Charlton Athletic have expressed concern after the resignation of their chief executive Katrien Meire was falsely posted on Companies House.
The club put out a statement saying: “The club is aware of a document that has appeared on Companies House. “This document is false and the club is investigating the matter as it is something we take seriously.”
Louis Mendez, whose Twitter feed identifies him as a presenter on Charltonlive, said: “This is hilarious. I have been reliably informed that it was in fact a #cafc fan who has resigned Katrien Meire’s directorship on her behalf.”
He added: “For the record, I do not know who did this. But I do know it is a forged signature and Katrien has not resigned as director.”
The incident is the latest to strike the troubled club who in January appointed their third manager this season, José Riga, who had managed the club previously.
Also in January, at the home game against Blackburn, thousands of fans protested against the ownership of Roland Duchâtelet, the Belgian businessman and founder of Belgium’s Vivant political party who bought the club in January 2014.
Meire, a 30-year-old lawyer who was brought on board by Duchâtelet, had attracted fans’ ire by referring to them as “customers”. At present Charlton sit bottom of the Championship, three points short of safety.
I would have thought that anyone else that can reliably confirm that this was not done by the club would be best served keeping it to themselves.
I don't want to sound like a killjoy but I suspect that submitting false documents to Companies House is fraud and the fewer of us that admit to having any knowledge of it the better for all those concerned. On something that is in the public domain like this an investigation will need to be considered or it might send out the message that fraud is ok if it makes people laugh.
It is, indeed, hilarious but I fear that the Police might be quite insistent that the identity of the person that reliably informed a journalist that it was a CAFC fan is disclosed.
It's not fraud though, is it? Fraud is "criminal deception; the use of false representations to gain an unjust advantage". There's no advantage to whoever sent this is in. It's hardly going to be in the public interest to waste police or any other public resources on a prank, and that's what they would tell the club if asked.
It would still come under Fraud by Misrepresentation.
It would, but as @Airman Brown said, it would take a lot of police time and effort to find out who did it (even if they could) and they have a lot of other more pressing things to occupy them other than an upset precious Belgian. I doubt the police have even been informed, nor do I imagine the club is investigating anything. What are they going to do? Ask for handwriting samples from everyone going through the turnstiles on Saturday?
Charlton Athletic have expressed concern after the resignation of their chief executive Katrien Meire was falsely posted on Companies House.
The club put out a statement saying: “The club is aware of a document that has appeared on Companies House. “This document is false and the club is investigating the matter as it is something we take seriously.”
Louis Mendez, whose Twitter feed identifies him as a presenter on Charltonlive, said: “This is hilarious. I have been reliably informed that it was in fact a #cafc fan who has resigned Katrien Meire’s directorship on her behalf.”
He added: “For the record, I do not know who did this. But I do know it is a forged signature and Katrien has not resigned as director.”
The incident is the latest to strike the troubled club who in January appointed their third manager this season, José Riga, who had managed the club previously.
Also in January, at the home game against Blackburn, thousands of fans protested against the ownership of Roland Duchâtelet, the Belgian businessman and founder of Belgium’s Vivant political party who bought the club in January 2014.
Meire, a 30-year-old lawyer who was brought on board by Duchâtelet, had attracted fans’ ire by referring to them as “customers”. At present Charlton sit bottom of the Championship, three points short of safety.
I would have thought that anyone else that can reliably confirm that this was not done by the club would be best served keeping it to themselves.
I don't want to sound like a killjoy but I suspect that submitting false documents to Companies House is fraud and the fewer of us that admit to having any knowledge of it the better for all those concerned. On something that is in the public domain like this an investigation will need to be considered or it might send out the message that fraud is ok if it makes people laugh.
It is, indeed, hilarious but I fear that the Police might be quite insistent that the identity of the person that reliably informed a journalist that it was a CAFC fan is disclosed.
It's not fraud though, is it? Fraud is "criminal deception; the use of false representations to gain an unjust advantage". There's no advantage to whoever sent this is in. It's hardly going to be in the public interest to waste police or any other public resources on a prank, and that's what they would tell the club if asked.
It would still come under Fraud by Misrepresentation.
It would, but as @Airman Brown said, it would take a lot of police time and effort to find out who did it (even if they could) and they have a lot of other more pressing things to occupy them other than an upset precious Belgian. I doubt the police have even been informed, nor do I imagine the club is investigating anything. What are they going to do? Ask for handwriting samples from everyone going through the turnstiles on Saturday?
I can see it already; "In addition to flares and/or other forms of Pyrotechnics, the Metropolitan Police have asked us to make it aware that it's their intention to arrest any supporters found in posession of Companies House documentation.".
Charlton Athletic have expressed concern after the resignation of their chief executive Katrien Meire was falsely posted on Companies House.
The club put out a statement saying: “The club is aware of a document that has appeared on Companies House. “This document is false and the club is investigating the matter as it is something we take seriously.”
Louis Mendez, whose Twitter feed identifies him as a presenter on Charltonlive, said: “This is hilarious. I have been reliably informed that it was in fact a #cafc fan who has resigned Katrien Meire’s directorship on her behalf.”
He added: “For the record, I do not know who did this. But I do know it is a forged signature and Katrien has not resigned as director.”
The incident is the latest to strike the troubled club who in January appointed their third manager this season, José Riga, who had managed the club previously.
Also in January, at the home game against Blackburn, thousands of fans protested against the ownership of Roland Duchâtelet, the Belgian businessman and founder of Belgium’s Vivant political party who bought the club in January 2014.
Meire, a 30-year-old lawyer who was brought on board by Duchâtelet, had attracted fans’ ire by referring to them as “customers”. At present Charlton sit bottom of the Championship, three points short of safety.
I would have thought that anyone else that can reliably confirm that this was not done by the club would be best served keeping it to themselves.
I don't want to sound like a killjoy but I suspect that submitting false documents to Companies House is fraud and the fewer of us that admit to having any knowledge of it the better for all those concerned. On something that is in the public domain like this an investigation will need to be considered or it might send out the message that fraud is ok if it makes people laugh.
It is, indeed, hilarious but I fear that the Police might be quite insistent that the identity of the person that reliably informed a journalist that it was a CAFC fan is disclosed.
It's not fraud though, is it? Fraud is "criminal deception; the use of false representations to gain an unjust advantage". There's no advantage to whoever sent this is in. It's hardly going to be in the public interest to waste police or any other public resources on a prank, and that's what they would tell the club if asked.
It would still come under Fraud by Misrepresentation.
No it wouldn't. I’ve explained this. There was no gain (or intent to gain or cause loss). Fraud of any description doesn't apply. That leaves forgery and/or the Companies Act offence. The CPS have two tests when considering prosecution: Evidential Sufficiency and Public Interest. In a nutshell, once over the evidence hurdle they would have to consider the levels of loss or harm suffered as a result of the offence having been committed. As there wasn't any loss or any harm, it would not be in the public interest to proceed. The police would be well aware of this and consequently wouldn't even bother investigating if they have their thinking heads on.
Charlton Athletic have expressed concern after the resignation of their chief executive Katrien Meire was falsely posted on Companies House.
The club put out a statement saying: “The club is aware of a document that has appeared on Companies House. “This document is false and the club is investigating the matter as it is something we take seriously.”
Louis Mendez, whose Twitter feed identifies him as a presenter on Charltonlive, said: “This is hilarious. I have been reliably informed that it was in fact a #cafc fan who has resigned Katrien Meire’s directorship on her behalf.”
He added: “For the record, I do not know who did this. But I do know it is a forged signature and Katrien has not resigned as director.”
The incident is the latest to strike the troubled club who in January appointed their third manager this season, José Riga, who had managed the club previously.
Also in January, at the home game against Blackburn, thousands of fans protested against the ownership of Roland Duchâtelet, the Belgian businessman and founder of Belgium’s Vivant political party who bought the club in January 2014.
Meire, a 30-year-old lawyer who was brought on board by Duchâtelet, had attracted fans’ ire by referring to them as “customers”. At present Charlton sit bottom of the Championship, three points short of safety.
I would have thought that anyone else that can reliably confirm that this was not done by the club would be best served keeping it to themselves.
I don't want to sound like a killjoy but I suspect that submitting false documents to Companies House is fraud and the fewer of us that admit to having any knowledge of it the better for all those concerned. On something that is in the public domain like this an investigation will need to be considered or it might send out the message that fraud is ok if it makes people laugh.
It is, indeed, hilarious but I fear that the Police might be quite insistent that the identity of the person that reliably informed a journalist that it was a CAFC fan is disclosed.
It's not fraud though, is it? Fraud is "criminal deception; the use of false representations to gain an unjust advantage". There's no advantage to whoever sent this is in. It's hardly going to be in the public interest to waste police or any other public resources on a prank, and that's what they would tell the club if asked.
It would still come under Fraud by Misrepresentation.
No it wouldn't. I’ve explained this. There was no gain (or intent to gain or cause loss). Fraud of any description doesn't apply. That leaves forgery and/or the Companies Act offence. The CPS have two tests when considering prosecution: Evidential Sufficiency and Public Interest. In a nutshell, once over the evidence hurdle they would have to consider the levels of loss or harm suffered as a result of the offence having been committed. As there wasn't any loss or any harm, it would not be in the public interest to proceed. The police would be well aware of this and consequently wouldn't even bother investigating if they have their thinking heads on.
Not only that, the loss or harm was almost entirely self-inflicted by the bizarre decision to bring this to the attention of the general public and the media by issuing a ludicrous press release when the best option (for all but KM and the new HoC so it seems) was to wail publicly about how those nasty people were behaving. I suspect the police reaction, if formally approached, would be a valiant attempt to suppress sniggers.
At the end of the day, what harm has it done? None, so why would the Police want to investigate. Neither KM or Charlton suffered (until the club made it public, then they only felt embarrassment). She was running the club fro 5/12 until now without any effect, so who has suffered?
At the end of the day, what harm has it done? None, so why would the Police want to investigate. Neither KM or Charlton suffered (until the club made it public, then they only felt embarrassment). She was running the club fro 5/12 until now without any effect, so who has suffered?
The police may not take it any further, but if the club or Meire have rang to report the incident, then they would look in to it. They may deem it a matter for Companies House to investigate instead and let them advise the police if they feel it's serious enough to proceed.
Could we follow this up by printing loads of said document and paper planning them onto the pitch at a specified time. If we get at least 100 on the pitch, I reckon the game would have to be stopped whilst they are being picked up. Should be easy to do as we could all print a reasonable number and give them out if organised so should be cost neutral. If we can delay a match with her resignation letter, that should continue the story that has already gained the interest of the press.
I see on Facebook that the legendary Sue Parkes is saying that she hopes the club catch the culprit and justice for "fraud" is served, because Katrien is a human being with feelings being treated in a disgusting inhumane way by supporters.
Presumably this is another sign that the protests and this latest stunt, are getting to the CEO.
I don't care that Chris Parkes has worked for Charlton for 300 years. Or that his wife is entitled to opinions. She's clearly not on the side of the majority of Charlton customers and come the revolution, the old trout should be the first to receive a life banning order.
The old man should tell his missus to keep her trap shut.
I see on Facebook that the legendary Sue Parkes is saying that she hopes the club catch the culprit and justice for "fraud" is served, because Katrien is a human being with feelings being treated in a disgusting inhumane way by supporters.
Presumably this is another sign that the protests and this latest stunt, are getting to the CEO.
I don't care that Chris Parkes has worked for Charlton for 300 years. Or that his wife is entitled to opinions. She's clearly not on the side of the majority of Charlton customers and come the revolution, the old trout should be the first to receive a life banning order.
The old man should tell his missus to keep her trap shut.
If we banned or disrespected people we disagreed with, we would be no better than the current regime.
Funny thing is - why would RD remove her from the post, when she is the one taking all the stick - I know she's brought it on herself (and the intellectuals on here love nothing more than an argument, particularly if somebody implies they are more intelligent - no greater crime on here other than being more ITK). Personally I think the abuse aimed at her is a bit childish and to a certain extent, cowardly really. She's clearly inconsequential in the grand scheme of things - its him that needs to be targeted .
Could we follow this up by printing loads of said document and paper planning them onto the pitch at a specified time. If we get at least 100 on the pitch, I reckon the game would have to be stopped whilst they are being picked up. Should be easy to do as we could all print a reasonable number and give them out if organised so should be cost neutral. If we can delay a match with her resignation letter, that should continue the story that has already gained the interest of the press.
Muttley, I think this is a simple & great idea. I've copy & pasted it onto the sticky/CARD thread.
Funny thing is - why would RD remove her from the post, when she is the one taking all the stick - I know she's brought it on herself (and the intellectuals on here love nothing more than an argument, particularly if somebody implies they are more intelligent - no greater crime on here other than being more ITK). Personally I think the abuse aimed at her is a bit childish and to a certain extent, cowardly really. She's clearly inconsequential in the grand scheme of things - its him that needs to be targeted .
Unfortunately it is always the foot soldiers on the front line who get killed in a war, before the generals come to their senses and surrender or sign a peace deal. No difference in this case.
Comments
The police would be well aware of this and consequently wouldn't even bother investigating if they have their thinking heads on.
At Companies House
At Companies House
We've all just sacked you
At Companies House
Half dozen geezers salivating whilst hanging on her every word. Amazing what a fat a*** and sagging t*** can do even with a squirrel face.