The Administration Thread

[DCFC27]

6 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

There is, if you have any experience of banking transactions and or M&A you would know that you would need to show where the money has come from. If you look at Chelsea, Newcastle takeovers they were more or less seamless because they would have gone to their bank and said, this is what we want to do, this where the money is from and this is where the money is going, and shown evidence. TheY would have done this in advance, it dosnt appear CKs advisors have done this.

Each financial institution (banks etc) will have people that ensure that transactions are not laundering money. This will be done on a risk basis such as country, industry, amount, type of transactions (crypto etc), new account/large single transaction etc. the transactions will be put through the software and anything that matches the above will be flagged. So if you spend £30 in the COOP no action, £21m in a new account going to another country (UK will not be high risk by the way)= red flag and further questions. 
 

what you do is speak to the bank in advance and go through it and ensure they are comfortable with the transaction and then they push the transaction through 

You can’t speak to them in advance. The reason for this is this could be seen as assisting. Can you imagine if you went to the bank and asked what information do you need to show this isn’t money laundering and then they told you…

It’s the solicitors job to gather the appropriate evidence it’s not money laundering. If they’ve done there job correctly they’ll have years worth of history as to the origin of funds and can send that on request. 
 

 

[PistoldPete]

4 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

For this transaction for CK to finalise the deal you cannot blame the EFL or the Administrators they are not in control of CK transferring his funds into the Administrators Escrow account 

They are in control of the timetable.  Of course they are both responsible for the fact that it hasn't completed. CK says he has transferred the money but it hasn't been accepted by Q's bank. How is that not the responsibility of both parties that the transaction hasnt happened? 

[RipleyRich]

On another note, the Transfer Window opens today. I expect that rival Clubs will be trying it on with Quantuma.

[Woodley Ram]

12 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Thanks Woodley. Do you think banks in the UK could be more picky about source of funds than banks in Texas? Wouldn't his bank know what the source of his wealth was otherwise they wouldn't have accepted his money coming in,  in the first place?         

The same, a UK, US or EU bank (in fact I would hope most) would flag this if they were not prewarned and had seen the evidence. The US give the biggest fines, but HSBC, Nat West and a few others have received fines from the FCA (UK regulator).

re his bank you would have thought so, but did he use the same bank? Nixon who knows lots about sport but naff all about banking said it was a new account, which could be because he has a new company in the States with a new bank account? He might do that to keep his private stuff and Derby stuff separate. 
 

If he wants the money and can prove source of wealth etc I’m sure we would put the money through for him. Nixon calls the money laundering people the financial police, the head of that where I work is me.

seriously, if he can show where  the money has come from (and I don’t see why he shouldn’t) and why and where the money is going too (which again he should be able to) then there is no reason why the money shouldn’t be transferred very soon.

[Papahet]

Unless he never transferred the money to begin with ?

[Woodley Ram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

They are in control of the timetable.  Of course they are both responsible for the fact that it hasn't completed. CK says he has transferred the money but it hasn't been accepted by Q's bank. How is that not the responsibility of both parties that the transaction hasnt happened? 

Not heard that one and if true (which would suprise me) then that is the bank not Q and should be very easy to resolve 

[admira]

Well I bet CK won't be playing golf today.

[Sheff Ram]

16 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

For this transaction for CK to finalise the deal you cannot blame the EFL or the Administrators they are not in control of CK transferring his funds into the Administrators Escrow account 

Not blaming them for this. Criticising their coms policy.

[Lander]

Plan of action today:

5PM strikes, Kirchner money still not arrived.

Mike Ashley pops down to Pride Park at 10 past, enters his card details, buys the club because he has the actual money sat waiting in an account.

CK tried his best so comes out of this looking like a reasonable chap that just couldn't get it done in time, Mike Ashley gets what he wanted all along. 

Transfer window opens, we sign a few hidden gems and a few proven old boys, we're now favourites to finish in the top 6.

[Woodley Ram]

5 minutes ago, DCFC27 said:

You can’t speak to them in advance. The reason for this is this could be seen as assisting. Can you imagine if you went to the bank and asked what information do you need to show this isn’t money laundering and then they told you…

It’s the solicitors job to gather the appropriate evidence it’s not money laundering. If they’ve done there job correctly they’ll have years worth of history as to the origin of funds and can send that on request. 
 

 

Not correct, you are mixing up speaking to the bank about a large transaction that would hit their red flags and providing evidence and the issuing of a suspicious activity report to (in this country) the NCA. If a bank does this (the SAR) then there is a tipping off offence that prevents a bank from discussing things with the client or working on the transaction. the US have a similar law.

you can talk to the bank about what you are doing with your money and providing them with proof that you are NOT money laundering 

it doesn’t have to be a lawyer. I have a house in Cyprus, I provided HSBC with evidence of where my money had come from and what it was for in advance. If I didn’t it would have been flagged as it was far more than I would normally put through by bank account. By doing this the money was transferred with any issue 

I do this for a living 

[PistoldPete]

11 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

The same, a UK, US or EU bank (in fact I would hope most) would flag this if they were not prewarned and had seen the evidence. The US give the biggest fines, but HSBC, Nat West and a few others have received fines from the FCA (UK regulator).

re his bank you would have thought so, but did he use the same bank? Nixon who knows lots about sport but naff all about banking said it was a new account, which could be because he has a new company in the States with a new bank account? He might do that to keep his private stuff and Derby stuff separate. 
 

If he wants the money and can prove source of wealth etc I’m sure we would put the money through for him. Nixon calls the money laundering people the financial police, the head of that where I work is me.

seriously, if he can show where  the money has come from (and I don’t see why he shouldn’t) and why and where the money is going too (which again he should be able to) then there is no reason why the money shouldn’t be transferred very soon.

Yeah he might want a new account to keep things separate for accounting purposes that all makes sense. Nothing suspicious there surely? Proving "source of wealth" is easier said than done though, if his own bank was happy why are Q's bankers refusing the money? 

[Woodley Ram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

Yeah he might want a new account to keep things separate for accounting purposes that all makes sense. Nothing suspicious there surely? Proving "source of wealth" is easier said than done though, if his own bank was happy why are Q's bankers refusing the money? 

I don’t think there is @PistoldPete, the fact has been flagged means it’s a high risk transaction not that anything is wrong with CK’s money. I very much doubt if there is anything untoward with CK’s funds. I think he has been caught up by the triggers in the banking system, I just feel maybe (because I don’t know about what he has done) maybe he could have done a lot in advance 

[ck-]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Yeah he might want a new account to keep things separate for accounting purposes that all makes sense. Nothing suspicious there surely? Proving "source of wealth" is easier said than done though, if his own bank was happy why are Q's bankers refusing the money? 

It’s a fair question, but presumably it’s because if you’re on the hook for any penalties as the receiving bank, you make damned sure of the provenance rather than trusting some other third party’s checks. 

[Woodley Ram]

18 minutes ago, Papahet said:

Unless he never transferred the money to begin with ?

True, but you would hope unlikely……but the whole year has been a crock of *8888 so nothing off the cards

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, eccles the ram said:

All this is playing into the hands of the EFL. They must see that all the delays in reaching a conclusion is making their decision about whether to include DCFC in Division 1 easier. They can sit back and let all these 'squabbles' go on and on until they come out with - Sorry but we are not including you!!!! Quantum have come out of this as looking on the sidelines as ' kids beat themselves up in the playground'. I wouldn't offer them another job at all. Personally, I hope Appleby's team comes through but who knows? Wayne must have aged another 5 years in the last couple of weeks cos I know I have! No matter what though, I do hope we survive with all my heart. Q - get the frigging thing sorted once and for all and then we have got to go to have EFL approval after that! Another couple of white hairs have dropped out! UTR!!!

I know we all hate the EFL but I really think they would much prefer this is all resolved in time for Derby to be included in league 1.

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

17 minutes ago, Lander said:

Plan of action today:

5PM strikes, Kirchner money still not arrived.

Mike Ashley pops down to Pride Park at 10 past, enters his card details, buys the club because he has the actual money sat waiting in an account.

CK tried his best so comes out of this looking like a reasonable chap that just couldn't get it done in time, Mike Ashley gets what he wanted all along. 

Transfer window opens, we sign a few hidden gems and a few proven old boys, we're now favourites to finish in the top 6.

If Heineken did Fridays….

[I know nuffin]

27 minutes ago, DCFC27 said:

You can’t speak to them in advance. The reason for this is this could be seen as assisting. Can you imagine if you went to the bank and asked what information do you need to show this isn’t money laundering and then they told you…

It’s the solicitors job to gather the appropriate evidence it’s not money laundering. If they’ve done there job correctly they’ll have years worth of history as to the origin of funds and can send that on request. 
 

 

Agree but how long should it take. Appears CKs money was transferred 19th May

[RipleyRich]

5 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I know we all hate the EFL but I really think they would much prefer this is all resolved in time for Derby to be included in league 1.

It`s starting to create a massive problem for the EFL and I`m sure they don`t want to have to go down that alternative route.

[NottmRAM]

Don't get excited anticipating a big announcement at 5:00pm. My bet is, the funds will not clear today and there will be silence from Q.

[I know nuffin]

16 minutes ago, Woodley Ram said:

Not correct, you are mixing up speaking to the bank about a large transaction that would hit their red flags and providing evidence and the issuing of a suspicious activity report to (in this country) the NCA. If a bank does this (the SAR) then there is a tipping off offence that prevents a bank from discussing things with the client or working on the transaction. the US have a similar law.

you can talk to the bank about what you are doing with your money and providing them with proof that you are NOT money laundering 

it doesn’t have to be a lawyer. I have a house in Cyprus, I provided HSBC with evidence of where my money had come from and what it was for in advance. If I didn’t it would have been flagged as it was far more than I would normally put through by bank account. By doing this the money was transferred with any issue 

I do this for a living 

20.4 million,,,?