Accounts and other company information available for free

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Previously accounts could be bought for £1. If you were only wanting one set of accounts it was a hassle paying for the order. It was a hassle accessing the file purchased. Now you can get access very quickly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bengals Tiger
Does the bit under the SMC section where it states that there was a bent councillor and the RBS.

'By agreeing to this change the council have lost control over any future transfer of ownership of the SMC, as any buyer can purchase the holding company.'

Does this mean that the Allams bought it and that's why they transformed the Arena for the U21's and the council couldn't do anything about it?
 
mauled1904 said:
Does the bit under the SMC section where it states that there was a bent councillor and the RBS.

'By agreeing to this change the council have lost control over any future transfer of ownership of the SMC, as any buyer can purchase the holding company.'

Does this mean that the Allams bought it and that's why they transformed the Arena for the U21's and the council couldn't do anything about it?
Click to expand...

No. Allamhouse bought the company which had a lease with the City Council. The SMC is now in breach of that lease according to the council.

It was not a bent councillor they were talking about.
 
I think there was a clause in the lease saying that the SMC couldn't sell on the lease but by setting up a holding company they could get round that.
 
tigerscanada said:
A "holding them by the balls company" perhaps ?
Click to expand...

The clause in the lease said that Adam Pearson couldn't sell the company for 12 years (I think it was 12). The Liberal Council agreed to amend the clause when he sold the SMC to Bartlett. If someone wanted to sell the lease they just sell the SMC or the holding company.
 
Obadiah said:
The clause in the lease said that Adam Pearson couldn't sell the company for 12 years (I think it was 12). The Liberal Council agreed to amend the clause when he sold the SMC to Bartlett. If someone wanted to sell the lease they just sell the SMC or the holding company.
Click to expand...
So the weak as piss Lib's let Pearson wiggle out of the contract, with both of them with the full knowledge Bartlett was going to get a mortgage on it to buy it. Utter ****s.
Definitely the sanity clause.
 
Chazz Rheinhold said:
So the weak as piss Lib's let Pearson wiggle out of the contract, with both of them with the full knowledge Bartlett was going to get a mortgage on it to buy it. Utter ****s.
Definitely the sanity clause.
Click to expand...

so if pearson hadn't sold it, how would the fa and pl have reacted to a situation where derby county's chairman had control of hull city's ground?
 
x said:
so if pearson hadn't sold it, how would the fa and pl have reacted to a situation where derby county's chairman had control of hull city's ground?
Click to expand...

As they have no issue with ground sharing I wouldn't imagine a club playing at a ground controlled by someone at another club would be an issue.
 
Quick question with that site Peter, how long after accounts are submitted would they appear on there? I'm looking at a company whose accounts aren't due for submission until the end of September each year, but last year they were submitted in May. If they'd put them in during May again this year would they be on the site now, or does publication on there get held off until the end of September due date so as not to penalise early submission by giving their competitors earlier access to their figures?

The company has small company exemption from audit if that would make any difference.
 
Hull City AFC (Ricardo) said:
Quick question with that site Peter, how long after accounts are submitted would they appear on there? I'm looking at a company whose accounts aren't due for submission until the end of September each year, but last year they were submitted in May. If they'd put them in during May again this year would they be on the site now, or does publication on there get held off until the end of September due date so as not to penalise early submission by giving their competitors earlier access to their figures?

The company has small company exemption from audit if that would make any difference.
Click to expand...

From companies I use to file for, they were usually a few days/weeks after you posted them off to companies house.
 
ImperialTiger said:
From companies I use to file for, they were usually a few days/weeks after you posted them off to companies house.
Click to expand...

Cool, so they're probably submitting later this year than last year. Interesting to know, been comparing a few companies, and I probably know why that one would do that.
 
Hull City AFC (Ricardo) said:
Cool, so they're probably submitting later this year than last year. Interesting to know, been comparing a few companies, and I probably know why that one would do that.
Click to expand...

I haven't filed any for 7 years but they were usually pretty prompt (you used to get them showing that they were filed but not yet available (think they came up in pink on the company details page). Then they would become available a few days later. May be completely different these days).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back