Pcf Share Discussion Threads

[seasidehippo] 20/7/2021 09:58

For wording in quotes refer RNS 19/3/21

[seasidehippo] 20/7/2021 09:56

IMO the experience of our CFO should be a benefit in resolving these issues "Whilst at the Co-operative bank, she was one of their key contacts with the Prudential Regulatory Authority"

[cc2014] 20/7/2021 09:22

My reading of the RNS's suggests to me that achievement of targets was set above financial integrity.

The early RNS related to the audit reducing the profit by £1m is either because the accountants can't do their job or were trying to massage the numbers up hoping they wouldn't get caught. If it's the former they are incompetent. If the latter it strikes me as naive and foolish as it is more usual to run controversial items through the auditors before the accounts are done to get a feel of the auditors outlook.

The second issue relating to possible collusion between the finance team (and others?) in deliberately misreport numbers to the PRA and the auditors indicates the whole culture is wrong and regrettably means both the PRA and auditors can now longer trust any document presented to them. I'll quote from the June RNS:

"In addition, the Independent Review has enabled the Board and the executive management team to identify a number of deficiencies and failures in PCF Bank's financial control and reporting function, including members of the finance team, under instruction, manually adjusting certain accounting entries for both financial and regulatory reporting purposes which appear to the Board to have been a deliberate effort to facilitate specific results or compliance with rules regarding Large Exposure limits. Based on the findings of the Independent Review, the Board believes that these matters may be driven by possible collusion by some members of the finance team, under resourcing, an inadequate level of skill and experience within the finance team, technological limitations and a poor culture in the finance team resulting in a lack of, and a reluctance to, challenge its leadership."


It's far more serious than the Metro scandal when they found they had worked out allowable regulatory capital wrong.


I'm sure the PRA have ordered a skilled persons review and if they haven't they should have done. Indeed the remediation plan smells of the PRA specifically the commissioning of an independent forensic review and the FPPP. This is needed because the PRA need to assess the competence of the Board as well as the staff.


My conclusion if it's of any help is that somewhere along the line through inexperience it became apparent that PCF had breached the large exposure limit and rather than owning up to it, a number of staff decided to supress the information probably in the knowledge given a bit of time they could get it back within the limit. They probably justified this to themselves in terms of the consolidated accounts still being correct.


A full forensic review is going to take some time. Given the contract for it had not been placed by 28th June, I would guess a month to get it done is pushing it. Possible but not an easy task, depending mostly on whether they turn anything unexpected up.

[graham1ty] 20/7/2021 07:46

What really winds me up here is the Board statement:

“The Board wishes to thank its shareholders, customers and other stakeholders for their patience and the valued support they have provided to the PCF Group during this difficult time and wishes to reaffirm that it is committed to provide updates in a timely, transparent and comprehensive manner."

Timely.......hahaha
Transparent.......we still do not actually know what the problem is
Comprehensive.......there is a vast amount still unsaid ( the most recent statements do not mention Scott)

[dandigirl] 19/7/2021 18:20

You can find it highly unlikely. I think otherwise as the last RNS reads:

“””;The Group announces that it will not publish its interim financial results, for the half year ended 31 March 2021, by 30 June 2021. AIM Regulation has issued guidance (dated 9 June 2020 and reconfirmed on 27 January 2021) permitting an extension of one month for the reporting of its half-yearly results. The shares will remain suspended as announced by the Company on 28 June 2021.

The Company will provide an update in due course.””;”

[seasidehippo] 19/7/2021 14:06

I find this highly unlikely IF there is a proper contract in place for the work to be completed (refer last RNS).

[dandigirl] 19/7/2021 10:27

Serious repercussions if not completed by the end of next week.

[seasidehippo] 18/7/2021 18:00

Fudging figures is inexcusable and thankfully imo they are doing a full drains up review to provide confidence to the market.

[dandigirl] 17/7/2021 08:56

It seems to be much more than just a matter of changing the returns for large exposures. Suspect something akin to a s166 is going on. Just a great pity that it wasn’t done discretely. Franklin does not appear to have had a grip before this kicked-off and still doesn’t by allowing this to run on for so long. Wouldn’t surprise me if the Bermuda lot give him his P45 before the year is out. Hope so.

[cjd190573] 16/7/2021 20:54

This has gone from ‘review’ to witch-hunt, Not sure what the day rate is for that. Maybe PWC may find some Bronze Age artefacts, whilst they are drilling 2km under Scott’s old office.

[graham1ty] 16/7/2021 19:44

Monday will be two months.....

I have never known anything like this. The later RNS seemed to suggest it was not fraud per se, but a (deliberate) misstatement, not quite crossing a fraud threshold. And then it was really just a review of accounting processes and controls.

Why do either take two months ?

[geraldus] 16/7/2021 17:33

My friend the vicar is praying,literally,for a good outcome.

[dandigirl] 16/7/2021 10:14

This must be costing millions.

Enough, already.

RNS Monday, please.

[dandigirl] 09/7/2021 15:43

Appropriate.
This is worth a watch if you are into historical stuff.
The torture. hanging, disembowelling and dismemberment are thought to be a bit too graphic though.

[seasidehippo] 09/7/2021 14:00

Guy Fawkes was hung, drawn and quartered for that!!!!

[dandigirl] 09/7/2021 11:27

Putting a fire cracker under PwC.

[seasidehippo] 09/7/2021 09:41

What alternative would you suggest?

[dandigirl] 08/7/2021 20:22

Having been handed a blank cheque by the Board, why would PwC be in any hurry to conclude matters quickly?

[geraldus] 30/6/2021 08:49

Still positives to be found here.Rather like the curate's egg.Also very apt with my friend the reverend but that is a another story.

[dandigirl] 30/6/2021 08:19

As Hippo had said: Incompetent. This lot are out of their depth. Yes, regulatory reporting is very important but it should not be hard to find someone to do this.

As it is, I suspect this Board’s incompetence and past failures will cost in the region of a £1m plus this year in accounting fees, etc. and add a few hundred thousand per annum on-going.

A few of these directors should go too. I hope the regulators are taking a long hard look as they are not “fit and proper”.

All that said, there is a good business here and after these shenanigans, it should thrive.

[graham1ty] 30/6/2021 07:24

Why was this RNS not rolled into the RNS of a few days ago ?

[seasidehippo] 29/6/2021 11:59

Yes that and a couple of others!! Looking on the positive side at least we appear to have acquired a top CFO.

[cjd190573] 29/6/2021 00:15

Seasidehippo, think that they could have used your single word post from last week, to summarise the RNS.

[cc2014] 28/6/2021 12:54

IC say it's a "hold". (Shaking my head and wondering what invsestors can do but hold right now)