revised in part on 15 and 16 December 2020 by Mark Smith
Below are the personal opinions (unless stated otherwise) of Mark Smith.
Dural’s director is Ralph Ignatius Paligaru. Ralph purports to have connections to people in extremely high public offices in Fiji – Cabinet Ministers some having, he claims, attended a Marist College as a Schoolboy in Fiji where he has said that he formed relationships with persons later coming to occupy, as I mentioned, high public offices in Fiji. It is believed that some of these connections include to persons within the Reserve Bank of Fiji, Fiji Hardwood Corporation and a number of Government Departments and elsewhere. It is believed some of the below may be of public interest to those trading with persons and dealing with government officials, in some instances, in Fiji as well as interest to foreign persons providing aid or other support to Fiji or otherwise. It may also be of interest to Australians & Chinese – Australia contributes a substantial sum of aid to Fiji (China is also reported to provide aid to Fiji), so naturally have an interest in the good governance of the Country of Fiji – one of Australia’s regional neighbours together with an interest in efficient and proper utilisation of the Aid provided by our nation to Fiji. Regrettably, Fiji, it is reported, has corruption problems as do other countries within the region. The below may also be in the public interest of persons from or interested in India. The public interest of Australia may also be involved – Ralph and his employer (discussed throughout this blog, a man named Mohan Kumar) lobbied and received Visa’s and had other legitimate dealings with officials and public office holders in Australia. The solvency of corporations in Australia, their proper or improper registration of companies or otherwise, to provision of finance guaranteed by “mums and dads”, the rates of interest charged (in this case compounding at 6% PER MONTH IN DEFAULT, e.g. >72% per annum) and other factors are also believed to be of public interest.
But this still does not explain why Ralph and Amreeta mortgaged their house and provided $540,000 to Craig or for the benefit of Craig? The precise benefit (if any) that Ralph and Amreeta thought they would receive is unknown? The writer supposes that the email from Ralph to myself dated 8 June 2017 may provide clues where it states the following:
In around April 2020, Ralph sold 88 Perfection Ave, Stanhope Gardens to satisfy some of the mortgages or charges however a 3rd charge to my company was not discharged and the caveat protecting that charge was withdrawn.
In or about February 2020, Pacific8 (the holder of an AFSL) loaned money under a 1st mortgage to Ralph and Amreeta. Pacific8 (is the holder of an AFSL). Pacific8 also loaned money to Craig’s company Bargo through a series of controlled companies, e.g. N&M and Kesinda. These loans to both Craig and Ralph are most likely just a coincidence, the writer does not suggest any wrongdoing by Adam Tilley’sPacific8 (the holder of an AFSL)?
DC Partners (Solutions) Pty Ltd working with a financier client recently had collections dealing with an estate agent where the agent alleged it could not pay ‘factored monies’ because of Covid-19.
In December 2019, the agent factored its rent-roll management cheque for March 2020, expecting to receive around $52,000.
Factoring is the business of purchasing accounts receivables.
In this instance, the estate agent ‘sold’ its March 2020 receivable in exchange for an upfront sum paid in December 2019.
At the end of March 2020, the agent then said it was unable to repay the factor the money (or any of it, despite banking it for themselves at the end of March) “because of Covid-19“.
Factoring ‘discounts’ the purchase price of the receivable. The price paid upfront in December 2019, was based upon the time value of money with the expectations that the funds would be banked in March 2020. Obviously, the funds do not have the same value if the funds are not banked until June or later.
The agent is a well known agent from WA.
If a crime was committed, it was a crime of fraudulent appropriation. Alternatively, as was pointed out to the agent in collections discussions, the agent runs the very real risk that the estate agent continues to trade whilst insolvent, exposing the directors to personal liability. In those instances the agent’s personal assets are exposed to creditors.
If your business is in a similar position, being unable to meet obligations to creditors, there are some important steps that you and your company need to take to protect your personal AND business assets. These can be discussed on 1300-327123 if you find yourself if this position (call anytime till late 5 days).
Sydney’s Daily Telegraph reported: Click here that Hakan began inventing sales in late 2017 however the slippery slope caught up with him when arrested in late 2019 after he could no longer shuffle the deck chairs and lenders and others began to investigate.
Unfortunately the maximum penalty of imprisonment is just 2 years and Hakan’s guilty plea will no doubt result in a discount, however we think it is a safe bet that Hakan’s (who is also bankrupt) will not be administering a trust account any time soon.
Sentencing of Hakan Kutup is expected sometime around June 2020.
For more information – chat with us live using our instant chat tools (bottom corners), book an appointment or call now on 1300-327123 (till late).
To contact us with any tip-offs, files or information – please use the instant chat tools or form below:
A liquidator is a person appointed, in the winding up of a corporation, to assume control of the company’s affairs and to discharge its liabilities in preparation for its dissolution. The appointment of a liquidator may be done voluntarily (by the proprietors) or via the courts (usually upon the application of a creditor – very often the ATO using a creditors statutory demand).
The process of the liquidator conducting the affairs of the company and realising its assets is called liquidation.
The liquidator’s role is to ascertain the liabilities (and assets) of the company, convert its assets into money, terminate its contracts, dispose of its business, distribute the net assets to creditors and any surplus (which is rare) to the shareholders and/or proprietors.
The liquidator will extinguish the company, lawfully, as a corporation on the records of ASIC by formal dissolution.
In determining the assets of a company, it is the liquidator’s duty to determine whether particular assets under the company’s control are owned by the company or others – i.e. stock may be purchased subject to a retention of title, vehicles may be on a corporate hire purchase and secured via a PPSR.
BAP can assist company directors to structure their assets and affairs, if not insolvent, in such a fashion to provide lawful asset protection. To discuss how we can help to structure your company’s affairs and assets to provide maximum asset protection, please click here to book an appointment, call 1300-327123 (1300-DCP123), or complete the below form.
Insolvency in general terms, as it relates to a corporation, is the inability to pay debts as and when they become payable.
A company is also insolvent if it is experiencing an ‘endemic shortage of working capital’ as opposed to a temporary lack of liquidity.
Determining the difference at a point in time during the corporation’s life is a question for a court to determine .
Indicators of insolvency include:
no access to alternative finance,
the inability to raise further equity,
special arrangements with selected creditors,
solicitors’ letters or judgments issued against the company,
failure to keep books and records, etc.
The list is indicative and not exhaustive.
Companies experiencing any or all the above indicators should book a free consultation by clicking here then where we’ll provide you with company specific advice re insolvency in your instance. Alternatively call us on 1300-327123 (till late) or complete the form below.