Stewart Regan has played down expectations that Sevco will be given SFA membership today.
Yesterday Ibrox chief Charles Green told the Rangers website that he expected to have a licence within 24 hours giving Ally McCoist the go-ahead to start signing players.
This morning however Regan has put a dampener on that by revealing that the issue is far from cut and dried.
He told the Daily Record: “It could possibly be settled in 24 hours but there are still a number of issues to resolve and it will require a lot of action from our lawyers.”
The issue of membership must go before the board of the SFA with time at a premium before Sunday’s Ramsdens Cup tie at Brechin.
The SFL website doesn’t list Brechin’s opponents although tickets have been sold for a fixture against Rangers.
The issue of a name could be one of the problems for the SFA to overcome knowing that Rangers are in liquidation and that HMRC take a tough line on phoenix businesses trading on the goodwill and reputation of liquidated companies.
In the last week Hawick Royal Albert and Kelty Hearts have had to cancel matches against the Ibrox club due to the lack of a licence.
The SPL have no connection to the membership application and still have to deliver a verdict on claims that Rangers made unregistered payments to players through the EBT scheme.
SFA membership normally requires three years of audited accounts but the last audited accounts from Rangers were in June 2010.
The identity of Green’s backers is also unclear with former Rangers defender fearful that Craig Whyte remains involved with the club as well as challenging Green to show him the title deeds to Ibrox and Murray Park.
CLICK HERE for Neil Lennon’s verdict on HJK Helsinki
Follow Video Celts on Twitter and Facebook
Is anybody keeping count of how many times our old mate Charlie has been ‘economical with the truth’? Actually, it’s probably easier to count how many times he said something that proved to be right. Zero?
He has probably been given a nod from someone high up at the SFA. The easily deluded fans are still under the asumption that they are “needed” hence the reason they are now in Division 3. Some people are beyond help, the SFA should now take a very tough stance as previous attempts to smooth the passage have been taken as a sign of weakness.
If has been implied by “The Rangers” fans that the EBT’s investigation and possible sanctions are to be binned in a deal for their TV rights then the SFA and SPL could be in court again with the judge considering again what the rules were at the time of the EBT payments and whether the SPL have the right to stop investigations and making a club answer for breaking the rules?
You would think that this is clear cut. Other fans may well also petition the HMRC around the issue of the name if it is Rangers FC as that is the name of the club that is being liquidated this Friday at the latest if the new club is to play on Sunday.
A too similar name would mean they are benefitting from the Liquidated clubs goodwill with proceeds going to the newco, but under company rules and Liquidation process that is not allowed and a mass petition from fans of other clubs could force them to change the name – Govan United ?
While there is little doubt the old club have to pay the piper, this fiasco is increasing the daily laugh of all fans the world over. this bungling by the sfa is all down to cover-ups and while they jockey for position to make sure each of them is not exposed, the game in Scotland is going further and further down the tube at a rate we can’t ever hope to catch.
Sure, rangers oldco cheated. But we can’t have this both ways! The current club should have been treated exactly the same as any non-league side trying to gain entry into the lower leagues. Sure, the Sevco would have been the logical choice for a multitude of reasons, but it should at no time have been the foregone conclusion the sfa made it. the sfa make themselves look worse with every passing day. We all know they have people on board who were and may even still be involved in the corruption.
But the show they are putting on is unconvincing to anyone. Everyone can see they are playing the game to make it look like they are playing hardball, just as much as we all know mccoist is trying to get himself fired just so he can say, “I didn’t walk away”.
Having to cancel matches with Hawick R A(dont they just play rugby down there?), and Celty, sorry Kelty Hearts! Fpmsl!
HH!!
Ha ha ha! I wrote about this months ago! At last the SFA are consulting lawyers and the legal reality is hitting home to them. There are legal restrictions that apply regarding the reuse of a liquidated company’s name or its trading name. This is intended to prevent abuse of the so-called ‘phoenix company’ – where a failed business re-emerges to operate under a similar name. The idiots at the SFA are only just being made aware of this. Total fanny’s the lot of them.
A prohibited name is a name by which a liquidated company was known at any time in the 12 months immediately before its liquidation. This can be any of the following:
. the name registered at Companies House
. the company’s trading name
. any name so similar to either of the above that it suggests an association with the liquidated company
Examples of prohibited names
If a company in liquidation was registered at Companies House as ‘ABC Limited’ and it used the trading name ‘XYZ’, then the following would all be classed as prohibited names:
. the registered name ‘ABC Limited’ or ‘XYZ Limited’
. the trading name ‘ABC’ or ‘XYZ’
. the trading name ‘ABC’ or ‘XYZ’ used by an unincorporated business – eg a sole trader or partnership
. a registered name or trading name used by a company or business that is so similar to ‘ABC’ or ‘XYZ’ it suggests an association with the liquidated company
So Sevco can’t use the name Rangers and the SFA can’t use the name Rangers in its fixture list unless it wants to get into BIG legal trouble.
Reuse of a company name after liquidation…
Penalties for breaching rules on the use of prohibited names
It’s a criminal offence for you to break the rules regarding the use of a prohibited name of a liquidated company. Successful prosecution could lead to a fine, a prison sentence or both.
You could also be made personally liable for company debts incurred during the period you were involved in managing a business using a prohibited name – even if it was a limited company.
Helping someone else to break the rules regarding the use of a prohibited name can also make you personally liable for company debts incurred during that period.
This would apply if you are involved in managing a business and act on instructions from someone you know to be acting as a director when restricted from doing so – because you would be helping that person to commit a criminal offence.
Beware Mr Regan – if you help Green commit a criminal offence your head is on the line too!
MMwhooohahahaha!
I’d rather have you on my side than across the courtroom TT!
The law regarding reuse of a company name after liquidation…
Exceptions to the restrictions on the reuse of a prohibited name:
There are three exceptions to the restrictions on the reuse of a prohibited name:
1. If you are buying a company in liquidation if you immediately apply for permission to use it if the name has been in use by another company of which you are a director
2. If you are – or intend to be – a director proprietor of a company business that buys the whole – or a substantial part – of the company in liquidation from the liquidator, you can reuse the name of your former company. (Note: Green only bought the assets from Duff & Phelps – he did not buy the Rangers FC company from the official liquidator) If this happens you must use Form 4.73 – notice to the creditors of an insolvent company of the reuse of a prohibited name – to place a notice in the London Gazette. (Note: Green has not done this) Find out about placing a notice on the London Gazette website –
You must also send copies of the form to all creditors known to you – or whose names and addresses you can get by making reasonable enquiries. (Note: this has not been done) The notice can be published and sent before completion of the sale arrangements, but must be published and given no later than 28 days after completion.
3. Immediate application to court for permission As a former director of a liquidated company, you can get permission to use the prohibited name from a court. You should apply to the court within seven business days of the liquidation – ie within seven business days of the winding-up order or seven business days of the resolution to wind up. (Note: The Oldco Rangers have not even been liquidated officially yet – how can Sevco therefore apply to use its name!) If you apply within that time, you may carry on using the prohibited name for six weeks from the date of the liquidation, or until the court decides whether to grant you permission, whichever is the earlier. It’s important that your application is heard within the six weeks – otherwise the restriction will again apply to you. (Note: no application has been made from Green)
Previous use of the name by another company or business The prohibited name restrictions don’t apply to you if you are a director of another company that has used the prohibited name continuously for 12 months up to the date of the liquidation of the liquidated company. In these specific circumstances your use of a name would not be prohibited, even though the name was also used by the liquidated company. For this to apply, your company must have: been actively trading during the whole of the 12 months up to the date of the liquidation of the liquidated company used the name during the whole of that period If your company was dormant – not actively trading – during any part of the 12 months, or used the name during only part of the period, then the restrictions will apply. In which case, you won’t be allowed to reuse the prohibited name without court permission. General application to court for permission The court can grant permission at any time during the five years that a name is prohibited, but not retrospectively. So it cannot authorise the use of a prohibited name for any time before it gave permission. If your company has gone into compulsory liquidation – ie was wound up in court and dealt with by an official receiver – you should apply for permission to the same court that made the winding-up order. If your company has gone into voluntary liquidation, you can apply for permission to any county court in the area where the company traded – as long as that court has the jurisdiction to wind up companies. If you apply to a court for permission to use a prohibited name, you should, at least 14 days before your application is due to be heard, send a copy of your application to:
The Insolvency Service Hotline and S216(3) Applications Team 3rd Floor Cannon House 18 Priory Queensway Birmingham B4 6FD
The court may ask the liquidator, or any former liquidator, for details of the: circumstances in which the liquidated company became insolvent extent of your responsibility for the insolvency – if any
THIS IS THE LAW! Regan might feel confident he can break SFA rules, but does he have the balls to knowingly break the law in order to allow Sevco to use the name “Rangers”. I very much doubt it. I also should add I believe this has only recently been brought to his attention, hence the hold up with the registration.
I emailed the record today to explain that there denail about the scum and the refusal to stop using the name r*****s in every headline and story is only showing the world how bigoted and low they are, ill not be expecting a response, lowlifes
Hope you are right with all this TT. I do not feel they have been nearly punished as yet.
If i had a spare million i swear i would hire a qc to take the lot of them to the cleaners, if only paul mcbride rip was still here
good work TT wouldn’t it be great to have them renamed to anything else other than r……s