As a matter of interest, and since this appears possibly to be particularly relevant now, I was wondering if you ever had a legally proper answer to your very reasonably put questions, as expressed in the link below?
Absolutely not, just some vague references that it didn't need to be logged and is nothing to worry about, inferring but not confirming this was a spurious and malicious filing by someone. If this was the case then the failure to log this is a huge concern and the pathetic response was telling me its already been addressed in the previous letter. As you say this now seems very relevant
I'm not sure how you can get a "spurious" filing of a directorship, but I do agree that it could have been malicious or fraudulent. As has been noted elsewhere recently, it takes less proof of ID to file a fraudulent directorship than to borrow a library book. What surprises me is that, if it is fraudulent or malicious, Adderley could have had the directorship struck from the record. But instead, he merely resigned, which is administratively simpler but still leaves him with director's responsibilities (as defined in the Companies Act) for the period between appointment and resignation. This could blow up in his face quite messily if, for example, HMRC were to do an audit that included prior years. So, either it is (another) foolish act by the CC or there is justifiable grounds for suspicion of something murky. In any case, maliciously or fraudulently registering a director is an offence, either via straight criminal fraud or via the provisions of the Companies Act. Thus, even the most innocent explanation (from the perspective of the CC) would involve there having been a demonstrable offence, with the likely culprits straightforwardly identifiable to all and sundry. So there really is nothing to justify there not being (or having been) a proper investigation. Set against this background, the Commissioner's "nothing to see here" approach is, in my opinion, incompetent at best.
The issue for me if this was done without his knowledge, why did he not report this and have it filed with OPFCC for his own protection, in case just something like this ever arose and questions started being asked. To be totally even handed this still MIGHT be something he is not involved in, but the optics of his cutting corners and not reporting this only serve to make me think something is amiss. The companies are certainly bogus all registered as driving companies, with various shell companies and linked directorships. This was also the same address that exploded in July 2011 due to a gas cylinder catching fire in the middle of the night. This certainly is not looking good for Adderley with more scandals to try to talk his way out of, with his word counting for very little now.
I'm confused by the dates. He was "only 15 years old at the time of the 1982 conflict", and served in the Royal Navy "for ten years from 1981 to 1992". So he joined the Navy when he was 14 years old then?
Brilliant investigative journalism. Thank you. It’s extraordinary to find people in high paid jobs even think about exploiting business opps associated with their substantive jobs. I wonder how much of that goes on?
Great work Sarah, have you been informed of the nature or extent of the reporting restrictions? I would love to know if the location of the hearing has been confirmed yet, it wouldn’t surprise me if we’re not released until 24 hours before the event.
Absolutely Phil. Those Councillors are guilty as charge in my opinion. It is a question of morality. It would appear from their behaviour that they are prepared to agreed to whatever Mold says.
More excellent reporting of a very serious matter which reflects no credit at all on the people supposed to be looking after Northants!
Good to know media will be permitted to attend the hearing now
Nice one Sarah, keep up the good work!
As a matter of interest, and since this appears possibly to be particularly relevant now, I was wondering if you ever had a legally proper answer to your very reasonably put questions, as expressed in the link below?
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/nick_adderley_conflict_of_intere
Absolutely not, just some vague references that it didn't need to be logged and is nothing to worry about, inferring but not confirming this was a spurious and malicious filing by someone. If this was the case then the failure to log this is a huge concern and the pathetic response was telling me its already been addressed in the previous letter. As you say this now seems very relevant
I'm not sure how you can get a "spurious" filing of a directorship, but I do agree that it could have been malicious or fraudulent. As has been noted elsewhere recently, it takes less proof of ID to file a fraudulent directorship than to borrow a library book. What surprises me is that, if it is fraudulent or malicious, Adderley could have had the directorship struck from the record. But instead, he merely resigned, which is administratively simpler but still leaves him with director's responsibilities (as defined in the Companies Act) for the period between appointment and resignation. This could blow up in his face quite messily if, for example, HMRC were to do an audit that included prior years. So, either it is (another) foolish act by the CC or there is justifiable grounds for suspicion of something murky. In any case, maliciously or fraudulently registering a director is an offence, either via straight criminal fraud or via the provisions of the Companies Act. Thus, even the most innocent explanation (from the perspective of the CC) would involve there having been a demonstrable offence, with the likely culprits straightforwardly identifiable to all and sundry. So there really is nothing to justify there not being (or having been) a proper investigation. Set against this background, the Commissioner's "nothing to see here" approach is, in my opinion, incompetent at best.
The issue for me if this was done without his knowledge, why did he not report this and have it filed with OPFCC for his own protection, in case just something like this ever arose and questions started being asked. To be totally even handed this still MIGHT be something he is not involved in, but the optics of his cutting corners and not reporting this only serve to make me think something is amiss. The companies are certainly bogus all registered as driving companies, with various shell companies and linked directorships. This was also the same address that exploded in July 2011 due to a gas cylinder catching fire in the middle of the night. This certainly is not looking good for Adderley with more scandals to try to talk his way out of, with his word counting for very little now.
I'm confused by the dates. He was "only 15 years old at the time of the 1982 conflict", and served in the Royal Navy "for ten years from 1981 to 1992". So he joined the Navy when he was 14 years old then?
Think the dates are a moveable feast which is part of the investigation into him.
Fantastic work Sarah. Really important journalism.
Brilliant investigative journalism. Thank you. It’s extraordinary to find people in high paid jobs even think about exploiting business opps associated with their substantive jobs. I wonder how much of that goes on?
Great work Sarah, have you been informed of the nature or extent of the reporting restrictions? I would love to know if the location of the hearing has been confirmed yet, it wouldn’t surprise me if we’re not released until 24 hours before the event.
Critical reporting by NN journal which highlights again the failure of accountability from Stephen Mould and the Councillors supporting his regime.
Absolutely Phil. Those Councillors are guilty as charge in my opinion. It is a question of morality. It would appear from their behaviour that they are prepared to agreed to whatever Mold says.
Is there a general attitude in the minds of those who hold office as public servants of a them and us approach to honesty?
ROFL - literally. Amazing write-up Sarah. Speak to you soon! Keep safe.
Delay delay delay, that's the Northants way.
As Al Bundy would retort... 'The hell you say! '