Petition to wind up Accolade (Shels)

**Dodge** · 23/03/2006, 2:05 PM

Originally Posted by Schumi

But Accolade holds a work permit for a Shels player. Is that possible without paying the wages?

Its not possible for anyone else to pay wages except the company who hold the work permit

**TonyD** · 23/03/2006, 9:05 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Shelbourne FC is purely a business name - it doesn't have trade or have any activity, etc. It isn't even a legal entity. Accolade Ltd does all its trading. That's why Shels' headed paper includes the name Accolade Limited.

From my knowledge, a company can be registered under one name with the companies office and also have a trading name. It doesn't mean they are two seperate companies.

**Billy Lord** · 23/03/2006, 10:46 PM

Branvard trade as Shamrock Rovers so the licence was given to the one entity. Presumably, Accolade similarly trade as Shelbourne.

**thomas** · 24/03/2006, 8:43 AM

Originally Posted by Macy

And as I keep saying, the only reason that is the case because the FAI insist on clubs having a limited company. If it wasn't for that FAI rule, there only would be the club. I can see your point to a certain extent, but it would be wrong to make out that there is anything underhand about us, or necessarily shels, in doing things this way.

Have you evidence to back up this claim about the licence anyway? And was Rovers licence issued to Shamrock Rovers FC or Branvard Ltd last season? As that'd could be the test of your theory in this regard.

You're missing the point.

In every other clubs case they ARE either a co-op or company of some form. Ie Branvard Limited T/A SRFC = Rovers. This applies to all clubs Except Longford and Shels where the related companies only hold the clubs assets. The football club part of it remains separate and unincorporated (ie not an actual company or co-op).

**Raheny Red** · 24/03/2006, 2:56 PM

http://www.shelbournefc.ie/news.php?id=293

Should be interesting............hopefully!

**Poor Student** · 24/03/2006, 4:09 PM

I thought he was notoriously paranoid about the internet!

**Dodge** · 24/03/2006, 4:15 PM

Nah, thats Dolan...

I'm sure he;ll answer all questions honestly and there will be no censorship

**A face** · 24/03/2006, 4:30 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Nah, thats Dolan...

I'm sure he'll answer all questions honestly and there will be no censorship

Yeah Dolan is a huge advocate of honest question answering and no censorship ... fair play to the fella !!

77425

**Dodge** · 24/03/2006, 4:34 PM

Mixing up my two points there aface, but whatever, never let it be said that I got in the way of a good Dolan jibe

**BohDiddley** · 24/03/2006, 4:39 PM

Originally Posted by thomas

You're missing the point.

In every other clubs case they ARE either a co-op or company of some form. Ie Branvard Limited T/A SRFC = Rovers. This applies to all clubs Except Longford and Shels where the related companies only hold the clubs assets. The football club part of it remains separate and unincorporated (ie not an actual company or co-op).

Does that make directors of the (not limited) club liable for its debts?

**pineapple stu** · 26/03/2006, 2:20 PM

Originally Posted by TonyD

From my knowledge, a company can be registered under one name with the companies office and also have a trading name. It doesn't mean they are two separate companies.

That's what I'm saying though...?

Originally Posted by thomas

...Longford and Shels where the related companies only hold the club's assets.

Longford Town Limited is dormant - two quid share capital and two quid debtors. It doesn't hold the ground or any assets. The company trades as a partnership, as far as I remember (you can download the relevant form RBN1A from the CR website).

Accolade Ltd does far more than hold Shels' assets. Otherwise -

(a) It wouldn't have PAYE issues
(b) It wouldn't have qualified accounts on issues relating to debtors and creditors control (see the Audit Report)
(c) It wouldn't engage a qualified accountant and various volunteers to write up their books (see Audit Report)
(d) Shels' headed paper wouldn't carry Accolade's name
(e) It wouldn't be issuing P60s

**DmanDmythDledge** · 02/04/2006, 6:30 PM

From the Sunday Times:

Originally Posted by Sunday Times

D-Day paycut to save Shelbourne
Shelbourne owner Ollie Byrne said yesterday that he will present the Revenue Commissioners with a payment of €300,000 at the High Court tomorrow to prevent the club been closed down. 'I have a draft for the entire sum that I will be collecting out of my bank at half-nine or a quater to 10, even though the bank doesn't open till 10,' Byrne told the column. 'I will be heading towards the court with the draft where I will meet our solicitors. The draft will be handed over to an official from the Revenue Commissioners.'

Last month, the Commissioners applied to the court to wind up the company Accolade, which controls the club, because an unpaid bill and a deadline of tomorrow was issued for the matter to be settled.

While Byrne is now complying with the demand he remains angry at what he claims is discrimination shown against his club, particularly in the light of the leniency shown to Shamrock Rovers.

'We have often been in arrears with the Revenue but we worked with a understanding lady who always understood that everything would be honoured. We have been dealing with a different department whom I've had one or two arguments with. I cannot understand how in a situation where one person owes €1.5m to the Revenue, that they're allowed to build up that sum of money and the Revenue is prepared to say they will accept two percent or four per cent, which is what it turned out to be. Ask yourself this: if tax inspectors follow a certain football club could they be in a position to influence an attack on another club?'

Whatever about Byrne's accusations, the affair is hugely embarrassing for the club that has been the msot successful club in the country over the past 10 years, winning four titles in seven years.

**soccerc** · 02/04/2006, 7:05 PM

SHELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB

PRESS RELEASE

Statement from Shelbourne FC

Sunday 2th April:
Shelbourne FC wishes to inform their fans, supporters and sponsors that the outstanding arrears in tax due to the Revenue Commissioners, will be paid in full on Monday morning 3rd of April 2006. The club would also like to thank all those who have rallied around the club in the past few weeks during this difficult period.

Shelbourne CEO Ollie Byrne said: “As promised, the tax bill will be discharged in full. It’s unfortunate that we ended up in this position, because it’s difficult enough to survive in Irish football, let alone make the great advances that we have achieved at Tolka Park in the past fifteen years. We need all the help we can get if we are to make the vital break-through at European level that the eircom League is capable of.”

He continued: “Now that this episode is closed, we would like to get back to the real business in hand – which is football. We’re playing our final group match in the Setanta Sports Cup on Monday night against Derry City with an excellent chance of making it to the semi-finals. To help achieve this, we need as much support as possible on the night in Tolka Park. I would like to invite all those who have shown so much interest in the club over the last three weeks, to come along and see what this club is really all about and to enjoy another great night in Irish football.”

ENDS

I think we already know what Shels are all about!

**Roverstillidie** · 02/04/2006, 7:17 PM

the man is unreal.

its rovers fault the revenue went after him after he missed a pre-arranged payment date?

if we had that much clout would we still be working to complete our stadium in the first division?

can he not do a simple thing like pay a bill without slandering SRFC and I assume bohs?

queue shels acolytes to tell us all that olly is right, Rovers and Boyezzz run a conspiracy against shels through the Revenue Commisioners. From there Limerick offices as well no less.

**hoopy** · 02/04/2006, 7:46 PM

Let's not forget his other court date which, no doubt, will be all Rovers fault as well

**Gareth** · 02/04/2006, 7:48 PM

Originally Posted by soccerc

I think we already know what Shels are all about!

Good for you.

**pineapple stu** · 02/04/2006, 7:54 PM

If Shels are out of the woods (and I'd be delighted for the Shels fans if they were), how do the club plan on avoiding this happening again a couple of months down the line? If the club's losing a million a year, it's going to happen sooner rather than later unless serious cut-backs are made surely?

**Roverstillidie** · 02/04/2006, 8:02 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

If Shels are out of the woods (and I'd be delighted for the Shels fans if they were), how do the club plan on avoiding this happening again a couple of months down the line? If the club's losing a million a year, it's going to happen sooner rather than later unless serious cut-backs are made surely?

agreed, the main reason the revenue let us off some of our debt was we radically changed our coporate culture to the extent that the problems were unlikely to happen again.

olly has not made those commitments, but is still comparing the situations.

**sfc red** · 02/04/2006, 8:16 PM

Guess yous are gonna have to resort to porn now lads.

**OneRedArmy** · 03/04/2006, 1:00 AM

Originally Posted by sfc red

Guess yous are gonna have to resort to porn now lads.

As the old saying goes "he who laughs last...doesn't get the joke".

Whilst everyone`s aware that Shels fans have a reputation as fawning acolytes who frequently seem happy not to ask the obvious questions & live in blissfull ignorance, are you so naive not to worry about why it got to this stage & what state the clubs finances are in, never mind that all the Shels eggs appear to be in the Dalymount basket?

Also re the previous article & Ollie planning to be in the bank picking up the money BEFORE it opens on Monday, should someone notify the Special Branch? and come to think of it, what a coincidence that there was another large cash-in-transit robbery today....