Setting Up a Limited company

Has anyone on here ever set up a limited company or does anyone know how long it takes and what you need to do/documentation needed?

There's loads of information available on this - here's just one link.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/newbusinesses/iwtset-up-as-a-limited-company.shtml

Here's another:

http://www.bytestart.co.uk/set-up-limited-company.html

I set up a limited company some years ago and as far as I am aware the accountant obtain an 'off the shelf' company ie, it was already registered and all we had to do was submit a change of name.

Setting up a company can be quite quick provided you know what you are doing. There is a lot on information on the Companies House website if you are planning on doing it yourself. You could of course buy an "off the shelf" company from one of many organisations who offer the service. Google is your friend. Incorporating one is one thing administering it is another but reasonably straightforward. You do have to be aware of deadlines though. Late filing of annual returns or accounts can be costly.

I am not setting one up, the only reason I asked is that the Mccanns set up a Ltd coy quite quickly. Was there time to do everything and all searches and obtaining information in the time they had? and it would have to have been via the internet. did Gerry have his laptop with him or did he borrow one along with the internet connection. If he had a laptop with him, why? He was supposed to be on holiday.

Keela wrote:I am not setting one up, the only reason I asked is that the Mccanns set up a Ltd coy quite quickly. Was there time to do everything and all searches and obtaining information in the time they had? and it would have to have been via the internet. did Gerry have his laptop with him or did he borrow one along with the internet connection. If he had a laptop with him, why? He was supposed to be on holiday.

He could have done it quicker than he did.

I once set one up as a charitable limited company for a Women's Aid group. It was really easy. We borrowed a constitution from another group, changed the name of the group and submitted it. That constitution got passed around lots of groups and we all got registered very quickly! So, we were all registered as charities and as companies limited by guarantee.

The mcCanns used solicitors Bates wells Braithwaite to set up a standard limited company for them. the solicitors used the 24 hr incorporation service available from Company House for an extra fee.

the issue is not could the company known as the Fund have been set up in such a short time - it was, and lots of standard companies are set up this quickly.

the question is why incur the costs (though it was the donations paying for it!) of setting up a company so soon after Madeleine vanished when she could have been found at anytime. presumably asking a big firm of solicitors to drop everything and set up a new company (as opposed to buying an off the shelf one) would cost a few thousand pounds?

maybe I have a simple mind but what I would do is to put the donations in a separate bank account so that income and expenditure are easy to see. No way in a similar situation would I spend on a company, and then on ongoing compliance costs - audit fees and filing fees.

Chris wrote:

Keela wrote:I am not setting one up, the only reason I asked is that the Mccanns set up a Ltd coy quite quickly. Was there time to do everything and all searches and obtaining information in the time they had? and it would have to have been via the internet. did Gerry have his laptop with him or did he borrow one along with the internet connection. If he had a laptop with him, why? He was supposed to be on holiday.

He could have done it quicker than he did.

If you go to Mccannfiles.com and google Enid O'Dowd, you'll get a comprehensive analyses of the Fund, how it was set up and questions about why the charity status wasn't an option. The story the mcCanns give out about the reason to make it a Company doesn't quite ring true. Ms. O'Dowd is a chartered accountant.

This is the link

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html

in the article it makes reference to someone from IFLG saying that their behaviour was well within the bounds of responsible parenting - however, IFLG have denied that anyone from there would have said any such thing.

in the article it makes reference to someone from IFLG suggesting starting a Fighting Fund - if the above is untrue, was it true that it was someone from IFLG who suggested starting a Fighting Fund!

James - the question is why incur the costs (though it was the donations paying for it!) of setting up a company so soon after Madeleine vanished when she could have been found at anytime.


I think that is the question everyone would like an answer to, just as they would like an answer to Gerry organising anniversary event well ahead of time when she could have been found at anytime!

Sadly, if and when she is found, I fear it will confirm our worst fears that she died early in May 2007.

James is absolutely spot on.
The company was set up in embarrassingly indecent haste.
Just shows that the 'wider agenda' was already in their minds very early on.

cherry1 wrote:This is the link

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html

in the article it makes reference to someone from IFLG saying that their behaviour was well within the bounds of responsible parenting - however, IFLG have denied that anyone from there would have said any such thing.

in the article it makes reference to someone from IFLG suggesting starting a Fighting Fund - if the above is untrue, was it true that it was someone from IFLG who suggested starting a Fighting Fund!

In kate's 'truthful' book p.124-125 you will find that it was an unnamed barrister who came to PDL along with the unnamed paralegal from IFLG who according to kate said they were within the bounds of responsible parenting. the book also says it was the IFLG who suggested a 'fighting fund'. I never heard that the IFLG denied these comments but if they are unhappy they should sue kate! the long article on the Fund only quotes from Kate's book on these matters.

And they made Maddie Ward of Court the same day as the launch of the Fund

I think IFLG are strongly behind the fund and likely were there on the advice of the Symingtons/Everleighs and the OC owners

I spoke to a lady at the IFLG and asked her how someone could have said about the responsible parenting
and she told me that nobody from there would have said such a thing, I explained it was written in Kate's book and she needed to get a copy of the book as it was being said and obviously I would have thought
damaging to their reputation. perhaps they should be telling Kate in her next book to write a correction!!

Keela wrote:Has anyone on here ever set up a limited company or does anyone know how long it takes and what you need to do/documentation needed?

Yes. If it's a bog-standard, off the shelf company with nothing unusual about it, it can take as little as 24 hours.

The McCann one, now that's a different kettle of fish altogether. That was very carefully planned indeed, it's not "normal" and would have required a considerable amount of legal expertise. IMHO.

cherry1 wrote:I spoke to a lady at the IFLG and asked her how someone could have said about the responsible parenting
and she told me that nobody from there would have said such a thing, I explained it was written in Kate's book and she needed to get a copy of the book as it was being said and obviously I would have thought
damaging to their reputation. perhaps they should be telling Kate in her next book to write a correction!!

This wouldn't be the only correction needed in the next edition !"

Quite right, I think the whole book would be taken up by corrections!

WILL A PROOF READER BE REQUIRED?

I would think so!

Although they would be there for hours having to cross out all the mistakes!

cherry1 wrote:This is the link

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html

in the article it makes reference to someone from IFLG saying that their behaviour was well within the bounds of responsible parenting - however, IFLG have denied that anyone from there would have said any such thing.

in the article it makes reference to someone from IFLG suggesting starting a Fighting Fund - if the above is untrue, was it true that it was someone from IFLG who suggested starting a Fighting Fund!

The IFLG is interesting - it was set up I think at the end of March 2007. I don't believe for a second that they suggested a Fighting Fund - as another poster said, it would have been quicker to use a bank account and more logical. Maddie might even have had an account already as many parents open savings accounts in their children's name. What's also of interest is how they found out about IFLG so quickly as the group was hardly well known.

In any case the absolution allegedly given by the said lawyers is worth nothing. Only social services could make such a statement imo.

Thanks for posting the link - I don't think Ms. O'Dowd believes the idea came from the lawyers either. In any case, if you look at IFLG's website, it is principally to resolve disputes in divorces and children that are taken abroad by one of the parents. Absolutely nothing about abduction by strangers which is clearly a police matter.

Badboy wrote:WILL A PROOF READER BE REQUIRED?

Let's hope SY do that job!

Remember the limited comapny name was trademarked the very next day after incorporation.

The IFLG launched 31 March 2007

The International Family Law Group launches at its premises in Covent Garden, London

The International Family Law Group (IFLG) launches at its premises in Covent Garden, London. We are a new specialist law firm providing services to the international community as well as for purely national clients. We have a special contract with the Legal Services Commission for child abduction work and are regularly instructed by the UK Government. We act for international families, ex pats and others in respect of financial implications of relationship breakdown including forum shopping and international enforcement of orders. We receive instructions from foreign lawyers and, as accredited specialists, act for clients of other law firms seeking their specialist experience.

See our attached media release and contact us for more details

Posted on 31 March, 2007 by David Hodson

How can they have 'regular instructions by the UK Government" when they are a new company?
----------

IFLG sent over their solicitor a Richard Jones, who seems to have left by August 2007. "Richard Jones is a Senior Family Law Executive at IFLG, having come to London in May 2006 from a leading law firm in Leicester. For the past 15 years he has specialised in International Parental Child abduction cases both under the Hague Convention and with complex non-Hague cases where there are no international treaties."
------


PACT - Mention Amber Alert on their website.
--------

Top Psychic joins search.

Last May it was reported in the UK Press Gazette that the McCanns, their friends and their family had invited the 'alleged psychics' Diane Lazarus (of Cardiff) and Amanda Hart across to Portugal to see if they could discover what happened to Madeleine (Amanda is an ex-resident of Portugal and Spain).
What's interesting is that Amanda Hart registered a website domain for her new company on April 28 2007 called Amber Connections Ltd.
Hart registered the actual company name on April 26th 2007 with the UK's 'Companies House'.
This 'psychic detective' company was to specialise in Missing Persons and Miscarriages of Justice. It was to behave in principle rather like the 'psychic wing' of Gerry's Amber Alert System.

Amanda Hart registered this domain 5 days before Madeleine went missing. It's alleged both she and Diane Lazarus were then invited across to Portugal by friends of the McCanns.
Amanda Hart alleges she too had a child taken away from her at a very early age:
see her Madeleine - Psychic Tracker diary …” Considering my daughter was taken just before her birthday, was nick-named Maddy after the character in the programme ‘Moonlighting’, had blonde hair (which was why she took on this nickname) and was now living on this island, I paid attention. I was then reminded that I was told she would come back into my life when she was
16/17 years of age. She is 16 now. This was clarifying what I was originally shown of her being returned"
------
PACT Press Officer is none other than clarence mitchell
http://www.pact-online.org/News-and-Media/news-a-media-pact-parents-and-abducted-children-together-parental-abduction-missing-children-associate-of-icmec.html

....Its all very suspicious