Where has it been mentioned in this thread? That CT story was only posted 10:30 today.
Basically amateur hour.
No great conspiracy or reorganisation of the group. Just missed paperwork
Wasn’t a PSC09 registered later the same day cancelling out that PSC02 in effect? So we’re back to square one where no one knows who the person with significant control is?
NO - read the opening line
It says it withdraws the previous statement regarding ... not completed reasonable steps etc.
It has not withdrawn the statement relating to SISU
View attachment 8854
View attachment 8853 Looks like they’ll be some more reading on Tuesday
That was just osb's opinion.
Till the CT reported it was not certain, though maybe highly probable, because nothing was on the companies house website except the strike off notice, in fact it is still there.
Seems a very backward way to do it?
Don’t worry. SISU are coming under scrutiny and it’s drawn some criticism. You know how that stresses Nick out. He’ll be OK once he’s ran a hot bath, lit some scented candles and put a recording of whale song on.Where has it been mentioned in this thread? That CT story was only posted 10:30 today.
Don’t worry. SISU are coming under scrutiny and it’s drawn some criticism. You know how that stresses Nick out. He’ll be OK once he’s ran a hot bath, lit some scented candles and put a recording of whale song on.
Don’t worry. SISU are coming under scrutiny and it’s drawn some criticism. You know how that stresses Nick out. He’ll be OK once he’s ran a hot bath, lit some scented candles and put a recording of whale song on.
So who else has been registered as a person of significant control in the past and not been withdrawn? Clearly someone has been withdrawn as it says in the box in the top right corner. If not SISU then who? Also if it’s not withdrawing the statement relating to SISU why does it say and I quote “the company has not yet completed taking reasonable steps to find out”? That’s hardly confirming the PSC02 filled earlier is it? In fact that statement alone cancels out any PSC02 ever posted wouldn’t it otherwise the company wouldn’t need to be taking “reasonable steps” because they’d already know? Unless you can explain otherwise of course? I’m all ears.NO - read the opening line
It says it withdraws the previous statement regarding ... not completed reasonable steps etc.
It has not withdrawn the statement relating to SISU
View attachment 8854
So? Post it on the wasps sub forum if you’re that concerned. This thread is about SBS&L. Why are you attempting to take it off topic? What’s in it for you?This is still here though
View attachment 8855
That was just osb's opinion.
Till the CT reported it was not certain, though maybe highly probable, because nothing was on the companies house website except the strike off notice, in fact it is still there.
So who else has been registered as a person of significant control in the past and not been withdrawn? Clearly someone has been withdrawn as it says in the box in the top right corner. If not SISU then who? Also if it’s not withdrawing the statement relating to SISU why does it say and I quote “the company has not yet completed taking reasonable steps to find out”? That’s hardly confirming the PSC02 filled earlier is it? In fact that statement alone cancels out any PSC02 ever posted wouldn’t it otherwise the company wouldn’t need to be taking “reasonable steps” because they’d already know? Unless you can explain otherwise of course? I’m all ears.
That's why I thought what he was saying was backward.
I "think" the way he is saying is that the statement was:
"The company has not yet completed...."
Now they are saying that statement isn't true any more, so it's withdrawn.
That's why I thought it was backwards and didn't make much sense.
What it all means though, no idea...
But till they post a new confirmation statement the question is still unanswered is it not?It means , previously that could not confirm who was the controlling entity so that posted that statement
Now they feel they can, so the old statement is withdrawn and the new one uploaded
Thanks for the clarification LesIt means , previously that could not confirm who was the controlling entity so that posted that statement
Now they feel they can, so the old statement is withdrawn and the new one uploaded
But till they post a new confirmation statement the question is still unanswered is it not?
Thanks for the clarification Les
Thanks for the clarification Les
YesDoes that make OSB - Simon or his successor ?
When can we expect that then? Will it still be SISU? If it is why was there a need to post the withdrawal? Was the withdrawal an error? Is it down to incompetence? Seems like they’d just be doing the same job twice if it is, hardly a sign of an entity with a grip on things is it?It means , previously that could not confirm who was the controlling entity so that posted that statement
Now they feel they can, so the old statement is withdrawn and the new one uploaded
Sorry begging your pudding, I meant the 'person with significant control' statement which was withdrawn leaving that question unanswered, though we sort of know it is Joy.No
First statement withdrawn
New statement on file - that is that
Come next year - assuming no changes - they will tick the box and pay £13 end
On this occasion are you sure it will cancel out the previous statement? Only where the PSC is concerned you seemed eager to point out that the withdrawal didn’t cancel out the previous statement.What they will be reading is the original notice which should be followed by a notice of withdrawal
When can we expect that then? Will it still be SISU? If it is why was there a need to post the withdrawal? Was the withdrawal an error? Is it down to incompetence? Seems like they’d just be doing the same job twice if it is, hardly a sign of an entity with a grip on things is it?
Will we know who the PSC is though?No
First statement withdrawn
New statement on file - that is that
Come next year - assuming no changes - they will tick the box and pay £13 end
Out of date during the course of an afternoon though? Sounds more like filed in error to me.From what I think he is saying, they have withdrawn the statement, the statement was this:
"The company has not yet completed...."
So they just withdrew the statement.
I have no idea if it's true, but could they have submitted this:
"Notification of Sisu Capital Limited as a person with significant control"
It then rendered the statement out of date as they had done that, so they withdrew the statement?
Out of date during the course of an afternoon though? Sounds more like filed in error to me.
Notification of Sisu Capital Limited as a person with significant control
I do love a poster who only surfaces when SISU need defending. Still, it's a living, eh? I see that Godiva is viewing the thread too!And don't you worry ACL / WASPs are not being overlooked
Proof of that is the requirement to have to change the Bond rules
Isn't that this?
View attachment 8856
that's just the way I am reading it, which is why I replied saying it looks a bit backwards...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?