Archive for spck
You are browsing the archives of spck.
You are browsing the archives of spck.
First of all, let me set the context for this series of posts.
I have covered the rundown of the bookshop chain that used to be known as SPCK over several months. An earlier post covered a story of some leaked correspondence from the time when the management of the bookshop at Durham Cathedral was transferred from the Society of Saint Stephen the Great (SSGCT) to the newly created company “Durham Cathedral Shop Management Limited” (DCSML), which showed a brutal approach to the management of unpaid suppliers to the previous management company SSGCT.
This article is about a debt of almost £100,000 ($165,000+) built up over a mere three month period owed to the new company DCSHL by SSGCT after the new company took over on March 11th 2008, and before J Mark Brewer attempted to put SSGCT into Bankruptcy in Texas on 19 June 2008 (that is the date when the “Statement of Financial Affairs” was filed).
I also take a detailed look at a series of payments comprising well over half a million dollars taken out of the SSGCT organisation during a period of 12 months and paid to J Mark Brewer’s legal firm or to him personally, or to the “Orthodox Christian Mission Fund” of which he is listed as the Trustee.
I need to attach a strong note here that the SPCK mission society who used to be associated with the bookshop chain which includes the Durham Cathedral Bookshop is no longer involved in any way, and that Durham Cathedral are the landlord and not responsible for the management of the Durham Cathedral Bookshop. Nothing in this article reflects on either Durham Cathedral or SPCK.
I should also say that there are a lot of numbers in this post, and I will be pleased to correct any mistakes.
Last week I posted about the plight of Durham Cathedral Bookshop.
Today there is an article about it in the Northern Echo Newspaper. The article features the petition we started a few weeks ago, which now has more than 300 signatures.
More about the SPCK/SSG case:
My weekly SPCK roundup should be out sometime on Saturday morning. This is just a summary.
[/caption]
Randy W Williams, the Trustee in Bankruptcy for the Application for the Bankruptcy of the Society of Saint Stephen the Great by J. Mark Brewer and Brewer and Pritchard PC, filed a motion requesting sanctions against J Mark Brewer and Brewer and Pritchard PC on September 4th 2008, following on from the dismissal with prejudice of the application.
The motion accuses Mark Brewer and the Brewer and Pritchard law firm of bad faith, non disclosure of information, conflicts of interest, perpetrating a “fraud on the court”, violation of disciplinary rules and possibly US Law, suggests financial sanctions, and asks that Mr J Mark Brewer be sent back to Law School for Training in Legal Ethics.
In other words, the kitchen sink.
This may be the biggest development since it all started - the dam *may* be about to start to break. Hang on to your hat.
Fairly brief this week, but with a couple of important reports.
A report from The Bookseller states that the application for Bankruptcy in the Southern Division of the Texas Court in Houston. They have been in contact with Randy Williams, the Trustee in Bankruptcy :
“The Chapter 7 bankruptcy filed by Christian bookseller St Stephen the Great was dismissed because the case was filed “in bad faith”, according to a court official.
Courtroom minutes show that the case was dismissed “with prejudice” during a hearing at Houston Bankruptcy Court last Thursday.
The ruling has a number of restrictions on it, including a set period when Mark and Phil Brewer, who run the chain, cannot submit another bankruptcy filing in the US. Randy W Williams, trustee for the Chapter 7 case, told The Bookseller that “the motion to dismiss was granted with prejud-ice and the judge found that the filing of the case was in bad faith”.
“Bad faith means in this case that it was done for a wrong or improper purpose,” he said.
In June, Williams filed a motion to dismiss it, claiming “on its face, there is nothing to liquidate and nothing available to fund an in-vestigation in the UK”.The brothers told suppliers in June that SSG had filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code. The court later converted this to Chapter 7, leaving the retailer in liquidation.
Mark Brewer told The Bookseller last week that he did not have enough money to file for bankruptcy in the United Kingdom.
He was unavailable for comment this week.”
This is one step further than I reported last week, when it was only clear that the application had been “dismissed with prejudice” .
As I documented last week, this has a lot of implications.
I hear from Phil Groom that the application to make the UK charity Society of Saint Stephen the Great bankrupt at the United States Bankruptcy Court Southern District of Texas in Houston has been Dismissed with Prejudice:
Thanks to Rigorist for this update, posted August 29, 2008 at 12:11 am:
I just checked the US court system’s PACER service this afternoon (it is still afternoon on this side of the Atlantic). The bankrupcty case was dismissed at today’s hearing on the trustee’s motion.
The actual docket entry is as follows:
“Courtroom Minutes. Time Hearing Held: 11:00 am. Appearances: Mark Brewer for debtor; Randy Williams for Trustee. (Related document(s): 24 Chapter 7 Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss Case). Ellen Hickman present. Mr. Williams addressed the Court regarding the motion to dismiss. Arguments were heard by opposing parties. The Court announced its findings and dismissed the case with prejudice. (rsmi) (Entered: 08/28/2008)”
A written order with more explanation may follow, but as of right now, the bankruptcy case is dismissed.
This means that the Society of Saint Stephen the Great, a UK Charity, has been recognised (at this stage, by this Court) as not being able to be liquidated under US Bankruptcy Laws.
The “With Prejudice” dismissal means that the case is dismissed for good reason and the plaintiff is barred from bringing an action on the same claim. I can’t comment on what is possible in other courts, however.