Scott's Shipping Services - FORMERLY UNDER "POSSIBLE LIQUIDATION"

Status
Not open for further replies.
.
sjm said:
He wouldn't be able to forward them if they are considered to be the company's stock and the company is being liquidated. What would then happen is that all assets (including debtors and purchased stock, if it's considered to belong to the company) would be pooled together, and all liabilities (including creditors, which anyone with undelivered goods would be) would also be pooled together.

If liabilities are greater than assets then the assets are liquidated and creditors are paid in order of preference (which I think is SARS first, secured creditors like banks next, then other unsecured creditors and finally shareholders, if there's anything left). This sucks for unsecured creditors as there's likely very little (if anything) left by the time their turn comes.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the lawyers doing the liquidation. They normally burn through what's left at a rapid rate.
 
sjm said:
He wouldn't be able to forward them if they are considered to be the company's stock and the company is being liquidated. What would then happen is that all assets (including debtors and purchased stock, if it's considered to belong to the company) would be pooled together, and all liabilities (including creditors, which anyone with undelivered goods would be) would also be pooled together.

If liabilities are greater than assets then the assets are liquidated and creditors are paid in order of preference (which I think is SARS first, secured creditors like banks next, then other unsecured creditors and finally shareholders, if there's anything left). This sucks for unsecured creditors as there's likely very little (if anything) left by the time their turn comes.
Click to expand...

I don't believe this for one second. If the goods are ordered, with the final shipper, paid for, the shipper could care less about it. He would have had to tell them to hold the items.

Hope im wrong, but there is a pattern of lying already. Scum like this should spend a nice long time in prison.

He spent money that wasn't his to spend
 
sjm said:
He wouldn't be able to forward them if they are considered to be the company's stock and the company is being liquidated. What would then happen is that all assets (including debtors and purchased stock, if it's considered to belong to the company) would be pooled together, and all liabilities (including creditors, which anyone with undelivered goods would be) would also be pooled together.

If liabilities are greater than assets then the assets are liquidated and creditors are paid in order of preference (which I think is SARS first, secured creditors like banks next, then other unsecured creditors and finally shareholders, if there's anything left). This sucks for unsecured creditors as there's likely very little (if anything) left by the time their turn comes.
Click to expand...

Surely this isn't considered company's stock though. You buy stock to sell. All of these items were already paid for by customers and were spoken for. It is different. Not sure the accountant/lawyers care too much.
 
sjm said:
He wouldn't be able to forward them if they are considered to be the company's stock and the company is being liquidated.
Click to expand...
How can it be the company's stock when it never belonged to them? Scott acted as middle-man between the seller and buyer. This is like giving money to a friend asking them to buy something for you and they use the money, or the item, to pay off their own debts.
 
gregmcc said:
Should really put on note on the website informing potential customers.

I see there is a FB post now: TEMPORARILY CLOSED

Afraid it's going to be more than temporarily.
Click to expand...
I see on FB the issues started from April:

eo5cX1k.png
 
agnouja said:
How can it be the company's stock when it never belonged to them? Scott acted as middle-man between the seller and buyer. This is like giving money to a friend asking them to buy something for you and they use the money, or the item, to pay off their own debts.
Click to expand...

If the suppliers invoiced the company, then it would likely be considered to be the company's stock. If the suppliers invoiced the individual customers and Scott just managed the freight then it would be customer stock. My understanding is that the suppliers invoiced the company and the company invoiced the customers. The stock would likely belong to the company until it is dispatched and received by the customer.
 
agnouja said:
How can it be the company's stock when it never belonged to them? Scott acted as middle-man between the seller and buyer. This is like giving money to a friend asking them to buy something for you and they use the money, or the item, to pay off their own debts.
Click to expand...

Well he is clearly lying. Either that or some really silly contracts whereby he only takes ownership of items once the actual shipper gets it and is paid
 
agnouja said:
How can it be the company's stock when it never belonged to them? Scott acted as middle-man between the seller and buyer. This is like giving money to a friend asking them to buy something for you and they use the money, or the item, to pay off their own debts.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Correct me if I have this wrong.

If I'm insolvent, my assets may be attached to be divided up among my creditors. Now, if I'm in possession of someone else's property and the owner can prove it, that property can't be attached as it belongs to the legal owner.

So, if he took my money and did not procure the goods I paid for, I'm a creditor, irrespective of any other claims/rights I may have. If he did, I am the rightful owner of the goods.
 
sjm said:
I think this point will always be reached at a particular point in time, and all those who purchased before this point would feel they were scammed.

I don't know the particulars of this case and don't know at what point Scott realised that he was no longer solvent, but it is plausible that he only realised this yesterday (as per his comms) and then stopped trading.

On the other hand, he might have known he was insolvent months ago, which would make this a scam from that time on.
Click to expand...
The delays in shipping started towards the beginning of the year. So already then he was relying on new orders to pay for the old ones as he had burnt through the cash. I mean it's one thing to invest the profits from the shipping business into the batteries business, but to take the money that people had paid for a specific product and then spend it on something else. Thats theft.
 
lol, creditors .. The guy was a one man band operating from home. He was just using his customers to bankroll his lifestyle.
Sorry to say it, but anyone who bought stuff recently got scammed.
Not the first guy to pull a stunt like this and wont be the last.
 
sammyb_ said:
Indeed. Correct me if I have this wrong.

If I'm insolvent, my assets may be attached to be divided up among my creditors. Now, if I'm in possession of someone else's property and the owner can prove it, that property can't be attached as it belongs to the legal owner.

So, if he took my money and did not procure the goods I paid for, I'm a creditor, irrespective of any other claims/rights I may have. If he did, I am the rightful owner of the goods.
Click to expand...
Not how it works. Like someone said earlier, If the invoice is with the the company then the stock is theirs. Essentially every single piece of paperwork tracing that item back to origin has their name on it.

To put it simply, you bought a 12V battery from him but so did 19 others. He only has 19 and not 20, who's to say any of those 19 are yours and not that you were simply the one forgotten.
 
I don't like to talk business, and neither have I had any business transactions with Scott's.

What makes me angry is how people and businesses can splash cash on new and shiny things when they can't splash cash on their debt. All I can say is that there are ethics and practices that I can’t condone any more.

I have even seen people using religion as a promise to pay. Still haven't paid. Oh, I can tell stories.
 
Fulcrum29 said:
I don't like to talk business, and neither have I had any business transactions with Scott's.

What makes me angry is how people and businesses can splash cash on new and shiny things when they can't splash cash on their debt. All I can say is that there are ethics and practices that I can’t condone any more.

I have even seen people using religion as a promise to pay. Still haven't paid. Oh, I can tell stories.
Click to expand...
The other problem I have is the people recommending these businesses.

Hence why I never used the service.

I just used the Ebay global shipping and hoped for the best.
 
acidrain said:
To put it simply, you bought a 12V battery from him but so did 19 others. He only has 19 and not 20, who's to say any of those 19 are yours and not that you were simply the one forgotten.
Click to expand...

This is not about his separate battery business. This is about Scott's Shipping Services business. Do you think a courier company would also be able to liquidate packages if they used third party carriers internally?
 
It's all good and well calling him a scammer. However he has been around and has said he was to blame and "stupid".
It sucks, the situation sucks, but yeah, you folks with claims need to get your details into the creditors list sooner rather than later, so that the liquidators can process in order (I seem to recall this also being a first-come, first-served process after SARS is sorted out)
 
agnouja said:
How can it be the company's stock when it never belonged to them? Scott acted as middle-man between the seller and buyer. This is like giving money to a friend asking them to buy something for you and they use the money, or the item, to pay off their own debts.
Click to expand...

I would logically think this is the case, but who knows. If the stock is ordered and paid for and invoiced to the customer, then its the customer property, there might be challenges of getting the property to the customer, but it wouldnt seem logical or fair to attach the product for liquidation.

Just a guess / scenario, the build up in delays is cash flow issues. Company has not been able to place new orders as they are trying to fulfill old ones with the new money, hoping more comes in and they can catch up.

The business is likely to be over, full transparency, if you ever want to start this again with the same customer base, is the best way forward, which does not seem to be the case. Show everyone legitimate orders and that it has been paid for etc
It wouldnt be that hard to do.

The business seems "small", which means internal standard expenses should be manageable and it really is just getting the money, ordering, shipping, paying whatever tax duties etc. Either calculations were wrong and it hurt or the money was used elsewhere
 
agnouja said:
This is not about his separate battery business. This is about Scott's Shipping Services business. Do you think a courier company would also be able to liquidate packages if they used third party carriers internally?
Click to expand...
He handles things differently from your standard courier. He purchases the items requested and arranges the shipping. This is as per the homepage so the items are legally his until they are passed on to the purchaser.

If it was handled similar to courier services, which may be the case in some circumstances, then those items are not legally his and should then be passed onto the owner once the liquidators have verified ownership
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X