Statement from Green - signatures are forgeries

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

and what is his history ?

Dont bite

[DietofWorms 2,067]

Not anywhere in that statement does it say that the documents are a forgery. Green is a fud who will likely run us into a wall, look at his history FFS

You seem.....raging?

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Companies House is the official website for this, and it does not update until Monday.

Having said that, with Green saying the forms are forgeries - ie he did not sign or authorise them, I cannot see how they could possibly be accepted.

And in the tiny possibility that they are, it just means that Whyte et al are directors of a company about to be struck off.

As I said - calm down.

If the tiny possibility came true, and the forms are legit, then it's unlikely the company would be struck off.

Also, if Whyte has proof there was an agreement to make him a director back on the date the form was signed, the appointment would be backdated and he could contest the sale.

It's 99.9% certain not to happen, but there are still a few things that need to be cleared up before everyone is satisfied.

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

If the tiny possibility came true, and the forms are legit, then it's unlikely the company would be struck off.

Also, if Whyte has proof there was an agreement to make him a director back on the date the form was signed, the appointment would be backdated and he could contest the sale.

It's 99.9% certain not to happen, but there are still a few things that need to be cleared up before everyone is satisfied.

"If if if if yer auntie had baws she wid be yer uncle"

Your a trier - I will give you that

[daviecooper01 826]

If the tiny possibility came true, and the forms are legit, then it's unlikely the company would be struck off.

Also, if Whyte has proof there was an agreement to make him a director back on the date the form was signed, the appointment would be backdated and he could contest the sale.

It's 99.9% certain not to happen, but there are still a few things that need to be cleared up before everyone is satisfied.

In this situation, with a delay in submitting details (an 11 month delay) - Companies House will revert to do checks. They will check with the director(s) at the time of the supposed appointment - guess what Green will say?

They will check with any outstanding legal issues - and the claims of the documents not be true & correct will CERTAINLY influence things.

Unless Whyte has a singed & independently witnessed statement saying that Green signed the forms (and he could forge these too), Companies House will not accept the forms as correct.

There has to be this level of checking or I could fill out a form, forge a sig and become a director of any company I wanted, in theory.

I have never, in many years of dealing with Companies House, seen them backdate ANY appointment form. We were 6 days late in advising a change of Comp Sec once, and it got bounced.

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

Companies House is the official website for this, and it does not update until Monday.

Having said that, with Green saying the forms are forgeries - ie he did not sign or authorise them, I cannot see how they could possibly be accepted.

And in the tiny possibility that they are, it just means that Whyte et al are directors of a company about to be struck off.

As I said - calm down.

DC I got this from companiesintheuk.co.uk ---- I thought in the past they were reliable?????

I'll calm down when I get a drink

[annanbear 5]

Re-read the statement with a clear head, he's not said they're forged, he's said they're not valid and correct which sounds different to me. If they were forged then he would've used those exact words no?

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

"If if if if yer auntie had baws she wid be yer uncle"

Your a trier - I will give you that

If his auntie had baws she'd be a chick with a dick............. perhaps its genetic???

[daviecooper01 826]

Re-read the statement with a clear head, he's not said they're forged, he's said they're not valid and correct which sounds different to me. If they were forged then he would've used those exact words no?

The documents are not forged - in that they ARE the forms freely available from Companies House website.

They are not valid & correct as Green says he did not sign, nor gave any permission for anyone else to sign.

So ends up same difference - sigs are forgeries.

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

DC I got this from companiesintheuk.co.uk ---- I thought in the past they were reliable?????

I'll calm down when I get a drink

It's after 10am - what's keeping you FFS?

[Nikica Jelavic 41]

Great statement from Green. The media hounding of his is shocking.

[nachothelegend 1,932]

And some of our 'fans'

Have to agree with this .

The amount of Fans who capitulate at the Words of the Taig infested Mhedia ,and Outlets who are so Quick to Jump to accuse anyone associated with Rangers of Skulduggery.

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

It's after 10am - what's keeping you FFS?

BETTER

[daviec1953 147]

Lets stop for a moment.

Look at where we are now in comparison to where we were before Charles Green arrived on the scene.

He has delivered on everything he said he would and has NOT hidden from the spotlight (even when there were times when he should have).

We are on a stable financial footing with cash in the bank , and have a team on the park.

All this has been achieved mainly because we , as supporters, kept our faith intact and never flinched even at the darkest of times.

We continued to back our Club without a second thought and continue to do so.

As a group we are unbeatable because we stand together with bonds of loyalty which have continued unbroken for 141 years, generation on generation.

These are ties of blood and we have to keep faithful to them.

Now look at the nature of Craig Whyte :

A man forbidden to play any part in a Scottish Football club,

A previously disqualified Company Director, a man who financed the purchase of my Club by using the future sales of our season tickets.

A man who stands accused of neglecting to pay the taxes , despite collecting these same taxes from employees of the Club.

Who are we to believe- A man who has delivered on everything he promised or a man who allowed our Club to go to the very brink of oblivion.

I tell you guys, my loyalty stays with Charles Green and with my Club.

These latest attacks are just one more attempt to kill us off by those who have always hated us, and I take the same attitude to them as I always have.

NO SURRENDER

GOD BLESS THE RANGERS (1872 - FOREVER)

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

In this situation, with a delay in submitting details (an 11 month delay) - Companies House will revert to do checks. They will check with the director(s) at the time of the supposed appointment - guess what Green will say?

They will check with any outstanding legal issues - and the claims of the documents not be true & correct will CERTAINLY influence things.

Unless Whyte has a singed & independently witnessed statement saying that Green signed the forms (and he could forge these too), Companies House will not accept the forms as correct.

There has to be this level of checking or I could fill out a form, forge a sig and become a director of any company I wanted, in theory.

I have never, in many years of dealing with Companies House, seen them backdate ANY appointment form. We were 6 days late in advising a change of Comp Sec once, and it got bounced.

Thats why I said if he had proof. I agree that he cant just lodge a form 11 months late and then they will accept it. They will of course do checks.

They usually require minutes from a board meeting, but who knows if Whytes tape recorder would be acceptable in a legal challenge. Doubtful, but the we shite is resourceful, I will give him that.

Did a quick google on late submissions of AP01 forms and came up with this:-

http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/forums/archive/index.php/t-201457.html

From the folk on there, it seems like it is not all that uncommon, certainly not impossible.

Like I say, its all unlikely.

[jamess 3,453]

The circus will not be over until the rodent is in the jail. Hope the Polis get their finger out.

[boss 1,941]

Also, if Whyte has proof there was an agreement to make him a director back on the date the form was signed, the appointment would be backdated and he could contest the sale.

The sale could not be contested as you very well know. A director (Green) has authority under CA06 to bind the company. The sale is unaffected and Whyte/5088 could only every go after Green/D&P. Not sure how many times you need to be told this.

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

The sale could not be contested as you very well know. A director (Green) has authority under CA06 to bind the company. The sale is unaffected and Whyte/5088 could only every go after Green/D&P. Not sure how many times you need to be told this.

had to play the whole song, don't know how to cut it the opening line

http://youtu.be/V4RwCKCBcHc

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

The sale could not be contested as you very well know. A director (Green) has authority under CA06 to bind the company. The sale is unaffected and Whyte/5088 could only every go after Green/D&P. Not sure how many times you need to be told this.

By contesting the sale I obviously mean 'claim that the exclusivity agreement was not honoured by selling to the correct party' this as I have said many times before (dont know how many times I need to tell you) could not lead to the IPO being unwound, but in the worst case scenario could lead to CW getting damages from D&P / Charles Greens consortium.

99.9% certain Whyte has no claim.

Absolute worst case scenario, he gets a payout (probably not too big) from D&P and Greens consortium.

[govanmob 11]

According to Companies House the business address of 5088 was changed yesterday to an address frequently used by Craig Whyte. This time it was done via an Electronic Filing document. This would require a valid authentication code, probably held only by Charles Green's lawyers. Very strange indeed.

[Bears r us 30,994]

Lets stop for a moment.

I

Look at where we are now in comparison to where we were before Charles Green arrived on the scene.

He has delivered on everything he said he would and has NOT hidden from the spotlight (even when there were times when he should have).

We are on a stable financial footing with cash in the bank , and have a team on the park.

All this has been achieved mainly because we , as supporters, kept our faith intact and never flinched even at the darkest of times.

We continued to back our Club without a second thought and continue to do so.

As a group we are unbeatable because we stand together with bonds of loyalty which have continued unbroken for 141 years, generation on generation.

These are ties of blood and we have to keep faithful to them.

Now look at the nature of Craig Whyte :

A man forbidden to play any part in a Scottish Football club,

A previously disqualified Company Director, a man who financed the purchase of my Club by using the future sales of our season tickets.

A man who stands accused of neglecting to pay the taxes , despite collecting these same taxes from employees of the Club.

Who are we to believe- A man who has delivered on everything he promised or a man who allowed our Club to go to the very brink of oblivion.

I tell you guys, my loyalty stays with Charles Green and with my Club.

These latest attacks are just one more attempt to kill us off by those who have always hated us, and I take the same attitude to them as I always have.

NO SURRENDER

GOD BLESS THE RANGERS (1872 - FOREVER)

Good post mate, and I am sure ED will agree, 1953 was a good year.

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

Good post mate, and I am sure ED will agree, 1953 was a good year.

Good post mate, and I am sure ED will agree, 1953 was a good year.

Indeed the creme de la creme for your birth year bud and marry that to the date and month ....same as George Harrison, Davie Cooper,and Walter Smith, only one older btw.

[boss 1,941]

By contesting the sale I obviously mean 'claim that the exclusivity agreement was not honoured by selling to the correct party' this as I have said many times before (dont know how many times I need to tell you) could not lead to the IPO being unwound, but in the worst case scenario could lead to CW getting damages from D&P / Charles Greens consortium.

99.9% certain Whyte has no claim.

Absolute worst case scenario, he gets a payout (probably not too big) from D&P and Greens consortium.

That's entirely different from your statement that the sale can be contested. If I say that a lemon is yellow, then I say by yellow I mean it is pink, it doesn't make my first statement correct, it just makes me look stupid.

In any event, the sale cannot be validly contested. Hopefully you will accept this now.

[boss 1,941]

According to Companies House the business address of 5088 was changed yesterday to an address frequently used by Craig Whyte. This time it was done via an Electronic Filing document. This would require a valid authentication code, probably held only by Charles Green's lawyers. Very strange indeed.

Yes, the address change was alluded to last night. This will no doubt also be contested by CG.

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

According to Companies House the business address of 5088 was changed yesterday to an address frequently used by Craig Whyte. This time it was done via an Electronic Filing document. This would require a valid authentication code, probably held only by Charles Green's lawyers. Very strange indeed.

If these papers are filed electronically are AP01s also filed electronically.

Could someone therefore file using a false name. Just wondering because I'd not put it past these taig barstewards to file pretending to by Whyte ---- possible???

Been outside the UK too long and no idea what IT security is in place to mitigate against fraudulent filing.