I see there is some misinformation around regarding this process. I thought it was an idea to clarify the process and implications.

A winding up petition (WUP) can be applied for only after other methods have been used. It can be issued for any amount over £750 but as the costs are around £1500 it generally isn't. As part of the petition the company applying for the order has to show proof of the debt. This cannot just be a bill, it has to be a either a CCJ or a statutory demand. With HMRC the latter is usually the case. This path is taken after all other methods have failed.

A statutory demand has a 21 day notice period attached to it and a company director is legally obliged to take action on receipt of it.

All of the above doesn't sit too weak with the claim by HUFC that the payment to HMRC was ten days late.

Incidentally, once an order has been issued by the court it is not reversible. There is no appeals process, the company will be liquidated.

But is it the same in the Far East????

As somebody who works in Insolvency, I literally deal with hundreds of these every month. I agree with everything apart from there is an appeals process of sorts.

You can make a 7.1A to rescind the winding up order. You need to do it within 5 working days. A company being restored is quite rare and a little messy. A lot of the arguments to rescind a winding up order are often made on processes not being followed - e.g. poor method of service of the winding up petition.

There's a process. Usually something like this:

Stat demand or CCJ served on Company.

Debt not paid - winding up petition issued. Hearing scheduled.

Winding up petition served on the company.

Petitioner must wait 7 days before advertising (This usually gives the company time to pay debts as an advertisement can be damaging to the company's reputation)

If it's not advertised and debt has been paid, it can be withdrawn and nobody will ever know.

If it's advertised, the hearing usually goes ahead even if the debt has been paid to allow supporting creditors to seek substitution of the petition.

If the debt has not been paid, it's not disputed/there's no defence - the company can be wound up. If the debt has been disputed or opposes the winding up, there's a good chance it will be adjourned as winding up hearings are usually scheduled for 5 minutes and it's often difficult to fit in longer hearings - especially at London who can list up to 300 winding up hearings a morning.

If the debt has been paid, there's no supporting creditors wishing to seek substitution of the petition, the petition can be dismissed or dismissed with costs (which is what happened on Monday with Pools).

Judges frown upon winding up petitions being used for debt collection. If the court finds that the petition is an abuse of process, it can backfire on the petitioner and they may be liable to pay the Company's costs.

Personally, I'm a little bit concerned, it got to the stage of the winding up petition being advertised. A large proportion of winders involving football clubs get withdrawn, never advertised and thus nobody finds out.

I stand corrected. I understood that if correct process is followed and an order issued then there was no method of overturning it.

Nevertheless, as you say; to get to petition advertised stage is very worrying. Thats the stage when it knackers your credit rating and potentially freezes your bank account.

Most appeals are based on whether the correct process was followed. It becomes very messy, the Official Reciever do not hang around when it comes to following winding up orders.

Advertisement is a major pain - there are many Company's who claim they have funds but can't pay the debt or their own staff or pay counsel to defend the case because the winding up petition has been advertised and their bank account frozen. When the bank account is frozen, an application for a validation order needs to be made to unfreeze the bank account.

I wonder if Hartlepool's bank account was frozen and whether the players and staff were paid?

Obviously someone who'd previously been bankrupt would probably have a good understanding of such processes. Possibly even how far you can allow the process to get.

It's alarming, and despite the twitter messages of nothing to worry about from Mr Chairman, it's messy and is leading to gossip and rumours.

Did he not say one of them was because we had an outstanding invoice with somebody? Living hand to mouth is no surprise, but does mean a cup run and/or £1m for Nathan Thomas in January would go somewhere to keeping the wolves from the door.

Maybe I'm misreading but the article in the Mail is about the 2nd winding up petition that came about a wee ago?

Not a third one?

I think it is 'only' the two winding up orders!

Re: Gary Coxall's comment.

"Last comment. A notice of winding up is a warning and when issued HAS to go to court, even if paid. We have had two and nothing came of them"

Sorry Gary I'm not on Twitter.

Just to clarify, an issued winding up petition does NOT have to go to court, it can be withdrawn before the hearing.

It only has to go to court if advertised in the London Gazette which is what Gary is referring to. The moment it was advertised on the 15th, it had to go to court. HUFC would have had a minimum of a week, probably longer to settle the debt to stop it being advertised and thus stop it going to court.

I don't know what HMRC are like but most Petitioner's usually lay off advertisement if the Company gets in contact and promises to pay. All the petitioners want is their money, advertising the petition often slows them down in receiving their money (bank account frozen etc) so if the Company promises to pay it's counter productive unless they don't think the Company is going to pay.

Also just to clarify, Hartlepool have had two winding up petitions against them. Not three winding up petitions (unless there are others we don't know about which haven't been advertised - I'd be surprised if there are any right now) and not two winding up orders.

So in a nutshell

Summits going on?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not necessarily but advertisement could have been avoided.

It's up to you what conclusions you make. I'm happy to give Gary Coxall the benefit of the doubt for now but it doesn't fill me with confidence. We're either crap at admin and sorting stuff out or struggling for money. Let's hope it's the former.

The good news is I've heard no reporting of any supporting creditors.

Nothing on companies house fills you with confidence about JPNG/Gary Coxall. To me it just looks like a string of mostly unsuccessful companies. Several companies called Third Dimension something or other that are run from this house in Essex.

JPNG's Essex office, where that company is apparently run from, is a tiny office above a gym and while conveniently located close to a golf course it doesn't strike me as a football club owners business premises.

Could dig more but I'm sure the Bunker detectives will do a better job of finding something if there's anything to be found.

PS JPNG's Dubai address is a PO Box and the registered London address is 6 miles away from where their website claims their office is.

Ironic there is an accountancy firm next door, above the gym!

JPNGs companies house profile reads like a business man from Hartlepool

Whatever explanation is given no business wants to be in this sort of situation and unless the well-informed posters above here have got the process seriously wrong the club must have had several opportunities to stop things before they became public.

For me that means we're skint and the question is are they paying themselves handsomely while the club runs up debt? If the club is more or less breaking even and and the wages for Gary and his boss are reasonable then fair enough. If we're building up debt while they take a lot of money out we're in serious trouble. Taking over a debt free club and then paying yourself very well until the lines of credit ran out would be perfectly good business in the eyes of lots of unscrupulous twats.

It'll all become clearer over time but at the moment I'm genuinely worried that we're being stalked by the thread bear.

Let's hope we get through to the 3rd round and get some money on the kitty..

The club IS skint.

And in the twinkling of an eye the ugly rumours disappear - probably because they were libellous?

Meanwhile, Pools Player is offering a new episode of "Inside Pools" featuring Billy Paynter. Not acting like a club with something to hide are they? Hopefully that's a good sign.

I don't see anything sinister about the Billy Paynter situation.

He's barely featuring in apart from the odd ten minutes here and there. I'd imagine at his age he realises time is running out in his career and he either wants a lot more game time here if he can't get it here I'd imagine he'd feel he has to move on. That's football. Personally I think he's being criminally underused by a manager he is becoming too stubborn for his own good.

That is a very fair reflection on 'The Manger', Hit the nail on the head, he must be on Google , (other search Engines available), looking up things to say when a football team loses.