TNA. I tried them to start. They replied immediately they do not have it. The link just says not digitalised, not that they have it in non digital form.
This is consistent with the fact they do not have the Cork Report and sent me to you last year, when I came and collected with an appointment.
From: ARK Records Enquiries <enquiries@nationalarchives.gov.uk>
Subject: FW: TNA150157474: Research/records advice (General enquiries)
Date: 30 September 2015 12:38:23 GMT+01:00
To: "'mira.makar@btinternet.com'" <mira.makar@btinternet.com>
Dear Ms. Makar,
Thank you for contacting The National Archives of the United Kingdom.
The records you mention are not our records I suggest you contact Parliamentary Archives
We wish you every success with your research.
Yours sincerely
XXXXXXXXX
Remote Enquiries Duty Officer
Let us know what you think about your recent contact as your views are important in helping us improve our service. Please fill in our feedback form.
________________________________________
From: contactforms@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk
Sent: 26 September 2015 22:32:46 (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London
To: ARK Records Enquiries
Subject: TNA150157474: Research/records advice (General enquiries)
ENQUIRY DETAILS FIRST NAME: Mira LAST NAME: Makar EMAIL ADDRESS: mira.makar@btinternet.com COUNTRY: United Kingdom CATALOGUE REFERENCE: HMSO 1982,Cmnd. 8558 ENQUIRY DETAIL:
Dear HMSO/National Archives
The below is constantly being referred to.
Please can you make it readily accessible, and tell BIS and the Insolvency Service so their FoI teams can point to it.
Many Thanks
Insolvency Law and Practice: Report of the Review Committee (HMSO, 1982), Cmnd. 8558 (hereafter referred to as: Cork Report/Cork Co Cmnd. 8558 (often referred to as: Cork Report/Cork Committee/ILRG)
Mira Makar MA FCA 07768 610071
This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
Thank you for putting me in the queue. I wish to go ahead. I have been delayed in responding to you, as I had to re-jig priorities once I was on notice of the delay, and complete the next tranche for my evidence to IP Regulation as I am in indulgence on time and did not wish to compound the delays due to the scanning queue in Parliament.
Please send me the money link, and I shall do what I can to make it work!
I would appreciate this exchange being passed to the scanning team in case they have any flexibility in priorities.
I am most grateful to you
Mira Makar MA FCA
07768 610071
On 5 Jan 2017, at 16:33, Parliamentary Archives wrote:
Dear Mira Makar
Thank you for your call earlier today in respect of Revised Framework for Insolvency Law; White Paper, 1984 (Cmnd. 9175).
I have checked the UK Parliamentary Papers site which does hold electronic versions of many published reports and documents that have been laid before parliament. Unfortunately, although this document is listed on their site, there does not appear to be an electronic version available.
White papers do not always get transferred to the archives but fortunately this document was and I confirm that we do hold a version here. It is 53 pages long but we could do these as double spreads so the cost of copying and supplying it as a pdf would be £13.50. As I mentioned on the telephone, we aim to provide ordered copies within 10 working days of payment and although it doesn’t usually take that long, our imaging team work on a strict order queue process.
I have searched for the document elsewhere, in case you could get a version of it more quickly, and it appears that the National Archives do hold a copy. However, as you will see via the link, their copy order turnaround time appears to be 24 working days so we would be quicker than them should you wish to order a copy.
Please do let me know if you would like to proceed with this order and I will send you a money request for £13.50. The transaction is done through PayPal but you do not need a PayPal account, just a credit or debit card. Please let me know if you would like to pay in this way and I will send you a separate email with details. I have taken the liberty of already entering it into our copy order system in case payment cannot be processed until tomorrow.
I look forward to hearing from you should you wish to proceed with a copy order.
Yours sincerely
XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
Senior Archivist (Public Services & Outreach)
Parliamentary Archives
Houses of Parliament
London SW1A 0PW
United Kingdom
tel: +44 (0)207 XXXXXXXX
fax: +44 (0)207 XXXXXXXXX
e-mail: archives@parliament.uk
web: www.parliament.uk/archives
online catalogue: www.portcullis.parliament.uk
UK Parliament Disclaimer: This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not encrypted and should not be used for sensitive data.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse