Well mark it seems you and I did read and understand the same publication of the challenge.
All spelling and grammar apart. Bates' letter seems a fairly well reasoned argument, but it is one sided and even his most fervent supporters tend to agree that Bates' record for truth and veracity is not a great one. Fortunately, for him (and us) his opponents will not be there to argue the other side at the meeting and vote. All that aside, please note that Bates, himself clearly states, that the challenge, from HMRC was based on the voting rights of 3 entities (the off shores, Taylor & Yorkshire Radio)) and while he goes on to imply that it is really a disguised attack on the football creditors rule, that is his interpretation alone.. The evidence he uses to support that interpretation is flimsy. For the "reasoned argument" to garner enough votes to overturn the 15 points penalty, the voters must accept that implication rather than the hard copy of the filing itself. The fact that he apparently gave the Revenue what they asked for, in the shape of extra money to match what was being paid to the football creditors, surely means that it was not the issue they really cared about. .. They seem to want Bates, whether for his past tax dealings, in general or for his, perceived fraudulent manipulation of this process... Given what has transpired since the challenge, the latter seems to be the most likely, logical reason for the taxman to pursue the challenge to a dead CVA.. He opened a door, for them and they are jack-booting there way right on through it. The best laid plans..... _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
