A4e Emma Harrison vows to sue anyone who stands in A4e’s way

According to a statement made by Mr and Mrs Harrison (featured in The Star), Emma plans to sue anyone she even dares to consider is making “false” statements. (I am not sure what it has to do with her husband Jim, but I can only assume that A4e had paid into one of his companies for using Thornbridge Hall – although its apparently personally owned?)

A snippet of the statement is as follows:-

We have never misused or redirected funds through our companies. Any transactions between our companies is 100 per cent legitimate and has a full audit trail.

We own personal properties personally, not through companies. We own business properties in businesses, not personally. The two are not to be confused.

Our personal finances, and the finances of the companies we own, are legal, above board, open and transparent and fully audited for legality.

To suggest or report otherwise is false and we will take the appropriate legal action if claims to the contrary are made.

Does a blog constitute reporting? (I assume its addressed at the press) OK, we are suggesting that there is something a little dodgy here. Using information out there in good faith that it is accurate notwithstanding the fact Emma Harrison hasn’t corrected such as being incorrect (therefore not in objection to such), I work it out as follows:-

1. The Harrisons own Thornbridge Hall personally and not through a company – this is a personal asset (unless the property is divided up? This assumption is made from the above statement, they live there, must be a personal property? Wikipedia suggests so.)
2. Payments to “two businesses and a pension fund” for renting a room etc. of a property not owned by either businesses (or does the businesses rent from Harrisons, and is let back out to A4e to drain cash?)
3. Therefore A4e doesn’t have Thornbridge Hall as an asset, neither does the other businesses/pension funds involved? They are not able to receive income from rental of a property neither owns!
4. Emma Harrison being a majority shareholder is neither here or there in regards to a business. As chairperson and director she has unlimited liability for this practice. This is why she stepped down – but under law makes no difference.

Money laundering?

This comes into money laundering territory. The Money Laundering Regulations come into play here, although for a technical definition the money used in this process has to be illegal monies. This doesn’t mean the MLR doesn’t impact to prevent such transactions becoming money laundering – i.e. same process but with legal money instead of illegal money. These days the law makes such activities very restrictive – as far as I am aware, for example, you can no longer set up a company with authorised share capital (of say £1 million) and only issuing less than that amount.

Of course, if said monies taken from A4e’s otherwise profits, were an result of fraud (and it has to be said its likely that is the case) then this is money laundering. Emma Harrison could be going to jail.

Tax Evasion?

Notwithstanding the fact that as a “personal” residence you would pay Council Tax. For business property you would pay Business Rates. It is probable that holding such meetings at Thornbridge Hall would constitute “business use” and the taxpayer was defrauded whilst no business rates were paid (assuming it doesn’t pay business rates).

Could also require planning permission to hold such meetings. You might not need planning permission if the use isn’t the main use for the property and infrequent, but probably need to pay Business Rates still!

Innocent?

Saint Emma (A4e Emma Harrison CBE) who founded, owns almost 90% and was a chair and director of a global medium-sized business, and entrepreneur Jim, cannot really claim they genuinely didn’t know what they were doing. Emma alone has two decades of business experience – I think Business Rates generally is a basic thing all business owners, even start ups , would know about!

So what was one moment, “Oh, I own the property I can rent it if I want.. and although our income is all from the taxpayer, its profits I have made” attitude (not a quote) gets a little bit sinister. Firstly, if they had to pay Business Rates and didn’t it could be classified as Tax Evasion, by not going forward to the Local Authority or Valuation Office, and secondly, if wide-spread systematic fraud is found or fraud that is more than a few one-offs (i.e. say over 6 months at one location) it becomes money laundering.

It could be jail and the CBE might be annulled. That is of course if Emma Harrison and/or the top management agreed to pay such monies for the property and know to a reasonable extent of the fraud. I guess a few of the minutes could be tampered with in the meanwhile, they seem to love doing this on a local basis.

I guess we will now be sued (unless Emma see this as “true”) – another charge, this time of perjury if she goes through with it. Of course, that is assuming she doesn’t use PHA media and actually uses a solicitor!!