The Barclay Brothers – Tax What Tax
The Unauthorised Biography of
Sir David Barclay
Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay
Corporate Structures – Tax Issues
Littlewoods – Shop Direct Group
LW Corporation Limited
The reckless buffoons at HBOS financed the total acquisition cost totalling £750 Million of Littlewoods in 2002 on behalf of Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay in-return for a 5% stake in the company? The Barclay Brothers acquired Littlewoods via a jersey registered company called LW Corporation for tax purposes, which is ultimately controlled by Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay who themselves are tax exiled in Monaco, Switzerland and the Channel Islands.
HM Revenue & Customs in 2004 accepted it overcharged Littlewoods and its subsidiary companies VAT on sales dating back to 1973 and agreed to a rebate plus interest that totalled approximately £473 Million, even though tax exiled Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay only acquired Littlewoods in 2002? I mean, did The Barclay Brothers share this windfall with The Moores Family?
Tax exiled, secretive and reclusive Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay via fifteen companies within Shop Direct Group that includes Littlewoods in 2007 filed two further legal actions against HM Revenue & Customs claiming the rebate interest paid in 2004 was “simple interest” and they claim it should have been calculated as “compound interest“. Another contentious area of this case, The Barclay Brothers are seeking VAT overpayments made over 25 years before Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay acquired Littlewoods in 2002? Is this not morally bankrupt? Is this in the “spirit of the law“?
In short, if Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay win their case against HM Revenue & Customs, it will cost the UK Taxpayers a further £1 Billion on top of the £473 Million they have already paid them?
A contentious issue also arises from the fact several close-nit senior board members based at 20 St James’s Street, London play a pivotal and influential role in the major decisions made these include:
Michael Seal – Chartered Accountant
Richard Faber – Banker – Who is the ex-son-in-law of Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay
Philip Peters – Banker
Rigel Mowatt – Chartered Accountant
Aidan Barclay – The son of Sir David Barclay
Then in 2003, Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay acquired GUS plc catalogue business for £590 Million.
In 2003 Littlewoods (a private company) paid a dividend payment of £50 Million and as LW Corporation Limited is an “Offshore Registered Company” the dividend payment was Tax FREE?
The following is statement from
HM Revenue and Customs
HM Revenue and Customs internal manual 120210:
There is, in principal at any rate, no reason why a business which is visibly in this country should not be managed and controlled from, let us say, Jersey. But if the directors of that company are working in this country on a regular basis and probably living here as well, it may be highly unlikely that they will be doing anything more in Jersey than reaffirming decisions already taken here. If that is so the mere fact of having board meetings in the Channel Islands is irrelevant.
The question is where do the people concerned exercise management and control?. If they really do it in this country and go through a meaningless form of words in Jersey, that will achieve nothing for them but, of course, it leaves the Revenue with the difficult burden of proof.
With the above carefully noted, consider this:
In an unrelated court case in The London High Court of Justice in 2012, Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay submitted a civil Witness statement that could not be tested under oath, none-the-less I draw your attention to paragraph (10) of his statement:
CIVIL WITNESS STATEMENT OF
SIR FREDERICK HUGH BARCLAY
22 February 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
10) This interest is at a high level. We are not involved day-to-day, or in the minutiae of the business. We do not see or review legal / transactional documentation (and never did, if we could help it, employing lawyers to do so). However, given our position and responsibilities, we have very many legal papers to sign, including in relation to the business of non-UK holding companies within the group. I generally sign such documentation on the basis that I would not have been asked to sign unless it was appropriate and I do so in reliance on trusted advisers who have produced the documents.
(There is a relevance to this further on)
Back to the Littlewoods case:
Littlewoods is one of the many business interests of Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay, which are “managed at an executive level from an office based at 20 St James’s Street, London“. Then consider these several key factors:
Aidan Barclay, Michael Seal, Philip Peters are board directors of Shop Direct Company Shareholder Limited, which in turn is a Director of 35 UK Littlewoods / Shop Direct Companies
Aidan Barclay, Michael Seal, Philip Peters are principally based at an office based at 20 St James’s Street, London and play very significant roles throughout the Littlewoods / Shop Direct Group.
Michael Seal is a director of 13 separate Littlewoods / Shop Direct Companies
Richard Faber is a director of 2 separate Littlewoods / Shop Direct Companies
Philip Peters is a director of 2 separate Littlewoods / Shop Direct Companies
Aidan Barclay is a director of 2 separate Littlewoods / Shop Direct Companies
There is some evidence that 20 St James’s Street, London team are managing and controlling LW Corporation Limited, a Jersey registered company:
Michael Seal (a UK Resident) signed a shareholders resolution on behalf of LW Corporation Limited, a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands for £173 Million capital increase.
Michael Seal (a UK Resident) signed a shareholders resolution on behalf of LW Corporation Limited, a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands for £100 Million capital increase.
Philip Peters (a UK Resident) signed a shareholders resolution on behalf of LW Corporation Limited, a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands for a dividend in specie, effectively transferring all the shares in Home Delivery Network Limited to an offshore parent company.
Michael Seal (a UK Resident) signed a Share Purchase Agreement on behalf of LW Corporation Limited, a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands for the sale and purchase of Douglas Insurance Limited.
Philip Peters (a UK Resident) signed the 2006 Annual Return of Littlewoods Shop Direct Group Limited on behalf of LW Corporation Limited, a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands.
Michael Seal (a UK Resident) signed the 2006 Annual Return of Littlewoods Shop Direct Group Limited on behalf of LW Corporation Limited, a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands.
If Michael Seal and Philip Peters are effectively managing LW Corporation Limited a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands from 20 St James’s Street, London, this may have very significant tax implications for the group.
If Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were eventually successful in their pursuit for the £1 Billion rebate, then technically, this £1 Billion windfall could be drawn down as a dividend payment to LW Corporation Limited, a holding company registered in the tax haven of Jersey, Channel Islands TAX FREE. And if you consider this, they have already received £473 Million from HM Revenue & Customs in 2004, they paid themselves a dividend of £50 Million in 2003 and they only paid £750 Million for Littlewoods in 2002.
The High Court in 2010 then referred several key issues of this case to the European Court of Justice seeking a preliminary ruling. In 2012 the European Court of Justice said these matters were for national governments to determine and not them. The case is now back in the London High Court.
In 2012 in an unrelated High Court Judgment, which involved Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay, Judge Richards drew attention of “findings of fact” that may have a significant impact on The Barclay Brothers past and current tax affairs more generally. The four companies in question:
B Overseas Limited – Registered in the tax haven of the British Virgin Islands
Ellerman Hotels Group Limited – Registered in the tax haven of the British Virgin Islands
Maybourne Finance Limited – Registered in the United kingdom
Ellerman Corporation Limited – Registered in the tax haven of Jersey in the Channel Islands
The trustees alleged to own the relevant The Barclay Brothers companies in these proceedings but were not aware of the main transactions with which, this case is concerned until long after they had happened?. It was not until a series of trust meetings on the 14th June 2011 that they were informed of the purchases of both Misland and Derek Quinlan’s debts.
The minutes of a number of meetings on that date state that the meeting was advised that “the group is currently in the process of acquiring the hotels The Connaught, Claridge’s and The Berkeley being trophy hotels located in Mayfair and Knightsbridge in Central London”. “The acquisition process was according Aidan Barclay, ongoing“.
The Trustees have given assurances that:
The Trustees were unaware of the actions from which the claim and Petition arose at the time they occurred
Such actions were carried out by other “The Barclay Interests” (as that term is defined in the Petition) without prior reference to the Trustees
Insofar as Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay influenced the actions of “The Barclay Interests“, this was done without the involvement of the Trustees
Philip Peters said that all “The Barclay Family Interests” companies including those within the Ellerman Group and in the trust structure are ultimately owned by Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay
Richard Faber considered Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay to be the “Shareholders“. “Indirectly through their interests in The Barclay Family Trusts”
Richard Faber who is the Ex-Son-In-Law of Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay did not even know who the “Trustees“ were?
Michael Seal who was said to know the most about the trust structure, dealt with the “Trustees” only very occasionally
Misland (Cyprus) Investments Limited has three Cypriot local directors and Ms Cherielyn Muir Brockett
Michael Seal accepted that the Cypriot directors would not take commercial decisions. Sounds a bit like the old “Sark Lark” (Talk about calling the kettle pot Black). Michael Seal also accepted that Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were involved with Misland who held 24.78% at Board Level.
An email from Sir David Barclay confirms this:
19th January 2011 – Sir David Barclay to Gerard Murphy
“Gerry deal done with Greens, O Danny Boy, H.E. Sir David your friend“
Misland and Ellerman main shareholder is a company called “B Overseas Limited“, which is registered in the tax haven of the British Virgin Islands
The directors of “B Overseas Limited” is Ms Cherielyn Muir-Brockett and a lawyer based in Geneva, Switzerland
Ms Cherielyn Muir-Brockett works for a firm called “GL Monaco Corporation“, which is an “accounting and business administration” practice based in Monaco de Crime
It is bloody obvious from the documents in this case that Ms Cherielyn Muir-Brockett is not a commercial decision maker, but a “functionary” taking instructions from the commercial people at Ellerman in London?
Judge Richards – Judgment:
The Judge’s overall conclusions in certain aspects of this case may have serious ramifications in relation to The Barclay Brothers relationship with HM Revenue and Customs
Judge Richards said:
Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay have over many years built up significant business interests in a number of different sectors. They are now in their late seventies and are resident in Monaco, where they maintain an office.
The overall conclusion which I draw from the evidence in this case is that all the companies comprising the “Barclay Interests” are within Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay’s control, in the sense that they are able if they choose to control their decisions and activities. Those acting on their behalf frequently refer to them as controlling the companies and they are content to be seen as controlling the companies.
The evidence I have heard also shows that they are content to leave a good deal of the business to the executives whom they have appointed but that they take an interest and sometimes a very keen interest in particular aspects of the business. In particular, they will be directly involved in decisions to make significant acquisitions or disposals of assets in this case shares in the company or debts due from the company or from individual shareholders“.
“Most of the Barclay Companies involved in this case are ultimately owned by the trustees of the Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay Family Settlements. But the trustees have played no part at all in the relevant events and indeed were ignorant of many of them. Whatever the precise ownership structure and whatever, if any, beneficial interests Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay have in these companies and whatever, if any, legal rights of control they have, “I am satisfied, as I have said, that they, Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay could in practice control all the Barclay Companies involved in this case“.
The affairs of these companies, and many other business interests of Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay are managed from an office at 20 St James’s Street, London SW1, where a number of senior executives are based.
It was also said in court, when Aidan Barclay was ill, executives looked to Sir David Barclay for decisions, said Judge Richards. This contradicts what Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay early claimed in his witness statement “My brother and I have no editorial, political or economic power in the UK”
The four executives who gave evidence before me have offices there (20 St James’s Street, London) and each has his own area of responsibility.
Richard Faber – is in corporate finance and he is one of the principal investment managers within the group dealing in particular with investment opportunities and transactions
Michael Seal – is a Chartered Accountant whose principal responsibility lies in the areas of tax, corporate structure and pensions.
Philip Peters – is in commercial banking and his primary responsibilities are to manage the banking and finance requirements and relationships of the companies.
Rigel Mowatt – is a chartered accountant, his primary responsibilities are the management and financing of various businesses, although he is also involved in the acquisition and disposal of businesses. He is particularly involved in the Telegraph Media Group, which occupies a substantial part of his time, with the result that he spends only a minority of his time at “20 St James’s Street, London offices.
Aidan Barclay – The son of Sir David Barclay did not give evidence, Aidan Barclay operates from 20 St James’s Street, London. Aidan Barclay is chairman of Ellerman Group of Companies, which includes: B Overseas Limited, Ellerman Hotels Group Limited and Ellerman Corporation Limited
The Barclay Brothers have a track record of over inflating the value of their assets on their fledging businesses:
Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay acquired The Daily Torygraph, The Sunday Torygraph and both the Apollo Magazine and The Sextator Magazine via Press Acquisitions Limited in 2004 for an exorbitant £666 Million from the fraudster Lord Black of Crossharbour. As of December 2012 Press Acquisitions Limited still owed £199 Million from a £264 Million loan they obtained from the state-owned Bank of Scotland. Furthermore, Press Acquisitions had to increase the company’s share capital by £267 Million.
Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay value the Newspapers at £762 Million? There valuation is flawed. For example, circulation figures are well down from 2004 figures. The prestigious “Washington Post” was sold recently for a putrid sum of £150 Million? Again, it appears The Barclay Brothers are over inflating their asset valuations to raise more capital to fund their fledging businesses and keeping afloat debt-ridden Derek Quinlan.
BBC Panorama – “The Tax Haven Twins” 2012
So let scrutinise this. A £35 Million mansion, a stone’s throw from Buckingham Palace. (Called, Forbes House, Belgravia, London SW1 – is a leasehold property with approximately 44 years remaining. It was the former offices of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders Association. Furthermore, a planning application on Forbes House, Belgravia, London was made by a subsidiary company called: Halkin St Development Limited, a company registered in the tax haven of Jersey in the Channel Islands).
Forbes House, Belgravia, London SW1
When you or I buy a house, we do so in our own name.
But this mansion “Forbes House” is registered in the name of a company based in the British Virgin Islands, a tax haven? (Forbes House Limited) and financed by RBS International Limited Guernsey).
Why on earth would anyone want to do that? Well, if you are a family of great wealth like The Barclay’s (Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay), there is one possible advantage for future generations.
Mr Richard Murphy from Tax Research UK said “They will not pay inheritance tax if it is earned offshore. (They also probably avoided paying stamp duty?) Because you only pay inheritance tax on your UK based assets“.
Mr Richard Murphy from Tax Research UK went on to say “The house is now not in the UK for legal purposes. It is outside inheritance tax. If you pay £35 Million for the house and inheritance tax is at 40%,that saves you £14 Million in tax straightaway“.
(It should also be pointed out they paid NO stamp duty either?)
Around the block, there is more Barclay family property. It cost £21 Million and once again, “it is owned by a company in the British Virgin Islands“.
The former building of the Spiritualist Association of Great Britain in Belgrave Square, London SW1
GL Monaco Corporation based in Monaco de Crime controlled Rose Season Enterprises Limited, a company incorporated in the tax haven of the British Virgin Island, which recently acquired 33 Belgrave Square in London SW1, the former headquarters of the “Spiritualist Association of Great Britain for £21 Million and is now on the market for £26 Million. Funds for this purchase came from a company called Tulgurt Limited registered in the tax haven of the British Virgin Islands and must have loaned money to Rose Season Enterprises Limited and now hoping for a quick turn around with a substantial Tax-Free Profit, they also avoided paying Stamp Duty.
Yodel Distribution Holdings
BBC Watchdog have exposed “Yodel” a parcel delivery company? Owned by Sir David Barclay and Ex Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay’s “Yodel” has one of the worst track records for inconsistency in delivering parcels? Yodel was effectively a PR name change gimmick from “Home Delivery Networks“, which also appeared on BBC Watchdog, different name, but the same appalling service. If you order from Amazon or from any other on-line company, “Ensure you tell them you do NOT want to use Yodel as your courier, opt for DPD, “Royal Mail or FedEx. Remember, you are the customer you choose and ensure safe delivery of your goods.
2014 MoneySavingExpert.com polled 9,000 shoppers and Yodel was voted the Worst UK Parcel Delivery Company for the second year running. Customers who were unlucky enough to have their parcels delivered or not delivered as the case may be by Yodel – 58% of customers rated Yodel “BAD”.
Yodel delivers for: Amazon – Argos – Boots and Tesco Direct.
Enough is Enough. It is time for Customers to say NO to Yodel.
If Amazon – Argos – Boots and Tesco Direct say they only use Yodel who might deliver your parcel but their is a good chance they won’t. Then I suggest you say to:
Amazon – Argos – Boots and Tesco Direct
Either you use another parcel delivery company or I’ll shop on-line somewhere else?
Amazon – Argos – Boots and Tesco Direct will son change their tone?
DPD was named the best Parcel Delivery Services – Best opt for, no, INSIST on DPD to deliver your parcels. Alternatively, Parcelforce and Royal Mail who received positive results in the poll are worth a consideration.
In 2013 accounts for Yodel show losses exceeding £112 Million.
In 2014 The desperate tax exiles Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay offered Amazon an option to acquire a 4.2% stake in Yodel for around £8.7 Million which expires in 2022 valuing Yodel at just £200 Million.
With disgruntled Amazon customer complaints about Yodel non-delivery of parcels maybe The Barclay Brothers needed to keep Amazon on board to give hope to their bankers that they will get their money back and to continue backing them?
Another interesting point to note; shortly before this option was granted to Amazon, tax exiles Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay were valuing Yodel at £500 Million?
I can only assume the reasons why The Barclay Brothers need to over-inflate the valuations of their assets at the present time is to keep the banks on-side in supporting The Barclay Brothers financial obligations in keeping Derek Quinlan afloat? Because if they stop financial supporting Derek Quinlan there is a strong chance Derek Quinlan will be made bankrupt by his own creditors? This financial pressure on The Barclay Brothers is not sustainable and The Barclay Brothers own bankers must be starting to think of the possible “domino effect” and collapse of all concerned? Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay’s own bankers must be looking back to 1976 when The Barclay Brothers were over leveraged, massively personally financially insolvent and could not pay their debts and those debts were sold-off at a two thirds discount?
The Crown Agents Scandal
Jack Walker and Henry Kaye were both qualified solicitors and senior partners of law firm Davies, Arnold & Cooper.
Jack Walker was first introduced to corrupt Bernard Wheatley a senior executive at The Crown Agents back in 1964 by a mutual acquaintance in the property world. Shortly afterwards, Jack Walker and Henry Kaye’s law firm Davies, Arnold & Cooper were appointed as the official property lawyers of The Crown Agents. Jack Walker and Henry Kaye then commenced introducing their own dubious clients to corrupt Bernard Wheatley of The Crown Agents who were seeking finance? One of these dubious clients was The Barclay Brothers.
Another interesting point to note, Jack Walker and Henry Kaye’s law firm were acting for both The Crown Agents and their “own clients” at the same time on the same property transactions. If that was not contentious enough Jack Walker and Henry Kaye were also “shareholders and directors” of their own “clients companies” including The Barclay Brothers Companies? that were seeking funding from The Crown Agents?
The investigation into The Crown Agents scandal and near collapse was not a normal investigation to say the least. The Crown Agents was if nothing else a unique institution, effectively managing assets of individual commonwealth countries and not forgetting, Her Majesty The Queen and other members of The Royal Family estates. In any other scenario, The Serious Fraud Office and The Police would have been called in to properly investigate. Only two individuals were brought to the criminal courts, corrupt Bernard Wheatley was one of them but died before his trial began.
For example where others who would normally be judged as either “shady or corrupt“, in this investigation, The Crown Agents were deemed “lapse from acceptable standards“. And the borrowers many of whom got away with “day-light-robbery“.
Mr Jack Walker and Henry Kaye were instrumental in introducing poor quality borrowers to the secondary bank “The Crown Agents“, Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay being two of them.
Astonishing, but true, until 1965 The Crown Agents were “Agents” in the true sense of the word and managed just three principal funds. During 1965 The Crown Agents commenced accepting “Fixed Term Deposits” then shortly after entered the “Secondary Banking Sector” without a “Banking Licence?” The Crown Agents also lacked the expertise to operate an unlicensed secondary bank.
In its demise by the mid-1970’s the Bank of England had to bail out The Crown Agents in excess of £180 Million “British Taxpayers Money“. Under the 30 year release rule I have been able to obtain copies of correspondence between 10 Downing Street, The Cabinet Office andThe Crown Agents.
When the government set-up an inquiry (several inquiries followed) as to what went wrong with the near collapse bailed-out Crown Agents, it became apparent at the early stage “High-Level” executives of The Crown Agents and Civil Servants were either incompetent and “not-fit-for-purpose” and/or corrupt and fraudulent? It was also established early on that witnesses would not be prosecuted on criminal charges? It was also agreed that Jack Walker would only be asked “limited questions?” within the “Inquiries“. This had a lot to do with the fact Jack Walker and his partner in crime Henry Kaye acted for both The Crown Agents and its own clients on the same transactions and that Jack Walker and Henry Kaye were instrumental in introducing poor quality borrowers like Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay with whom Jack Walker and Henry Kaye retained a financial interest within those companies? This is explained in more detail in my unauthorised biography on The Barclay Brothers & Family – Tax-what-Tax.
Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay did not take part personally as witnesses in any of the inquiries relating to the near collapse of The Crown Agents.
As mentioned earlier here is a transcript of the limited questions being put to Jack Walker that relates to his own and that of his partner in crime Henry Kaye’s direct involvement with Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay’s companies in one of the inquiries and pans-out like this:
Jack Walker was asked:
Barclays Hotels Limited was one of the borrowers whom you introduced to The Crown Agents?
They had a subsidiary called Highgrange Investments?
In which your partner Mr Henry Kaye a solicitor was a shareholder?
Was that fact disclosed to The Crown Agents?
I am sure it was? “Bernard Wheatley” (Bernard Wheatley was corrupt and in 1976 remanded on £15,000 bail at Bow Street Magistrates Court in London charged with corruption including accepting bribes and who died in July 1977 before his trial) had a very close knowledge of the business activities in which I was engaged. There is little doubt that Henry Kaye’s name came up. I think we were both directors at one stage of Highgrange Investments (They were both directors. In 1968 Edna Kaye, the wife of solicitor Henry Kaye was appointed a director too)
You say “both of you”?
Both Henry Kaye and myself, I cannot be sure.(They were both directors and shareholders as from 1966 – How could the corrupt Mr Jack Walker not know this, he personally held 25% of the shares and his partner in crime Mr Henry Kaye also held 25% of the shares)
Jack Walker – solicitor, was asked another question:
The Londonderry House Hotel
Hertford Street – Old Park Lane, London W1
In 1970 Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay put up a scheme for the purchase of the “Londonderry House Hotel” in Old Park Lane, London with a memorandum in support and signed by Mr Jack Walker– solicitor and sent it to The Crown Agents. The memorandum forecast high profits.
Jack Walker replied, based purely on the value of the property, “it would be difficult to justify the price being paid? (Would Jack Walker himself finance this transaction with his own money, No” “Would Jack Walker himself finance Ex-Bankrupt Sir Fredrick Barclay and Sir David Barclay, No)
The Crown Agents lent the whole of the 1st instalment of the purchase price. The original scheme on paper anyway was to float the company on the Stock Market. J & A Scrimgeour, stockbrokers, recommended the proposal in these words: “the whole situation is a high risk one“. “A competent person would walk away from this proposal? So why did Jack Walker submit it? Because Jack Walker had nothing to lose and neither did his partner in crime Henry Kaye? The Barclay Brothers had nothing to lose either? Only The Crown Agents and eventually, The Taxpayer lost“.
J & A Scrimgeour suggested that The Crown Agents should have Accountants check the figures. Cooper Brothers (Accountants) were instructed to examine the books and report. Mr Towse from The Crown Agents requested a “Full Report“, but the two small identical twins David Rowat Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Frederick Hugh Barclay wanted to exclude from the Accountants purview the calculations and figures contained in the profit forecast and the assumptions underlying it?.
Question to another Crown Agent Mr Towse:
Do you know why The Crown Agents went on lending to The Barclay Brothers despite that?
The Barclay Brothers had a characteristic contempt for Accountants?
By June 1972 Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay were unable to keep to their own profit forecast and were unable to re-pay the £1.5 Million loan due in July 1972. Desperate David Barclay telephoned corrupt Bernard Wheatley at The Crown Agents and asked him if he could extend the loan repayment to July 1973? Alarm bells were ringing? A seasoned un-corrupted lender would have taken a much closer look at their accounts?
From their early years up to 1976 Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay predominately borrowed from “Secondary Banks and Finance Houses” equivalent today to those offering “Unsecured Personal Loans“, lenders we now call “Wonga Loans Companies?”
Consumer Credit Corporation Ltd
National Bank Limited
The Crown Agents
Keyser Ullmann Limited
Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were obviously viewed as “Risky” and who could argue against that assessment.
Zoe Margaret Barclay now a housewife was a major shareholder and former director of several of The Barclay Brothers companies, but in 1975 she listed herself at c/o Midland Bank Limited (now HSBC) 13 High Street, St Peter Port, Guernsey, Channel Islands? Something to hide Zoe? Did Zoe Barclay transfer her and Sir David Barclay’s personal assets outside of the UK jurisdiction months before the day of reckoning of Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay’s demise in 1976?
By 1976 Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay declared themselves massively personally financially insolvent. Lady Zoe Barclay, the wife of Sir David Barclay then moved her interests to c/o the offices of Theodore Goddard in tax haven Jersey, Channel Islands.
In conjunction with borrowing substantially from The Crown Agents, Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were also borrowing substantially from another “Secondary Wonga bank” called Keyser Ullmann Limited.
Edward du Cann
Sir Edward du Cann was a Member of Parliament for The Conservative Party between 1956 – 1987 and chairman of the influential 1922 Committee between 1972 – 1984. Edward du Cann was the chairman of Keyser Ullmann Limited a secondary bank that lent heavily to Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay’s companies in the 1970’s. Interestingly, Keyser Ullmann Limited themselves were also substantial borrowers from The Crown Agents. Edward du Cann was later criticised in a Department of Trade & Industry report as “Incompetent” in the Bankrupt of Keyser Ullman Bank. Edward du Cann helped elevate close friend the late Margaret Thatcher as leader of The Conservative Party in 1975 and then Prime Minister in 1979. Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were active Conservative Party donors. Edward du Cann was constantly in debt, his Somerset Estate was repossessed in 1992. Edward du Cann’s London flat was repossessed in 1993. Edward Du Cann later had a bankruptcy order served upon him, sounds familiar?. Edward Du Cann was the deputy chairman of Homes Assured Limited and who resigned two days before the company crashed in 1993 with debts of more than £10 Million and where several of its board members were charged, criminal charges that included Deception of making false representation to obtain a total of £500,000 in funds, Dishonestly furnishing information for the High Court proceedings and three directors charged with fraudulent trading. Edward du Cann somehow evading prosecution? Friends in “High Places?” Edward du Cann was later a board member of E-Clear a company that went into administration in 2010. Edward du Cann was also the former Chairman of Lonrho plc, Tiny Rowland once commented, “Edward du Cann is so oily, you could bottle it” and that was coming from the unscrupulous Tiny Rowland?
Sir John Cuckney
Sir Clive Bossom
Even by the mid 1970’s Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay’s “Address Book of Influential Contacts” enabled them to bring a friend the late Sir Clive Bossom a Conservative Party M.P to a meeting with Chairman Sir John Cuckney of The Crown Agents in an attempt for The Crown Agents to keep financially supporting The Barclay Brothers fledging companies. Unfortunately on this occasion Sir John Cuckney was not impressed with Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay’s track record in servicing their loans and rejected their proposal. That said the canny West London Dell Boys The Barclay Brothers continued to support The Conservative Party and later brought them into direct contact with the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher whom throughout her premiership developed close friendships with other undesirable individuals including: Ex-Convict Lord Archer of Western Super Mare, predatory paedophiles in Sir Jimmy Savile and former Deputy Conservative Party Chairman Sir Peter Morrison who had a Police caution for “Cottaging with Underage Boys” to name but a few…..
Desperate Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay had several meetings with their friend Victor Matthews of Trafalgar House and although they made a proposal to The Crown Agents, it did not materialise to anything positive. Victor Matthews who later became Lord Matthews and later owner of Express Newspapers would later become Chairman of Ellerman Lines in 1983, when The Barclay Brothers acquired the group even though the appointment of chairman was assured to Sir David Scott, but Sir David Barclay went back on his word on that appointment.
They also had meetings with their friend Maxwell Joseph of Grand Metropolitan in the hope of brokering some kind of deal and although Maxwell Joseph made offers to The Crown Agents again nothing materialised. Quickly going back to the 1960’s, Maxwell Joseph owned the Curzon House Club, a casino in Curzon Street in London and had several meetings with Benny Huntman and others that represented the US Criminal Underworld (Mafia) in acquiring The Dorchester Hotel in Park Lane and establishing a casino complex for US Junkets. Again this did not materialise.
By January 1976 The Crown Agents had issued formal notices and these were served upon Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and their companies effectively calling in their loans.
In March 1976 a creditors meeting was called. Sloman of Turquand Young were prepared to act as receiver.
Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were in deep financial trouble and on the brink of bankruptcy: They were defaulting on their loan interest payments.
The Crown Agents – £9.5 Million – Excluding Interest Payments
Keyser Ullmann Limited – £5.3 Million
National Westminster Bank – £750,000
At this point, Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were paper-thing – on the verge of “Bankruptcy“, that would have meant the second time for Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay.
Out of the blue?, “What a coincidence” on the 2nd August 1976 an offer of £3 Million was made to Norman Barrington Cork of Cork Gully, an insolvency practice for the four hotels:
Londonderry House Hotel
Kensington Palace Hotel
It is important to note Norman Barrington Cork was a friend of Sir David Barclay and a former co-director of Hyde Park Casinos Limited back in 1972. Another co-director of Hyde Park Casinos Limited was Jack Solomons who himself had frequented the “Criminal Underworld” and Sir David Barclay was both a director and shareholder.
Theodore Goddard & Co who were looking after Zoe Barclay’s assets? were also acting on behalf of Harold Bolsom and Leslie Bolsom who formed a newly registered company called “Trenport Investments Limited” for the sole purpose of acquiring The Barclay Brothers debt for a fraction of its true value, they offered just £3 Million, which meant The Crown Agents had to take a haircut of £6.5 Million, or should I say, a loss to the British Taxpayer of £6.5 Million.
As mentioned earlier Sir David Barclay and Lady Zoe Barclay were already clients of the Channel Islands office of Theodore Goddard & Co?
Bankers Morgan Grenfell & Company handled the negotiations and by the 4th October 1976 the offer was reluctantly accepted conditional to the following conditions:
In support of the offer statutory declarations of assets and liabilities by David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Frederick Barclay were obtained showing a state of massive personal insolvency.
In the declaration David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Frederick Barclay also confirmed that they had no present or future interest in the equity of the Bolsom Family or in Trenport Investments Limited?
Mr E Osgodby on the 6th October 1976 confirmed to The Crown Agents Board that in view of the signed statutory declarations, there was no mention of the release from David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Frederick Barclay from their personal guarantees. We should still be in a position to proceed against David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Frederick Barclay as guarantors?
However, by 13th October In 1976 David “Spotty” Rowland via his company Williams Hudson Group Limited loaned Sir David Barclay £720,000.
The security Sir David Barclay gave his friend, “Shady Financer” David “Spotty” Rowland was an agreement constituted by an exchange of letters dated 13th October 1976 and on the 8th November 1976, that in the event of Sir David Barclay defaulting on the loan, David Rowland had the right to receive the sum of £720,000 payable by another shady businessman“Cyril Stern’s” – Ladbroke Group Limited and/or Hyde Park Casinos Limited. Was this disclosed within the Statutory declarations of assets and liabilities made by David Barclay to his friend Norman Barrington Cork to The Crown Agents? This is all panned out in the book.
Another interesting point:
Taking into account the signed declarations Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay signed in 1976 that made clear The Barclay Brothers will hold no interest in Trenport Investments Limited present or in the future. In 1978 Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay acquired the interest of Trenport Investments Limited, which breached their signed declaration of 1976. Furthermore, there is no evidence found that would support the repayment of the £6.5 Million plus compound interest that would have needed to be repaid back to The Crown Agents. In today’s value, this would equate to over £100 Million? Would this not constitute fraud?
Had the two West London Dell Boys Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay re-paid The Crown Agents back in full with compound interest when they eventually disposed of those four hotels separately later on then fine, but No.? William George Stern also borrowed heavily from The Crown Agents and was forced into Bankruptcy in fact it was one of the largest bankruptcies at the time, many other borrowers from The Crown Agents went into bankruptcy, but not The Barclay Brothers?. In light of the fact the two small identical twins Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay were sparred bankruptcy in 1976 you would have thought the so-called Committed Catholics, who were later given a Knighthood for charitable giving and who according to their own lawyers, worked hard to earn their “Reputation?” one would have expected them, Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay to pay the money back to The Crown Agents, “Reputation and Integrity? No. “They have a bought reputation?”
SARK – TAX what TAX
The UK is not the only jurisdiction that Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay attempt to find ways to avoid paying their fair share of taxation:
In 2007 Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay hatched a cunning plan to avoid paying the true value of each tenement? Sark is probably one of the lowest, if not the lowest tax jurisdiction in Europe. Why would a couple of repugnant paper billionaires want to deny the Sark Government and the people of Sark the small tax revenue properly due?
La Moinerie – (Long Leasehold)
La Rondellerie – (Long Leasehold)
La Vieux Port – (Long Leasehold)
Clos de Messervy – (Freehold)
All for the sum of £25,000 apiece.
An earlier letter written by Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay’s advocate Gordon Dawes made clear “it is only fair to say though, that my client intends in any event to acquire first a long leasehold interest over La Friponnerie, which is likely to leave the tenement itself without any great value?”
The Tax Haven Twins
George Osborne the Chancellor of the Exchequer has already described aggressive tax avoidance as “Morally Repugnant“. Margaret Hodge, chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee describes such tax avoiders as “Immoral“.
So how do David Cameron and George Osborne feel about The Barclay family placing these London properties offshore? The Prime Minister David Cameron and the Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne declined to comment. (Well, with a general election looming and UKIP riding high in the poles, they “Cameron and Osborne” can ill afford to upset The Barclay Brothers, who own the Conservative broadsheet – The Daily Torygraph?) – (What was it that Lord Leveson said? Oh yes, Newspaper proprietors getting to close to Politicians or was it Politician’s getting to close to newspaper proprietors?)
In a statement by The Barclay’s Lawyers
The Barclay family members and their companies abide by the law and pay the taxes required by UK law and laws of other relevant countries.
The question of fairness is determined by Parliament when enacting tax law. (The Barclay Brothers lawyers should have said, my clients do not obey by the “Spirit of the Law?”
The holding company of
The Maybourne Group
Claridge’s – The Connaught – The Berkeley
Richard Faber the ex-son-in-law of Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay claimed in July 2013 “This is a complete and total defeat for Mr McKillen. There is nothing for him to salvage from these rulings. After nearly two years of legal proceedings he is considerably worse off financially and no further forward“.
However by March 2014 Paddy McKillen who many wrote-off in his relentless fight with The Barclay Brothers over control of “Coroin” out-manoeuvred them in their attempt to acquire some of his loans? Paddy McKillen has now secured long-term funding and puts him firmly at the helm of “Coroin?”
Paddy McKillen has secured long-term funding
Paddy McKillen is not saddled with a third parties debt unlike The Barclay Brothers who are having to finance Derek Quinlan which is unsustainable.
Paddy McKillen is the largest single shareholder in Coroin
How much longer can The Barclay Brothers hold Derek Quinlan’s debt they acquired from NAMA and to continue financially supporting him? As a friend? Funny, but it might not be long before The Barclay Brothers will be seeking a “friend in need” to bail them out?
The Barclay Brothers and/or their companies are themselves laden with huge debt
How much longer can The Barclay Brothers bankers continue supporting a lost cause?
Another contentious issue that I have found whilst researching Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay, when it suits them they obtain over-inflated valuations on their distressed assets or claim to have received offers in excess of their true value enabling them to either buy time or seek further funding for their flagging businesses. For example,
The Ritz Hotel London
Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay claim The Ritz Hotel London is valued at £625 Million which in this economic climate is absolutely silly? Part of the financial crises was caused by over inflated property prices and inapt bankers from the likes of Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and HBOS who later had to be bailed out by the British Taxpayers (NOW state owned) Do bankers ever learn? I wonder if these inapt bankers at RBS and Lloyds Banking Group would lend at this level if it were their own money. So lets analyse The Barclay Brothers valuation on The Ritz Hotel London?
The Ritz Hotel London is worth £250 Million maximum and another £100 Million for The Ritz Club Casino = £350 Million.
The valuation is based on the following:
The 133 Bedrooms and Suites at The Ritz Hotel London would average £1,879,699 Million each. The Ritz Club Casino is obviously not included.
One has to factor-in the location of The Ritz Hotel London, situated at 150 Piccadilly a dirty and noisy road, The Ritz Hotel London is next door to an Underground Station, a Bus Stop and a Boris Johnson Bike Shed. You then have to consider the constant Stream of Beggars who ply their trade outside The Ritz Hotel London and the Homeless People sleeping under The Ritz Hotel London covered frontage? If that was not off-putting enough you then have to avoid the “Activist Groups” that frequent The Ritz Hotel London smashing windows in protest of the owners Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay’s Non-Payment of Corporation Tax in the last 17 years.
If your company secretary has booked you a room or lunch at The Ritz Hotel London, may I suggest for “Health and Safety Reasons” you wear a “Crash Helmet and Goggles” to protect your head and eyes from possible scattering glass.
My second point is this:
If Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay’s valuation had merit then it would equate to “Each Bedroom or Suite at The Ritz Hotel London being valued at an average of just under £3.94 Million” excluding The Ritz Club Casino, which is silly..
The Maybourne Group
Includes the following three compatible 5* Hotels have recently been valued at £1 Billion?
Claridge’s 5* The Connaught 5* The Berkeley 5*
203 Rooms & Suites 121 Rooms & Suites 214 Rooms & Suites
If I average the combined 538 rooms and suites of these three 5* Hotels at the current valuation, then each room would be worth just £1.85 Million?
Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay can’t have it both way’s.
The Ritz Hotel London is worth £250 Million excluding The Ritz Club, which then values The Maybourne Group at £1 Billion
The Ritz Hotel London is worth £525 Million excluding The Ritz Club, which then values The Maybourne Group at over £2 Billion?
I am sure that would put a smile on Paddy McKillen’s face?
The profitable Ritz Hotel London has paid NO “Corporation Tax” for seventeen years? Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay and Sir David Barclay use a series of “Tax Relief’s” to reduce the hotel’s corporation tax to “ZERO“. They are both ethically and morally bankrupt. Hence, the public outrage and the activist movements?
In 2007 around 300 people had to evacuate The Ritz Hotel London due to a fire in the Ritz Club casino kitchen. Thankfully the neighbouring hotel at the Mayfair Hotel on the same road (who pay their corporation tax) were able to accommodate these distressed residents from The Ritz Hotel.
Tea at the Ritz was originally “Tea at the Savoy“. However The Savoy obviously decided to concentrate on its core clientele; Royalty, Establishment and Multi-National Board Members rather than the low-budget tourist, the East London Cockney’s and the West London Dell Boy’s now found at The Ritz?
The Ritz Hotel London still has an outstanding bank loan of £149.6 Million.
Another financial headache for
The Barclay Brothers and their Bankers
Marme Inversiones which is controlled by Glenn Maud and Derek Quinlan declared voluntary insolvency in 2014. Earlier this company owned trophy assets like Banco Santander SA Madrid 1.9 Billion Euro headquarters and Citigroup’s London Canary Wharf Tower which cost 1.1 Billion Euros.
There are three Interesting points for concern to both The Barclay Brothers and their Bankers:
Derek Quinlan and Glenn Maud years earlier filed for a Euro 200 Million loan from RBS and they put-up Marme Inversiones own shares for collateral. In 2010 due to RBS own financial problems sold the debt to Robert Tchenguiz / Aabar Investments for just Euro 80 Million.
It seems Blackstone Group LP GSO unit and Centerbridge Capital Partners LP own a slice of the debts of Marme Inversiones. I assume Blackstone’s debt is now secured on assets owned by The Barclay Brothers who are having to constantly buy Derek Quinlan’s debts to enable them to control Quinlan’s stake in Coroin which ultimately controls three trophy hotels Clarige’s, The Connaught and The Berkeley hotels. If Quinlan’s creditors file for his bankruptcy, Paddy McKillen has first option on Derek Quinlan’s stake in Coroin?
The Barclay Brothers own the Telegraph Media Group which publishes The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Telegraph which published an article on the 11th March 2011 that said; “the Maxwell name remains mud with the power to damn by association, even where there are NO similarities? When the Serious Fraud Office arrested billionaires Vincent and Robert Tchenguiz, it was reported in The Torygraph that they shared an office in Park Lane, London with Kevin Maxwell once Great Britain’s biggest ever bankrupt?”
What goes around, comes around?
Now this could have serious implications for The Barclay Brothers? As The Telegraph vindictively smeared the names of Vincent and Robert Tchenguiz name in 2011 it would only be fair and reciprocal that Vincent and Robert Tchenguiz screw The Barclay Brothers?
I would assume that The Barclay Brothers could have at least £100 Million exposure on this transaction?
Glenn Maud worldwide assets once valued at around £4.5 Billion are now frozen and under administration by Grant Thornton. In 2012 The Guernsey Courts in the Channel Islands made an order that allows Glenn Maud a weekly living allowance of just £500 per week. Glenn Maud like his partner Derek Quinlan earlier then eloped to Switzerland where Glenn Maud is immune from the Guernsey expenses restrictions and probably confirms that Glenn Maud like Derek Quinlan had assets stashed over there? Coincidently, Sir David Barclay spends time in Gstaad for health reasons – so I would now expect Sir David Barclay picking-up a few cheap assets from a businessman in distress?
The Tax Haven Twins – December 2012
In 2012 the BBC Panorama programme – (The Tax Haven Twins) “The very profitable – Cash Cow” The Ritz Hotel London ultimately owned by Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay that has paid “NO Corporate Tax for 17 years“.
In March 2011 The Ritz Hotel in London which is owned by the reclusive and secretive tax exiled Sir David Barclay and Ex-bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay came under attack by demonstrators who threw smoke bombs and paint at the hotel and smashed many of its windows. Ed Miliband, leader of the Labour Party told demonstrators at yesterday’s anti-government cuts rally that “he was proud to stand with them“. It was estimated that 500,00 protesters attended the TUC rally. 30+ Police Offices were later injured when a number of splinter groups then broke away with their own agenda to protest against “The Rich and large Corporations” who deliberately evade paying there fair share of tax.
The Ritz Hotel London
“In 2011 Guests had to be evacuated as Windows Smashed“
“Who would want a room at The Ritz Hotel in London?“
Homeless Person living outside the
The Ritz Hotel London
Boris Johnson’s Bike Shed – Bus Stop – Underground Station
Next door to The Ritz Hotel London
Who would want to stay in a hotel like this?
Copy and Paste and Play This Clip
Chair of the Public Accounts Committee
However, during 2013, “Margaret Hodge“, chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee added petrol to the fire exposing large corporations who were making billions of Pounds and avoiding paying their fair share of tax by calling it “Immoral“. They are “Morally Bankrupt“. This sparked outrage with the general public who have to pay their taxes “PAYE at Source” Even the Chancellor of the Exchequer had to publicly speak out with words like “Morally Repugnant“.
2013 The Prime Minister David Cameron said, I am determined to put an end to the “secretive companies” in “secretive locations” (Tax Havens like Jersey, British Virgin Islands and Bermuda) that amounts to Billions in lost Tax Revenue to the UK Treasury. Oh dear, Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay wont be happy with that?
Perhaps the final blow was when The Prime Minister David Cameron said “he would not associate himself with anyone who carried out aggressive tax avoidance“?
This is very bad news. Would The Daily Torygraph continue to support the Conservative Party at the 2015 General Election? And would Sir David Barclay and Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay invite The Prime Minister David Cameron back for a second visit via their helicopter accompanied by Aidan Barclay to their hideous mock gothic castle on their tiny rock with a helipad on wind swept “tax friendly” Brecqhou in the Channel Islands before the 2015 General Election? Let’s hope The Prime Minister David Cameron was only joking!
When The Prime Minister David Cameron made this statement in April 2013 The Daily Torygraph shortly afterwards disclosed that a Conservative Cabinet Minister Jeremy Hunt M.P. had reduced his tax bill by over £100,000 by receiving dividends from “Hotcourses” in the form of property, which was promptly leased back to the company. The dividend in Specie was paid just before a 10% rise in dividend tax and Jeremy Hunt was not required to pay “Stamp Duty” on the property. Was this a cynical warning shot by The Daily Torygraph and The Sunday Torygraph at The Prime Minister David Cameron “to leave the door open slightly for a select wealthy few?“
It should be pointed out that I have not read anything like this in the Sark Newsletter?
Ex-Bankrupt Sir Frederick Barclay said “Sir David and I left the UK over 23 years ago for health reasons and NOT FOR TAX REASONS, indeed, we continued to pay personal tax in the UK for 18 of those 23 years?. Our charitable donations far outweigh what we would have paid in tax if we had remained residents of the UK. (Boy, would I like to challenge them on that under oath?)
Mr Jermyn Brooks was global managing partner of one of the largest four accountancy firm’s PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLC between 1998 – 2000. Mr Jermyn Brooks is now a director of Transparency International based in Berlin. A non-governmental organisation that monitors “Corruption and Promotes Accountability“. Brooks said; “Even if a company is privately owned, if it’s large, it has in good practice – if not in law – obligations to be transparent“.
The Barclay Brothers Bankruptcy
Frederick Hugh Barclay
Douglas Victor Barclay
1960 – 4th November Frederick Hugh Barclay of 47 Lansdowne Road, London W11 formally in partnership with others as a Furnished Accommodation Bureau under the style of Peter Howard Agency and traded from 171 Holland Road, London W14. Frederick Hugh Barclay was also in partnership with his brother Douglas Victor Barclay as Tobacconists and Confectioners trading as Candy Corner from 64 Richmond Way, London W14. They were also both formally carrying on business in partnership with another as Builders and Decorators under the style of Barclay Brothers and trading from 39 Addison Gardens, London W14 described in the receiving order as Candy Corner (a firm). Appointment of Trustees were appointed by the High Court of Justice – Crosskey, Harold Edward of 24 Eastcheap, London EC2. Date of Filing Petition 31st May 1960.
Frederick Hugh Barclay
Douglas Victor Barclay
1965 9th March – Frederick Hugh Barclay of 47 Lansdowne Road, London W11 formally in partnership with others as a Furnished Accommodation Bureau and his brother Douglas Victor Barclay of 171 Holland Road, London W14 both carrying on business in partnership as Tobacconists and Confectioners trading as Candy Corner from 64 Richmond Way, London W14 and both formally carrying on business in partnership with another as Builders and Decorators under the style of Barclay Brothers and trading from 39 Addison Gardens, London W14 described in the receiving order as Candy Corner (a firm) of 64 Richmond Way, London W14 (Joint Estate) High Court of Justice of 1960. Last Day for Receiving Proofs – 26th March 1965. Name of Trustee and Address: Crosskey, Harold Edward of 24 Eastcheap, London EC2.
Frederick Hugh Barclay
Douglas Victor Barclay
1965 – 9th March Separate Estate of. Court – High Court of Justice of 1960. Last Day for Receiving Proofs – 26th March 1965. . Name of Trustee and Address: Crosskey, Harold Edward of 24 Eastcheap, London EC2.
Frederick Hugh Barclay
Douglas Victor Barclay
1965 13th April Frederick Hugh Barclay of 47 Lansdowne Road, London W11 formally in partnership with others as a Furnished Accommodation Bureau and his brother Douglas Victor Barclay of 171 Holland Road, London W14 and formally of 136 Addison Gardens, London W14, both carrying on business in partnership as Tobacconists and Confectioners trading as Candy Corner from 64 Richmond Way, London W14 and both formally carrying on business in partnership with another as Builders and Decorators under the style of Barclay Brothers and trading from 39 Addison Gardens, London W14 described in the receiving order as Candy Corner (a firm) of 64 Richmond Way, London W14 (Separate Estate of Frederick Hugh Barclay) High Court of Justice of 1960. Amount per £ – 18s. 9d. First or Final or otherwise – First and Final. When Payable – 27th April, 1965. Where Payable: 24 Eastcheap, London EC2.
Frederick Hugh Barclay
Douglas Victor Barclay
Application For Discharge:
1966 1st March Frederick Hugh Barclay of 47 Lansdowne Road, London W11 formally in partnership with others as a Furnished Accommodation Bureau and his brother Douglas Victor Barclay of 171 Holland Road, London W14 and formally of 136 Addison Gardens, London W14, both carrying on business in partnership as Tobacconists and Confectioners trading as Candy Corner from 64 Richmond Way, London W14 and both formally carrying on business in partnership with another as Builders and Decorators under the style of Barclay Brothers and trading from 39 Addison Gardens, London W14 described in the receiving order as Candy Corner (a firm) of 64 Richmond Way, London W14 High Court of Justice of 1960. Date Fixed for Hearing – 21st April 1966 at 11am Place – Victory House, Kingsway, London WC2.
Frederick Hugh Barclay
Douglas Victor Barclay
Orders Made on Application for Discharge
1966 7th June Frederick Hugh Barclay of 47 Lansdowne Road, London W11 formally in partnership with others as a Furnished Accommodation Bureau and his brother Douglas Victor Barclay of 171 Holland Road, London W14 and formally of 136 Addison Gardens, London W14, both carrying on business in partnership as Tobacconists and Confectioners trading as Candy Corner from 64 Richmond Way, London W14 and both formally carrying on business in partnership with another as Builders and Decorators under the style of Barclay Brothers and trading from 39 Addison Gardens, London W14 described in the receiving order as Candy Corner (a firm) of 64 Richmond Way, London W14 High Court of Justice of 1960. Date of Order 21st April 1966. Nature of Order made – Bankrupts discharge suspended for 3 months and that they be discharged as from 21st July 1966, and whereas it has been proved that the Bankrupt Frederick Hugh Barclay has been guilty of misconduct in relation to his property and affairs. Grounds named in Order for refusing an absolute Order of Discharge – Proofs of Facts mentioned in section 26 sub-section 3 (A, B, C, and E), Bankruptcy Act 1914, as amended by section 1 of the Bankruptcy (Amendment) Act, 1926.
Frederick Hugh Barclay
Douglas Victor Barclay
1967 12th December Frederick Hugh Barclay of 47 Lansdowne Road, London W11 formally in partnership with others as a Furnished Accommodation Bureau and his brother Douglas Victor Barclay of 171 Holland Road, London W14 and formally of 136 Addison Gardens, London W14, both carrying on business in partnership as Tobacconists and Confectioners trading as Candy Corner from 64 Richmond Way, London W14 and both formally carrying on business in partnership with another as Builders and Decorators under the style of Barclay Brothers and trading from 39 Addison Gardens, London W14. High Court of Justice of 1960. Trustee’s Name and Address and Description – Crosskey, Harold Edward of 24 Eastcheap, London EC2, Accountant. Date of Release – 30th November 1967.
Information on the author:
Lord de Chanson
The Ritz Hotel London No Tax
The Barclay Brothers Casino Interests
The Barclay Brothers Family Tree
Online Catalogue Shopping Blog
If you hold any information on The Barclay Brothers contentious tax issues, be it on or offshore, please leave a message in the ” leave a comment” below: