Psychic News, SNU Spiritualist National Union and Liquidator

Susan Farrow wrote:

zerdini wrote:

Its no wonder they did their utmost to ensure the dissmissed staff could not vote as a Creditor.

There have been quite a few references saying that the PN staff would not be allowed to attend the creditors' meeting yet I see that Sue Farrow and Paul Brett (PN staff) were at the meeting.

To clarify the situation re the creditors' meeting:

Paul and I were not permitted to attend the meeting as creditors in our own right. He attended as a proxy for the International Spiritualist Federation; I attended as a proxy for one of the directors of Psychic Press (1995) Ltd, Cissie Shaw, who was owed a debt by the company.

Susan Farrow

Thanks for the clarification, Sue - much appreciated.

In view of these events it's interesting to revisit the SNU's history of Psychic Press at

http://www.snu.org.uk/news/pn_statement.htm

which contains not a little irony in such comments as:

Members of the NEC expressed concerns about what would happen to the existing staff at Psychic Press

So one wonders where that concern back in 1995 had gone when 2010 rolled around...

Union’s accountants...reported that at the present time Psychic Press was completely insolvent and the only item of any value was the title, Psychic News

So back then they knew the risks they were taking and perhaps with an eye to the probable future, saw that owning the masthead would help safegaurd their risky venture...

I find the section called "Growing Pains" to be very relevant as it seems to indicate that the SNU had no real understanding of what they were taking on, and had lost a lot of money in the process: A bit of due diligence back then would have saved a lot of pain and anguish today.

I think I mau be confused Ann,

So lets get this right the STF sold the SNU the assets so they would be able to clarify what was transferred into Psychic Press (1995)

The JV Trust was the major benefactor of the SNU who were also treated so badly by the SNU when it offered to buy the Company Psychic Press (1995), thereby safeguarding the interest of staff, creditors and the Spiritualist Community.

Jim, I believe Roy Stenman would be well placed to clarify what happened in 1995 as he made the initial approach to the SNU to see if they were interested in taking over Psychic News.

The SNU's version is contained in the link in my previous post

I believe you are entirely correct about that Wes, I notice the latest edition is out
SNU drops Psychic News liquidation

https://web.archive.org/web/20110710032603/http://paranormalreview.com/articles/20100916

Enough is enough. Does anybody here know how to call for a vote of no confidence in the president and the NEC of the SNU?

As I am not a member of the SNU I am not sure how you might go about calling for a vote of no confidence in the president and the NEC of the SNU other than as a motion put before an Annual General Meeting, though surely there is a way and perhaps someone on the list who is an SNU member will provide advice on this area.

I do note though on the official SNU website that its Byelaws make reference to the lodging of complaints and perhaps this may also be an avenue worth exploring.

Information regarding the process for making a complaint can be found on this link: http://www.snu.org.uk/snu/lawsf.htm

Lis

Does anyone know for certain what the implications of this latest decision are likely to be?
What is the position of the creditors and more importantly the staff? I read a post saying that staff had to apply to the government for their redundancy pay if the company liquidated. If creditors can't claim their debts from the liquidator, can they claim them from Psychic Press if it is still trading? The whole situation seems very unclear and dodgy.

Agreed Veritas the whole situation is unclear and very dodgy.

If their intention is to avoid liquidation and just try to make people go away it is an appalling act.

If, on top of that, it does more harm to the staff then it is a disgraceful and immoral avt made more despicable because they would well know that would be the effect of not liquidating.

I am sure we will discover the facts about the staff soon and if the scenario is that the staff cannot get Government assistance then we all have a moral duty to turn up the heat in the NEC kitchen until they truly can stand it no longer.

Is it not usual that a major creditor forces a company into compulsory liquidation and in practice this is often the taxman? If they have paid all the major creditors then perhaps the hope is the minor creditors, subscribers and advertisers, will not bother.

Of course the decision to abandon liquidation could be a cynical ploy to avoid having to let the archives and masthead go. No compulsory liquidation-no forced sale of controversial assets. Any minor creditors that threaten compulsory liquidation by legal action could be paid off on a piecemeal basis to avoid having to let go the assets they are intending to strip.

The way the whole affair has been handled leads me to the conclusion anything underhand is possible. The Psychic News website is still down. If this is reinstated they could set out their position but I am not holding my breath.

Thanks Peter a good summary of the situation. I still think much hinges upon whether we can get a compulsory winding up into play.

The trouble is we need to gather enough together to make it too hard for the SNU to pay them off one by one.

I note that some debts are very small, however they all add up. Paranormal Review notes the liquidator was surprised people followed up a 6 pound debt. Well all of those people are registering because it gves them a say in liquidation and a chance to voice their opinion of this appalling behaviour.

This is a moral and ethical issue which needs following through. In an earlier post I have noted how each debt grows because you can add on the legal costs of collection.

However small do not walk away, let us know how much is owed and allow us to collate a unified approach to bring on the liquidation.

You may have hit the nail on the head Peter! I believe that other major creditors, like the printing company may have been paid leaving only the SNu as the major creditor along with many small creditors none of whom on their own is likely to take action.

It is for that reason Admin has queried whether a number of small creditors might gather together and submit a statement of demand. I, like you suspect that if this was done, the SNu would pay them off but continue to ignore the other creditors who largely feel powerless against the organisation.

When you say - the decision to abandon liquidation could be a cynical ploy to avoid having to let the archives and masthead go - I fear you are very close to the truth of the matter.

Given how the SNU has handled the situation up to the present time, I too, fear that those responsible might resort to whatever tactics suit their purpose - not letting morality, ethical considerations or spiritual values to get in their way. To say that I am shocked and appalled is a massive understatement!

Does the SNU still boast the word 'Truth' in their now-tattered logo?
Presumably the word 'Honesty' could also be squeezed in.

Neither Truth or Honesty form a part of the activities of those in the SNU responsible for the demise of PN and the appalling treatment of employees, creditors and subscribers.

If Mr. Bruton, Gascoyne, Bradley and Hadley were interested in Truth and Honesty now is the time to come on here and say why they have done what they have - not a sanitized version of it - the actual truth - the good intentions, the less honourable self-serving intentions, the bad decisions, the excuses and justifications.

Would they? I wish they would. While many who watch do not post - the many who do watch wait to see whether the SNU will ever be willing to communicate the truth and the real reasons for their actions in an honest, open and spiritual manner.

In the final analysis, people will be more likely to tolerate the truth and find compassion in their hearts for those who have acted badly, even if in telling the truth, this exposes the shortcomings of those responsible, than they are ever able to forgive and excuse, those who will not own what they have done and will not enter into any dialogue with those who have been most adversely affected by their actions.

Roy Stemman has written an excellent article on his website:

Questions The SNU Must Answer

https://web.archive.org/web/20110711150503/http://paranormalreview.com/articles/20100919

zerdini wrote:Roy Stemman has written an excellent article on his website:

Questions The SNU Must Answer

https://web.archive.org/web/20110711150503/http://paranormalreview.com/articles/20100919

Thank you Zerdini. It is certainly excellent. Anyone taking bets on whether the SNU will reply?

Yes this is a brilliant article which is well worth reading

I particulary like the points he makes in this part.

One has to question the morals of an organisation that closes a publication and makes its employees redundant but claims, on a technicality, that the assets referred to – which were given to it in 1995 and have been the backbone of the newspaper ever since – are not part of the equation.

There are surely only two explanations:

1.The SNU's current officers are a bunch of buffoons (or unquestioning sheep) devoid of business acumen who are incapable of making a sensible decision about the fate of Spritualism's only independent weekly newspaper, Psychic News, with its 78-year record of uninterrupted publication.
2.The SNU's current officers (at least, those who have control) have a cunning plan to kill off Psychic News, whose independent voice was not to everyone's liking – that much it has now achieved – and then to use its valuable collection of photographs and cuttings, stretching back nearly eight decades, for their own purpose.

Now, why would the second explanation be an option? Perhaps to create a new publication (heaven forbid, given the SNU's failure to keep previous publications alive!)? Perhaps even to call it Psychic News (surely, they wouldn't dare!)? If not, then why would they want to keep those valuable assets?

Of Course Roy also comments about the employees plight in this

Of Course Roy also comments about the employees plight in this which highlights the disgaceful behaviour of the NEC in this matter and their lack of any feelings for the people they employ

First, let me deal with the huge impact of the on/off employment status on those who have worked loyally for Psychic News over the years.

They, naturally, had sought legal advice, having been told by the union there was not enough money left in the business for it to make redundancy payments. They were advised that, on liquidation, they would be able to apply to the government for redundancy.

But when they received the surprise news that the liquidation process had been abandoned, two staff members telephoned the government's Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) to check if this changed their situation. They were informed that since the proposed liquidation is no longer happening, there will now be no automatic access for them to the government's redundancy payment scheme.

Instead, staff must make efforts to claim the money from Psychic Press (1995) Ltd, their former employer. If the company ultimately refuses to pay up, then there is a possibility of claiming the money they are owed from the government. However, that could be a long process. In the meantime, staff who have already been without pay for a month could face several more before anything is settled.

I am told that everyone is very stressed and unsettled by this latest shifting of the goalposts, at a time when they have already had enough stress to last one lifetime.

Over the weekend I have been pondering things and gaining information.

I thought it was time to look at a few hypothetical scenarios about what happens next and then in the future.

These are pure hypothetical’s unless I can persuade Spirit to apport me the contents of the NEC's computers, however on the whole this is a mind numbing thought given all the other informaton I would get.

Let us look at what has happened so far, it is clear that nothing has fallen out as they wanted. Regardless of their new claim, to have owned the masthead and archive from the start of Psychic Press (1995), it seems obvious they had no certainty about that when this process started.

They believed that, working with this liquidator, they could liquidate quietly and just pay the set fee for the service provided to buy all of the assets. Overall costs say about 4000 pounds, clearly there was no intention to pay anything to the other creditors and the staff were not going to receive their full entitlements and would have to seek a minimum payout from the Government.

Quick and dirty and intended to occur on June 13th but it may now appear that the sudden public knowledge of their intentions caused a hold up. In honesty the delay has become a disaster for their plans. Yes they would have faced howls of protest for a fait accompli, especially occurring in the last days of Gascoyne’s Presidency and before the annual conference. However, with the shock and timings they may well have pulled it off before anyone could have reacted. There can be no doubt this is what was meant to happen. In the end though events have played out differently. 4 months elapsed before the Creditors meeting, during this time the company traded insolvently and committed what are essentially fraudulent acts by receiving monies for services they knew they could not provide. They also turned down an offer for the whole company that would have seen everyone paid out in full, saying they would never part with the masthead and archives.

The protests have been extensive with the significant facts laid out to the liquidators, to the Companies Investigations Bureau (to the knowledge of the liquidator, who then informed the SNU), written on here and in Paranormal Review. I believe that entirely changed the scenario that the NEC was facing with their chosen liquidator.

The liquidator could not fail to follow up to see that all the assets were still recorded in the Company; investigating especially the Masthead and Archives as the one asset of value. Additionally he would now be forced to place them all on offer to the highest bidder. Then I have no doubt he would, given the unexpected five months delay from his advice to the working party up until the Creditors Meeting, be forced to evaluate the Directors Insolvent Trading. I am sure he highlighted all of these risks to them especially in a creditor’s liquidation of an insolvent Company. I believe that the NEC and at least two directors of PP (Bruton and Bradley) are aware of the serious risks they face if liquidation takes place now.

Yet they have done the one thing that perpetuates insolvent trading in their decision, apparently to restart trading whilst insolvent.

In doing this they have made life even more intolerable for their staff who now cannot access Government funds, a disgraceful kick in the teeth for loyal employees. Given the way the NEC have acted to date why should any of us be surprised that they can find more acts of such an appalling nature.

However, they must know that the situation cannot go on. Creditors can raise statements of demand to formalise liquidation. Those creditors now include the Employees for their full entitlements including redundancy. This would then trigger a court appointed liquidation with a liquidator appointed by the court, with the employees controlling the agenda and appointment of a committee of inspection.

In terms of the employess when reviewing the events surrounding all of this affair and the relative incompetence we see in the administration of the Company’s affairs I feel there may be more issues. I would feel the claims may increase because there could even be an element of wrongful dismissal involved. This is especially now the company is not being liquidated and this can no longer be the reason for severing their employment. I do hope employees have checked all the notices that they received to see that everything was in order and the effect current events may have on the amount they could claim which may have increased.

So given these possibilities what are the hypothetical choices.

• - They can act like ostriches sticking their heads in the sand and hope we all go away, it’s a dubious image, the NEC standing around heads down bum up. However, I doubt they would do that because they are aware they would not be left alone.

• - They can wait until the Creditors call in a liquidator and then attempt to deal with matters as best they can. However, this would be in a more openly hostile situation than when it was one they were appointing. Additionally, given the direct involvement of the NEC in running the Company I am sure any liquidator would seek to draw the SNU into the matter because of the money within it. This would be in addition to any action he chose to take on the directors trading the company in an insolvent manner.

• - They could try and persuade the JV Trust to bail them out by buying the entire assets, masthead and archives included. This is still a sensible act as it minimises any cost or future harm to the organisation the NEC govern, the SNU. However, they seem adamant that they want to keep the masthead and archives so this seems highly unlikely.

• - We get to the last real option. They turn it into a solvent liquidation paying out all creditors and the staff. I believe that, at this stage, if they want the masthead and archives that badly this is the sole solution. Any other method opens up significant risks to them. I believe the staff should pre-empt this as soon as possible by issuing statements of demand for the full amounts due. This crystallises what they are owed and has to be paid in full or disputed to stop the liquidation.

OK my punt is they pay people out and make it a solvent Liquidation when they can pocket all the assets with no further questions asked. However, what a huge cost, they will have paid out the liquidator’s fee and then the total debts could become very high with employee entitlements’. A cheap way to buy the assets at knock down prices may cost the SNU up to 100,000 pounds especially when you add in their own debts due from PP which will now be written off.

If it happens it will be the most astonishing cave in and back down. How will they justify these events to their members? Additionally they have argued it is a breach of their duties as a charity to prop up a commercial business so where will the funds come from?

I can imagine that they will have to try and present what they are doing in a positive light. Maybe to look after those who have been hurt by the collapse of PP. Or a realisation that the SNU could not be seen to be behind such an action. Spin Doctors working overtime but no PR machine could put a gloss on the appalling acts they have committed.

All for what one has to ask? Well clearly they must want to relaunch it as an in house publication. Bruton has said this many times, however I doubt anyone knew the full cost of that decision in money, in lost reputations and in harm to their employees.

This begs many questions; one would imagine some editor from outside who could give a thin veneer of independence. I could only think they may try for one from a similar publication like Two Worlds or Psychic World. I doubt Tony Ortzen would swap back again and unless Psychic World was trading poorly could not see Candy Taylor giving up full independence. However, stranger things have happened.

Who would form the subcommittee to run it from within the SNU (or from within the AFC?). I would punt that the VP Spiritual Judith Seaman would want some involvement in this and could guess that in his role at the AFC Gascoyne would also want in.

Oh well I will put my crystal Ball away now, except for one last scry.

The SNU has never been successful in running an in house newspaper. What is likely to make the difference now, I am sure it will become the focus of political infighting which is bound to hinder it. Additionally it is unlikely to appeal to Independent Spiritualists both because of the horrendous way it was brought into existence and because it will be run from within the heart of the SNU.

The members could be looking at an initial 100,000 write off with further inherent losses until it is finally buried within two years of starting. What an awful financial cost and terrible personal cost to the loyal staff of Psychic Press for such a dreadful result. Maybe it will become known as Bruton’s folly.

However, that could be a long process. In the meantime, staff who have already been without pay for a month could face several more before anything is settled.

As a practical gesture may I suggest that the Spiritual Truth Foundation makes a hardship payment to the PN staff which wouldn't affect future possible redundancy payments. After all, one of their objects is the relief of poverty. The have plenty of money at their disposal - probably in the region of two hundred thousand pounds.

Additionally, the JV Trust who have millions available could help the former PN employees with a substantial grant.

This would be more helpful than shedding crocodile tears and wringing their hands.

Leslie Price's report on the creditor's meeting as reported in Paranormal Review stated among other things:

"Graham Hewitt, spokesman for the SNU shareholders, said that the title, archives, etc, of PN had passed to the SNU in 1995, as confirmed by a 1995 STF letter to them. We shall doubtless hear more on this point."

Can Roy Stemman, who was involved at the time, shed more light on this statement?

zerdini wrote:

However, that could be a long process. In the meantime, staff who have already been without pay for a month could face several more before anything is settled.

As a practical gesture may I suggest that the Spiritual Truth Foundation makes a hardship payment to the PN staff which wouldn't affect future possible redundancy payments. After all, one of their objects is the relief of poverty. The have plenty of money at their disposal - probably in the region of two hundred thousand pounds.

Additionally, the JV Trust who have millions available could help the former PN employees with a substantial grant.

This would be more helpful than shedding crocodile tears and wringing their hands.

Yes Zerdini,
I absolutely agree.
I know at least two of the staff of PN are having difficulties in meeting bills and are in need of help. As we know any legal routes to getting a fair settlement, from what must be now unfair dismissal, are long winded, if help, in any form can be given from these charitable Trusts they are well deserving of assistance to keep them going in their fight for justice.

I also absolutely agree with the suggestion by Zerdini.

I think, however, that unless someone approaches these two charitable Trusts to make them formally aware of the problems facing the staff of PN they will not be in a position to intervene.

Perhaps, as you, Zerdini, have raised the idea, you might be the one to approach the Trusts with a request for help. That would certainly be better than expecting the staff to do so on their own behalf.

Ann Harrison wrote:

Yes Zerdini,
I absolutely agree.
I know at least two of the staff of PN are having difficulties in meeting bills and are in need of help. As we know any legal routes to getting a fair settlement, from what must be now unfair dismissal, are long winded, if help, in any form can be given from these charitable Trusts they are well deserving of assistance to keep them going in their fight for justice.

As you are aware of PN staff who need help meeting bills perhaps you would approach the JV Trust for assistance on their behalf.

As you and Tom were on the JV Trust week recently at Stansted Hall, together with the three trustees of the JV Trust, you would be in a position to request help for the PN staff.