Late Night Radio

[Fr45h3R]

I think this is the link to last night ?
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/local/nightlife/coins_on_n_m2190267.mp3

[purplepennyhunter]

I was listening too , tho i was half sleep at the time , PPH can you remember what's name of the business  form Andrew and Stewart was talking about    . Makes you a creditor  not a sucker if a business you have consigned something too goes belly up .

Yep the will thing was interesting too , might havto up date mine and my pcgs spread sheet thingo. Tho knowing my brothers  when i carkit it will be like seagulls on a chip time at belly's.

I don't remember exactly but I just googled. The PPS register

[bellyflorin]

thanks PP and thanks Fr45h3R

[acrellin]

That link to the PPS register is correct - my understanding is that the few customers of the Rare Coin Company that had registered on this before they went into liquidation have different creditor rights to those that did not.

The basic case is that if the company had "control" over the consigned items at the time the business went into administration, the liquidators are entitled to them, even though title may not have changed.

While this stinks, seems unfair on a fundamental level and may well be overturned via a legal case in future, my understanding is that the precedent in other industries (a bulldozer lease of all things) sees the liquidators entitled to sell the items, and the consignor doesn't get the proceeds.

This is new law and is still being tested, however best to be on the safe side regardless.

[echidna]

That link to the PPS register is correct - my understanding is that the few customers of the Rare Coin Company that had registered on this before they went into liquidation have different creditor rights to those that did not.

The basic case is that if the company had "control" over the consigned items at the time the business went into administration, the liquidators are entitled to them, even though title may not have changed.

While this stinks, seems unfair on a fundamental level and may well be overturned via a legal case in future, my understanding is that the precedent in other industries (a bulldozer lease of all things) sees the liquidators entitled to sell the items, and the consignor doesn't get the proceeds.

This is new law and is still being tested, however best to be on the safe side regardless.

Are you saying that many creditors (ie real owners of the coins) could loose everything ?
Who gets the funds - Mr Jackman or who?
To say it stinks is an understatement.
If I were a Rare Coin Co customer I would be wondering why ANDA did nothing pro-actively.
It would have been obvious that their business model would fail eventually.

[acrellin]

In my understanding, those folks that had items on consignment with the Rare Coin Company, whose items were sold without their knowledge and whose interests were not secured on the PPS register, stand to be treated the same as all other unsecured creditors. The likelihood of them recovering any funds at this stage is remote from what I understand.

As his company has entered administration, as far as I'm aware, Mr Jackman certainly isn't looking at receiving any further funds at all from the Rare Coin Company. As he was also taken to court (personally) over a director's guarantee he gave over one specific transaction, I understand that he may well need to declare personal bankruptcy. I understand this will most likely mean that any future income over and above a certain amount will be directed to that former client.

I can say that the first and only complaint that ANDA received re the Rare Coin Company indirectly led to the company entering administration. Despite the huge number of aggrieved customers that have been very significantly affected, we only received one solitary formal complaint.

It isn't up to ANDA or anyone else for that matter to intervene in business transactions between any two individuals, no matter what the circumstances might be.

The very serious issues that have now come to light such as non payment of sales proceeds, sales of counterfeit or grossly mis-described items, and exotic transactions such as the provision of income payments following purchase, all of these have come to light after the fact.

All that said, the ANDA committee is in the process of reviewing our governing documents to include the capacity to take action against members in the absence of a customer complaint, under appropriate circumstances of course. Other changes such as the inclusion of non-members on the governing body (to ensure complete oversight and add complementary skills to the committee) are being considered as well. While we can't change what has happened, I believe we are taking appropriate steps to further increase transparency and confidence in numismatics in Australia.