Adams Share Discussion Threads

[luafc] 30/11/2009 14:11

chrisdgb:

Think you'll find the timing is somewhat later: "early 2011" from the last release.

[chrisdgb] 30/11/2009 11:09

I estimate circa 3.65p per share in the distribution before the year end..

[gbill11] 25/11/2009 20:20

How this can happen. Every company that pays a dividend checks the shareholder register on the record date. Whats not important is the shareholder register on the date the dividend is paid. Basic, basic stuff but too complicated for Adamind and their advisers.

[eenmakkie] 25/11/2009 20:08

The fact that 3 of us have been underpaid shows poor financial controls.

Make it 4.

I have the feeling if the final payment is donne.
There will be no money left to pay (us) if some overpaids will not give the money back.

I going to take legal advice.
Maybe we can do it in a group plain if others are interested.

[nickcduk] 19/11/2009 18:27

Its a screw up. It hasn't been helped by the likes of Selftrade refusing to provide the company/registrars with a list of shareholders at the record date. The second payment won't be released until the first payment has been resolved. Im hoping that it gets done by year end. Would be a nice chrimbo present.

[dangersimpson2] 19/11/2009 16:54

I agree some form of check that the proportion of amounts from the previous distribution matched would have been good. However the totals would have been in proportion, and it tends to be the kind of thing you trust when it comes from the registrars.

I think you have the right to be concerned about the delay, particularly if the amount was agreed in July as you say, however I still think you'll get a better outcome by dialogue with the company's representative since you'll have a hard time proving negligence by any party I'm afraid, even if you suspect that they have been.

[luafc] 19/11/2009 15:53

From above:

"I suspect you are a thoroughly decent individual, which is perhaps why IMHO you may be being a touch too generous here."

That could have been written better! It doesn't mean those less charitable towards Adamind et al are not thoroughly decent people too!!!

[luafc] 19/11/2009 15:34

Hi danger (that has an interesting ring to it!),

I would have thought that ultimately the company must be responsible to correctly process amounts due to its shareholders. You can use advisers and sub-contractors all you like but at the end of the day it's the company's actions that are accountable to shareholders - at least until it formally hands over to somebody else. At the forthcoming EGM the first matter to be voted on is "The proposal that the Board's powers shall cease and pass to the liquidator is hereby approved and authorized." At that point the liquidator carries greater powers.

Until then we rely on the following words from the EGM document that states:

"At the time of commencement of the liquidation process the directors believed that their continued service on the Board would enable a more streamlined liquidation process and therefore the shareholders were asked to approve the continuation of the Board's capacity and powers."

But this is perhaps all a little picky anyway. I was using the word "company" as regards the dividend processing to mean itself and the support entities it hires including the PR adviser and the liquidator. In aggregate these players reflect the company's actions - actions that have fallen short.

Some people may indeed have acted in good faith - that is not really the point. If you go to a shop and the assistant short-changes you by accident (because £5 and £20 notes were mixed up in the cash machine), it doesn't mean you accept the shop can make up the shortfall difference in a couple of months or years!

(The fact they overpaid other customers who have gone and kept quiet is no reason for you to take the pain.)

I suspect you are a thoroughly decent individual, which is perhaps why IMHO you may be being a touch too generous here.

In terms of the information given to Adamind or its hired associates/advisers, it's similarly irrelevant if it led to mistakes. Those mistakes should be rectified promptly.

That information should have been checked anyway before cheques were issued. There should have been control reports sub-totalled by brokers and shareholders to make sure the payments were one third of the net payments processed in 2008.

Remember the June/July divi was the tax element relating to the net payments made in Spring 2008 and there is a simple arithmetic relationship between the two. The net payment made in April 2008 was correctly processed using the correct shareholder register information.

Why was it not retained? Where were the financial controls in this whole process?

Given the incompetence that occurred, I agree it could take a little time to fully unravel - but surely not months and months. But in any event that's the company's problem to resolve in the background. It is no reason not to rectify under-payments once they have been agreed and determined. I have a July copy e-mail between the company's adviser and my broker agreeing the amount that should be paid to my broker on my behalf.

The fact that it has been agreed and accepted as far back as July has not, however, led to payment.

And yesterday's release was IMHO inexcusable (though sadly not that surprising) in making no meaningful reference to July's incorrect processing statement. There should have been an updated status and resolution ahead of yesterday's further distribution plans.

Apologies to those who were correctly paid in June/July.

[gbill11] 19/11/2009 12:42

dangersimpson, I dont know what you mean. They have the shareholder list on the record date. Thats all they need. luafc may have hit the nail on the head though. They arent paying us until they have got back the money they sent out by mistake. If thats the case then its absolutely not acceptable.

[dangersimpson2] 19/11/2009 11:12

luafc,

Good to see you are able to leverage some pressure to help get this resolved, however I'm not sure the company was at fault for the use of the wrong shareholder list so they could easily argue that they acted in good faith based on the information they were given.

As for the delay in making the missing payments, I'm not surprised to see it take some time to trace all the shareholders & nominees and match them up, however I agree that waiting for the return of funds from the mistaken holders should not be a reason to delay.

Danger

[dangersimpson2] 19/11/2009 08:42

I think the issue is identifying all those affected which can be tricky when most of us hold via nominees.

I agree that a payment for missed interest would seem equitable but I really don't think its going to happen, so not going to waste any time on it...I personally will be extremely pleased to just see the missing money.

[eenmakkie] 11/11/2009 20:55

the never-ending story


Gbill11 you have already an update on that wrong sending of tax refund?

I can not believe they use the names of the registry to do that.

As everyone who received the dividends did had to sent up there personal info, singed paper with name, address and an tax resident confirmation.

[nickcduk] 11/11/2009 19:35

got a letter over weekend regarding agm. they are looking to return between 2-2.5m dollars before year end.

[chrisdgb] 11/11/2009 16:34

my broker just informed me that the formal liquidation process is now underway.....

[chrisdgb] 03/11/2009 14:35

Apparently on the final distribution no exact date yet, still hopeful of circa 6p per share..

[dangersimpson2] 30/10/2009 01:11

You are probably best getting that information from Corfin because without any written evidence I doubt anybody on here would be willing to make a statement as to who they have been told was responsoble for the error.

Before you consider legal action though its worth phoning your broker and identifying what nominee name they used for your holding and then phoning Corfin who should have the correct shareholder list and be able to match your holding to the correct register. You just need to explain your situation carefully to them but they are aware of what the issue is with people having sold after the ex-payment date.

[gbill11] 29/10/2009 20:15

I sold after the record date and am still trying to get the tax refund.
Corfin cant find me or my nominee on the shareholder register. I told them thats not so surprising because I sold my shares and am not a shareholder. Doh!
They really dont have any idea what they are doing. Im not optimistic at all about receiving anything. They've sent my money to some lucky sod who bought shares AFTER the record date. Who are responsible. Is it the registrars , Capita who are responsible. I need to know who to sue.

[dangersimpson2] 27/10/2009 08:48

Its a different company that's taken the EPIC after Adamind de-listed!

[double6] 27/10/2009 07:59

At least the Directors are still interested!

[deep powder] 25/10/2009 09:10

Once again I have e mailed Corfin to see if we can narrow down the 'Q4' payment. Nothing as yet, I could do with the extra funds for Christmas...!!

Would appreciate it if anyone else had any joy...????

[nickcduk] 22/9/2009 07:25

I think there is no point chasing up the second payment until the first payment issues have been resolved. Hopefully they will have that ready pretty soon after. It is dragging on a bit too long though.