--- In otmushrooms@..., tdnorthey <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Anyone know what the outcome of this vote was?
I called Sallie, she told me the two motions were carried. She also
told me my dissenting proxy was specifically noted in the minutes.
It mystifies me which creditors voted in favour, or why.
Nick.
Hi all
Unrelated to OT's failure to pay us...
On behalf of a project called "Big Brother Mouse"
(http://www.laobooks.com/support.htm and
http://www.bigbrothermouse.com/) which is producing books for kids in
Laos, I am looking for a Windows programmer for a small project.
The guy who is running the project has developed a new font to typeset
Lao, and needs a program for his Lao people typesetting the books to
easily switch the system font between English and the Lao font. His idea
is to have it run as a background program in Windows (XP), which starts
at startup, with an icon on the task bar to click to toggle between
English and Lao.
If you have the skills and are happy to do a small project to help out,
please drop me a line. Alternatively, feel free to pass this on to
people you know who might have the skills to help out! :-)
Cheers, Jane.
Anyone know what the outcome of this vote was?
I was cleaning up today and found my notes from the creditor's
meeting. I noted "Stewart Powell stated Company responsible for fees
for the Trust item 7". Stewart was a company director at that time, IIRC.
Item 7 of the variation of the DOCA says "Any fees, costs or
disbursements incurred by the deed administrator in excess of the
estimated fees of $100,000 provided for in 2.5, be paid by the Trusts
subject to the approval of the Company, or if not approved by the
Company, the approval of the beneficiaries under the Trusts."
I also found notes from 4 Dec 03 when Peter Yates and Sallie Muire
called me. I noted that they told me "In no worse position (employee
and unsecured creditors). Company covers all expenses even over $100k"
Required: Senior software engineer (C++, Windows, VS 6.0/2003/2005, MFC,
DirectShow, etc.). 3+ years experience. Immediate start.
Please contact me on p.s.davis@... if you are interested.
regards
Paul Davis
Hi,
Spoke with Sallie Muir this morning and got several pieces of helpful
information.
* Proxys can me made out to "the Chairman".
* Best to deal with Sallie this morning (02) 9322 5621. She will be
out for the majority of the afternoon. The other person (Tony) is on
leave.
* Fax number for these proxies (02) 9322 7261.
More detailed information
1. I suspect most people won't actually know anyone who is
physically turning up to the meeting in Sydney (L3/111 Harrington St,
Sydney), so the next best choice is to specify The Chairman (hopefully
his name is not Mao).
1a. If you are turning up to the meeting, reply to this list.
2. If you didn't get the documents about this meeting, it can be
emailed out if you contact Sallie. While she won't be there this
afternoon, leave a voice message, and she can check it and get someone
else to send it [if you leave enough details...]
3. The fax number is (02) 93227261 - THIS IS NOT ANYWHERE ON THE
MEETING NOTICE/REPORT. Send the original within 72 hours of faxing.
Nick Bishop
-----
Catering for stupidity #5,386,281
NEVER GO TO THE BEACH TO WATCH FOR, OR SURF, A TSUNAMI WAVE!
-- Tsunami safety brochure, Malibu, California Oct 2005
-oOo-
--- In otmushrooms@..., nick4mony <no_reply@y...> wrote:
>
> A notice of meeting has been sent, to approve extra fees for the
> Administration process.
Of course I was talking about the OT administration (as opposed to
Swish or Ion - we do have some of these members on this list).
Now a reminder,
This meeting is tomorrow (Wednesday 11:00am Sydney). If you have
questions, or (as one contractor has found) you've been dropped off
the radar, people to contact are Sallie Muir (02)93225621 or Tony
Wright (02)93227606.
Nick Bishop
-----
A brass plate seen in Ireland
Argue & Phibbs
Solicitors
-- courtesy of the Age.
A notice of meeting has been sent, to approve extra fees for the
Administration process.
I will be voting against these motions.
Support your contractor colleagues and send a message that you don't
think the work of the Administrator/Trustee is up to scratch.
While there is no impact on employee creditors, I do feel that the
Administrators are not starving, and that their work has not been up
to scratch. If these motions are carried, about 3/4 of the remaining
funds will be used on fees rather than being paid to your contractor
colleagues and other trade creditors.
The other Tuff-Nut question I have is why it has taken all this time
to get this far??? It has taken more than 2 years (since the first
unsecured creditors' distribution in April 2004) to come this far -
and they don't explain what they've been doing.
Fill out the proxy form, tick NO, and send it in to them.
Nick Bishop
-----
Has Hird's herd heard about The Hurd
[James Hird is a footy player for Essendon, The Hurd is a type of Unix]
-oOo-
I just got a letter from my super fund saying I got another super
guarantee payment on 22 Aug (which could only be for OT). It's for
approx 21% of the first SG payment I got (the first payment was for
about 110% of what OT owed me).
Perhaps the ATO has decided to pay compensation to all of us for the
delays?
I haven't filled in any compensation forms.
Anyone else get this?
The information and forms for lodging compensation claims against the
ATO have been uploaded.
Thanks to David Letcher for beating these out of the Tax Office. This
is intended for compensation for the lengthy delays in getting super
paid into our accounts. The files are in both the Public File
Archive, and on the Files section of the group. The files are:
Compensation_ATO_Howto.txt
Copy of email from ATO, how to claim compensation.
Claiming_ compensation.doc
Understanding the claims procedure.
Compensation application.pdf
Form for claiming compensation from the ATO.
Those with Yahoo ID's should get them from the Files section, those
without can head over to the Public File Archives.
Nick Bishop
-----
A real brass plate, seen in Ireland (I saw it in the Age).
Argue & Phibbs
Solicitors
-oOo-
Hello,
This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the otmushrooms
group.
File : /Compensationapplication.pdf
Uploaded by : nick4mony
Description : (from David Letcher) Form for claiming compensation from the
ATO.
You can access this file at the URL
http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/files/Compensationapplication.pdf
To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/au/groups/files
Regards,
nick4mony
Richard Watson wrote:
> I notice that OT has vacated 20 Prospect St Box Hill. Can anyone
> tell me what has become of them?
Gone to Tally-Ho technology park.
Renamed s2net
See www.s2net.net
I notice that OT has vacated 20 Prospect St Box Hill. Can anyone tell me
what has become of them?
Richard Watson
Lecturer
Caulfield School of IT
Monash University
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Did the ATO go after S2NET (OT) and get the money? Could we do a civil suite and
get our pay?
Paul
> nick4mony <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In otmushrooms@..., "landau351"
> <david_letcher@a...> wrote:
>
> > I have sent Nick Bishop a copy of an email from "ATO complaints"
> > together with electronic versions of two documents (as I can't post
> > them here).
>
> OK, I've got them on my computer. They'll be up in a couple of days,
> once I figure out what I can delete from my Public File Archive
> (because it is out of space).
>
> The other thing is ... just today, I got a letter from the ATO
> advising about the payment they made on 26 Oct 2005 for an amount that
> was 110% of the super that was owed by O.T. - that is 110% of the
> total, not 110% of the 43%. I thought it a bit strange they waited
> until the end of the tax year until they sent this letter.
>
> Nick Bishop
> -----
> For those that don't remember this from the Age a couple of months
> ago: A real brass plate, seen in Ireland
>
> Argue & Phibbs,
> Solicitors
> -oOo-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
> this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--- In otmushrooms@..., "landau351"
<david_letcher@a...> wrote:
> I have sent Nick Bishop a copy of an email from "ATO complaints"
> together with electronic versions of two documents (as I can't post
> them here).
OK, I've got them on my computer. They'll be up in a couple of days,
once I figure out what I can delete from my Public File Archive
(because it is out of space).
The other thing is ... just today, I got a letter from the ATO
advising about the payment they made on 26 Oct 2005 for an amount that
was 110% of the super that was owed by O.T. - that is 110% of the
total, not 110% of the 43%. I thought it a bit strange they waited
until the end of the tax year until they sent this letter.
Nick Bishop
-----
For those that don't remember this from the Age a couple of months
ago: A real brass plate, seen in Ireland
Argue & Phibbs,
Solicitors
-oOo-
Ok, It's been a while, but here is what (finally) transpired.
Nobody on the normal ATO help line knew how to help. I was told that
I was paid in error, or other complete rubbish.
Eventually I was told that I can contact "ATO complaints". At the
complaints line, I finally found someone that wasn't a complete idiot
and thus able to unravel the mess and get the monies paid to my new
Super fund.
I was also told that I could claim "compensation" for the incredibly
long time it took them to pay me. I don't mean since Dec' 05, this
refers to the entire time since OT.
Today I received a letter telling me they approved the claim and paid
more $$ to my Super scheme. YAY!!!
I have sent Nick Bishop a copy of an email from "ATO complaints"
together with electronic versions of two documents (as I can't post
them here).
The first doco is an explanation of what they consider a valid claim
and the 2nd doco was the actual claim sheet.
In part, the info. doc states;
"More information
For compensation enquiries, or to order Applying for compensation
(NAT11669):
• phone the toll-free compensation assistance line on 1800 005 172, or
• email mailto:compensation.application@....
"
Below is the email from Simon telling me how to claim compo. This
email (and the two attached documents) has been sent to Nick. I have
asked him to post them here.
=================== email ===================
Information about lodging a compensation claim
I refer to our conversation earlier today in relation to the lodgement
of a compensation claim against the Australian Taxation Office (ATO).
2. Please find attached an application for compensation form
which you may complete in order to lodge a compensation claim against
the ATO.
3. The information that the ATO will require in order to
assess your claim is the following:
(a) the basis of the claim, focussing in detail, with
particulars, on the losses that you consider you have suffered;
(b) the details of how you consider these losses have
been directly caused by the conduct of the Tax Office and or its
officers; and
(c) any documentary evidence of the losses claimed
such as, a copy of your Bank statement which notes the amount of the
Dishonour Fee.
4. I have attached a copy of an ATO brochure entitled,
"Claiming Compensation" for your information. Please also note that
the ATO has further information available on the website at
www.ato.gov.au.
5. Please do not hesitate to call me if you would like me to
clarify or provide you with further information.
Yours sincerely,
Simon Richards
Legal Adviser
Government Law & Practice
Australian Taxation Office
Ph: (02) 6216 1057
Fax: (02) 6216 1247
Email: Simon.Richards@...
Originally, the ATO increased the money owed to me when they made a
payment to my super fund in December 05.
Sadly, they had paid it into an old super scheme. The old super
scheme then returned it to the ATO who deducted the extra money to a
lower amount than even OT say they owed. This lower amount was paid
to the new super scheme yesterday.
The Tax office claim that the reversal must be as a result of
something that the employer (OT) has done, or did do, in December 05.
The ATO paid me only what they think OT paid them. The amounts they
have on record do not add up to the amount claimed to have been paid
by OT.
I am now going to contact OT to see what they had done (if anything)
to reduce my Super entitlement
- David Letcher
Hi all
I haven't got any letters form ATO. But somebody from ATO called me and said
my super will be sent to my nominated super fund. The amount too seems to be
more than what was originally said. I have to check with my fund now.
Bandula
tdnorthey <no_reply@...> wrote:
My online super fund statement says my outstanding OT super was paid
into my super fund on 29 Dec.
The amount was what ATO had said it would be - approx 110% of what was
originally owed rather than 43%.
BTW, I did not receive any letters from the ATO about this.
Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of this
group) can read this message in the archives.
Useful links:
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
otmushrooms-unsubscribe@...
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News: Get the latest news via video today!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
My online super fund statement says my outstanding OT super was paid
into my super fund on 29 Dec.
The amount was what ATO had said it would be - approx 110% of what was
originally owed rather than 43%.
BTW, I did not receive any letters from the ATO about this.
OSS Sales Position
Required: Sales person who understands the value proposition of selling OSS
type software to large telecommunications groups.This is the leading product
for performance management in the wirelesss world and requires someone who
can sell at the top end of organisations. They do not need to be an engineer
but have an understanding of what the technology can deliver to the
business. This is an Australian and NZ role so there will be travel
required.
Please e-mail me at p.s.davis@... if you are interested or know of
anyone from OT days who fits the bill.
regards
Paul Davis
I have received no letter from the ATO so yesterday I got onto
http://www.ato.gov.au/super/content.asp?doc=/content/33301.htm
which is a tool that will look for your lost superannuation and
provide you with possible matches.
Previously this has shown no matches, but now it shows "a possible
match with ...Superannuation Holding Account Reserve (SHAR) and/or
superannuation guarantee records".
It says to ring 13 10 20, which I did just now, and I must have got
through to the sheltered workshop within the ATO.
The call centre person couldn't find anything under super guarantee
or anywhere else, and after about 25 mins of me insisting there was
something there in Super Guarantee, and she wanting to know when it
was paid and what super fund she should look in for it, and thinking
an assessment was issued against OT, she put me on hold for 10
seconds and must have asked someone else because she came back and
told me it was there under super guarantee, and how much it was.
Like the others it is about 10.something percent more than the total
amount of super we should have got (i.e. approx 110% of the amount
we were owed, not 43% of it).
For some reason, the ATO has my old super fund (which has closed)
recorded as my current super fund, so they want me to send in a
Super fund nomination.
http://www.ato.gov.au/content/downloads/nat8676.pdf
Note the fax number on the form is wrong - I was told the correct
one is 1300 139 024.
Tough. Perhaps try to call them again, you may get a more sympathetic
person next time. I had no trouble at all.
If you choose to write, be prepared for a 5 month wait for any reply. I
sent them a letter end of May and did not hear anything until 3rd
November.
--- benedict
-----Original Message-----
From: otmushrooms@...
[mailto:otmushrooms@...] On Behalf Of Paul Davis
Sent: Tuesday, 8 November 2005 4:58 PM
To: otmushrooms@...
Cc: p.s.davis@...
Subject: Re: RE: [Unpaid Mushrooms] OT Superannuation payment by the tax
office
The ATO would not give me a break down over the phone as they required
me to put my request in writing!
Addressed to:
Superannuation - SG Payment
PO Box 277
World Trade Centre
Victoria, 8005
+ Tax file, letter reference, company name, ABN, etc...
regards
Paul
> Lofstedt, Benedict <Benedict.Lofstedt@...> wrote:
>
> I had a similar letter on Thursday.
>
> I rang my fund - they had not got any money.
>
> I rang the ATO and complained about being given a figure without any
> breakdown, saying that I found it to be a very unusual practice. I
also
> complained about the missing payment.
>
> I got a breakdown over the phone, and was promised to have one sent to
> me by post. The operator also promised to check the missing payment,
and
> to re-issue the payment if necessary.
>
> The figure was also higher than my estimate. The breakdown over the
> phone told me that this was due to
> - the 2001-2002 payment being topped up to 100% of what's owed (I
> suppose that's ATO paying what OT did not pay as part of the DoCA
> - interest on the 2001-2002 payment (a little bit more than 10% of the
> full amount)
> - interest on the 2002-2003 payment (I was a continuing employee) (a
> little bit more than 10.5% of the amount)
>
> If you make similar adjustments to the sums you got from Deloitte you
> should get pretty close to the ATO figures.
>
> My fund is still not showing any moneys having been paid. I'll wait
> another week and check again.
>
> --- benedict
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: otmushrooms@...
> [mailto:otmushrooms@...] On Behalf Of Richard Watson
> Sent: Monday, 7 November 2005 5:44 PM
> To: otmushrooms@...
> Subject: [Unpaid Mushrooms] OT Superannuation payment by the tax
office
>
> I was informed by the tax office today that the superannuation owed to
> me by OT was paid to my superannuation fund on 20 October 2005. I have
> not yet verified this with my fund but the amount the tax office
quoted
> was considerably more than the amount that Deloittes told me they had
> paid to the tax office on my behalf.
>
>
>
> Richard Watson
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/162 - Release Date:
> 11/5/2005
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members
of
> this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members
of
> this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
this group) can read this message in the archives.
Useful links:
Yahoo! Groups Links
The ATO would not give me a break down over the phone as they required me to put
my request in writing!
Addressed to:
Superannuation - SG Payment
PO Box 277
World Trade Centre
Victoria, 8005
+ Tax file, letter reference, company name, ABN, etc...
regards
Paul
> Lofstedt, Benedict <Benedict.Lofstedt@...> wrote:
>
> I had a similar letter on Thursday.
>
> I rang my fund - they had not got any money.
>
> I rang the ATO and complained about being given a figure without any
> breakdown, saying that I found it to be a very unusual practice. I also
> complained about the missing payment.
>
> I got a breakdown over the phone, and was promised to have one sent to
> me by post. The operator also promised to check the missing payment, and
> to re-issue the payment if necessary.
>
> The figure was also higher than my estimate. The breakdown over the
> phone told me that this was due to
> - the 2001-2002 payment being topped up to 100% of what's owed (I
> suppose that's ATO paying what OT did not pay as part of the DoCA
> - interest on the 2001-2002 payment (a little bit more than 10% of the
> full amount)
> - interest on the 2002-2003 payment (I was a continuing employee) (a
> little bit more than 10.5% of the amount)
>
> If you make similar adjustments to the sums you got from Deloitte you
> should get pretty close to the ATO figures.
>
> My fund is still not showing any moneys having been paid. I'll wait
> another week and check again.
>
> --- benedict
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: otmushrooms@...
> [mailto:otmushrooms@...] On Behalf Of Richard Watson
> Sent: Monday, 7 November 2005 5:44 PM
> To: otmushrooms@...
> Subject: [Unpaid Mushrooms] OT Superannuation payment by the tax office
>
> I was informed by the tax office today that the superannuation owed to
> me by OT was paid to my superannuation fund on 20 October 2005. I have
> not yet verified this with my fund but the amount the tax office quoted
> was considerably more than the amount that Deloittes told me they had
> paid to the tax office on my behalf.
>
>
>
> Richard Watson
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/162 - Release Date:
> 11/5/2005
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
> this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
> this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
I had a similar letter on Thursday.
I rang my fund - they had not got any money.
I rang the ATO and complained about being given a figure without any
breakdown, saying that I found it to be a very unusual practice. I also
complained about the missing payment.
I got a breakdown over the phone, and was promised to have one sent to
me by post. The operator also promised to check the missing payment, and
to re-issue the payment if necessary.
The figure was also higher than my estimate. The breakdown over the
phone told me that this was due to
- the 2001-2002 payment being topped up to 100% of what's owed (I
suppose that's ATO paying what OT did not pay as part of the DoCA
- interest on the 2001-2002 payment (a little bit more than 10% of the
full amount)
- interest on the 2002-2003 payment (I was a continuing employee) (a
little bit more than 10.5% of the amount)
If you make similar adjustments to the sums you got from Deloitte you
should get pretty close to the ATO figures.
My fund is still not showing any moneys having been paid. I'll wait
another week and check again.
--- benedict
-----Original Message-----
From: otmushrooms@...
[mailto:otmushrooms@...] On Behalf Of Richard Watson
Sent: Monday, 7 November 2005 5:44 PM
To: otmushrooms@...
Subject: [Unpaid Mushrooms] OT Superannuation payment by the tax office
I was informed by the tax office today that the superannuation owed to
me by OT was paid to my superannuation fund on 20 October 2005. I have
not yet verified this with my fund but the amount the tax office quoted
was considerably more than the amount that Deloittes told me they had
paid to the tax office on my behalf.
Richard Watson
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/162 - Release Date:
11/5/2005
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
this group) can read this message in the archives.
Useful links:
Yahoo! Groups Links
I was informed by the tax office today that the superannuation owed to
me by OT was paid to my superannuation fund on 20 October 2005. I have
not yet verified this with my fund but the amount the tax office quoted
was considerably more than the amount that Deloittes told me they had
paid to the tax office on my behalf.
Richard Watson
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/162 - Release Date:
11/5/2005
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Having just returned from a contract job in New Zealand I came across
the following letter from Tony Robinson MP amongst my mail. It seems
that Tony is still fighting for justice for retrenched employees. If
anyone is interested in talking to Tony please let me know.
Richard Watson
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________
9 June 2005
Dear Richard
GEERS
I enclose for your information a copy of a letter I have received from
the Federal Minister for Industrial Relations in response to my earlier
query about certain aspects of the General Employee Entitlements and
Redundancy Scheme.
The Minister makes a number of points, perhaps the most significant of
which is the relatively few number of cases in which Deeds of Company
Arrangements (DoCA) have disturbed the order of priority specified in
the Corporations Act.
I’d be more than happy to discuss this with you further – it may be that
given the relatively few cases in which DoCAs interfere with
distributions, a new procedure should apply to facilitate the provision
of entitlements.
Yours sincerely
Tony Robinson MP
Member for Mitcham
Enc.
Mr Tony Robinson MP
Member for Mitcham
9 Blackburn Road
Blackburn Vic 3130
1 Jun 2005
Dear Mr Robinson
I refer to your letter of 23 February 2005 concerning the legislation of
the General Employee Entitlements and Redundancy Scheme (GEERS).
The Australian Government is the first government to seriously address
the issue of employee entitlements lost as a result of an employer’s
insolvency. GEERS was established by this Government against a
background of inaction by the Federal and State Labor parties, including
a failure by State Labor Governments to contribute to employee
entitlements support schemes.
This Government appreciates that many employees experience significant
hardship as a result of their employer becoming insolvent. Since the
introduction of the first federal employee entitlements scheme in
January 2000, over 50 000 Australian workers have received in excess of
$615 million in assistance for their entitlements lost due to the
insolvency of their employer.
To further protect the entitlements of employees of insolvent companies
the Federal Government introduced changes into the Corporations Act 2001
which strengthened legal obligations on company directors to protect
employee entitlements and extended the prohibition on insolvent trading
to cover uncommercial transactions other than debts. Anyone who
deliberately avoids payment of employee entitlements can now be ordered
to pay a penalty and/or compensation to employees.
GEERS does not negate the responsibility of all employers to pay their
employees’ full entitlements. Employers are, and must remain,
responsible for the provision of entitlements to their employees,
especially to the extent that any assets are available.
You have specifically asked why GEERS is governed by Operational
Arrangements rather than legislation and/or regulations. The practices
of directors and related parties in respect of a company’s insolvency
are constantly changing. By remaining an administratively based scheme,
GEERS is better able to address emerging inappropriate practices which
seek to either exploit employees or derive an unwarranted benefit from
taxpayer funds used to provide GEERS assistance.
I don’t agree with your claim that the Government, through my
Department, may be able to “pick and choose those circumstances in which
the scheme will apply.” GEERS is administered in strict accordance with
its Operational Arrangements. My Department clearly explains the basis
for its decisions in writing on each occasion directing claimants to the
relevant clause(s) of the Operational Arrangements. Claimants who
believe their case has not been administered in accordance with the
Operational Arrangements may appeal the departrment’s decision or apply
to the Commonwealth Ombudsman for review.
I note you ask how many cases have involved Deeds of Company Arrangement
(DoCA) that have disturbed the order of priority specified in the
Corporations Act 2001. Where a DoCA is found to alter the priority
specified in subsection 556(1) in the Corporations Act 2001, Insolvency
Practitioners are advised that this is inappropriate and initially given
the opportunity to amend the DoCA so that the priorities and protections
they contain for employees are restored, and the terms of the GEERS
Operational Arrangements are met allowing employees’ claims to be
processed.
Out of over 4000 cases processed by my Department since the introduction
of the employee entitlements safety net schemes, there have been 19
cases with DoCAs that have disturbed the order of priority specified in
the Corporations Act 2001.
I note that you have also asked for the number of times people have been
prosecuted for deliberate avoidance of liability for employee
entitlements as provided for in the Corporations Act 2001.
Unfortunately, this issue does not fall within my responsibility, I have
therefore referred this aspect of your query to the Treasurer for direct
response.
I trust this information is of assistance.
Yours sincerely
Kevin Andrews
Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations
Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.1/28 - Release Date: 6/24/2005
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Not that I have heard. May be time to start lobbying again.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lofstedt, Benedict" <Benedict.Lofstedt@...>
To: <otmushrooms@...>
Sent: Friday, 27 May 2005 14:47
Subject: [Unpaid Mushrooms] RE: [otmushrooms] Status of SGC payments under
the deed as at 21 May 04
> Has anyone got their super?
>
> --- benedict
>
> Benedict Lofstedt
> Computer Associates
> Sr Quality Assurance Engineer
> eTrust Admin R&D
> Tel: +61 3 8416 5872
> Fax: +61 3 8416 5810
> Mob: +61 412 438 916
> Email: Benedict.Lofstedt@...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Northey [mailto:tn@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 May 2004 11:19 AM
> To: otmushrooms@...
> Subject: [otmushrooms] Status of SGC payments under the deed as at 21
> May 04
>
> I spoke to the ATO on 21 May asking when we would get our super. The
> news
> is pretty much the same.
>
> They are very busy on the phones fielding calls about Super
> co-contributions
> so it is hard to get to talk to someone. However they do take your
> number
> and call back (in my case, the next day).
>
> The computer system that would allow them to transfer SGC payments to
> our
> super funds is not yet in service and is expected to be "at the end of
> May".
>
> They still cannot tell you anything about your SGC amounts.
>
> ATO do not pay interest on SGC payments delayed by ATO inaction. You
> may
> request compensation by writing to them, detailing dates and amounts
> paid
> etc, demonstrating disadvantage by providing evidence of the income and
> growth your SGC payment would have made in your super fund for the
> period in
> question (based on the income of your super fund over that period). It
> would appear to be easier to do this once the payment is made so you can
> actually determine the loss.
>
> Write to
>
> Australian Taxation Office
> Superannuation Section
> PO Box 277
> World Trade Centre VIC 8005
>
> I think a letter to your local member is appropriate as well.
>
> Or put in a job application to work at the Mitsubishi engine factory in
> Adelaide to ensure you receive something from the govt.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Northey" <tn@...>
> To: <otmushrooms@...>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:41 PM
> Subject: [otmushrooms] Status of SGC payments under the deed
>
>
> > Anyone heard anything about super owed under the deed from ATO yet? I
> > haven't.
> >
> > It hasn't magically appeared in my super fund either.
> >
> > I just checked on the ATO Super Seeker on-line superannuation search
> at
> > http://www.ato.gov.au/super/content.asp?doc=/content/33301.htm
> >
> > and it said:
> >
> > Lost Members Register No match found
> > Tax Office Records No match found
> >
> > I called the ATO on 131020 and they said they are (still) transferring
> to
> a
> > new computer system (it was expected to be up by February but now they
> > expect it up in 2-3 weeks). They said the money is probably there as
> a
> > credit on the Deloitte account (but they are not permitted to check
> that
> for
> > me) and that it can't be distributed until the new system is up.
> >
> > When the money is distributed, it should automagically appear in your
> most
> > active super fund. If you want to make sure it goes to the right
> fund,
> you
> > can contact your super fund and tell them there is some SGC money
> coming
> > through soon and they will organise with ATO to make sure it goes into
> that
> > fund. Otherwise you don't have to do anything. If you call ATO, they
> > cannot tell you what your most active super fund is, because that is
> on
> the
> > new computer system.
> >
> > rgds
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> > Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members
> of
> this group) can read this message in the archives.
> >
> > Useful links:
> > OT Mushrooms home page (previous messages)
> > http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
> > Public file archives (Files for download)
> > http://au.geocities.com/nick4mony/otm/index.htm
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > otmushrooms-unsubscribe@...
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> > http://au.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
> this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> OT Mushrooms home page (previous messages)
> http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
> Public file archives (Files for download)
> http://au.geocities.com/nick4mony/otm/index.htm
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> otmushrooms-unsubscribe@...
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://au.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Has anyone got their super?
--- benedict
Benedict Lofstedt
Computer Associates
Sr Quality Assurance Engineer
eTrust Admin R&D
Tel: +61 3 8416 5872
Fax: +61 3 8416 5810
Mob: +61 412 438 916
Email: Benedict.Lofstedt@...
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Northey [mailto:tn@...]
Sent: Tuesday, 25 May 2004 11:19 AM
To: otmushrooms@...
Subject: [otmushrooms] Status of SGC payments under the deed as at 21
May 04
I spoke to the ATO on 21 May asking when we would get our super. The
news
is pretty much the same.
They are very busy on the phones fielding calls about Super
co-contributions
so it is hard to get to talk to someone. However they do take your
number
and call back (in my case, the next day).
The computer system that would allow them to transfer SGC payments to
our
super funds is not yet in service and is expected to be "at the end of
May".
They still cannot tell you anything about your SGC amounts.
ATO do not pay interest on SGC payments delayed by ATO inaction. You
may
request compensation by writing to them, detailing dates and amounts
paid
etc, demonstrating disadvantage by providing evidence of the income and
growth your SGC payment would have made in your super fund for the
period in
question (based on the income of your super fund over that period). It
would appear to be easier to do this once the payment is made so you can
actually determine the loss.
Write to
Australian Taxation Office
Superannuation Section
PO Box 277
World Trade Centre VIC 8005
I think a letter to your local member is appropriate as well.
Or put in a job application to work at the Mitsubishi engine factory in
Adelaide to ensure you receive something from the govt.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Northey" <tn@...>
To: <otmushrooms@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:41 PM
Subject: [otmushrooms] Status of SGC payments under the deed
> Anyone heard anything about super owed under the deed from ATO yet? I
> haven't.
>
> It hasn't magically appeared in my super fund either.
>
> I just checked on the ATO Super Seeker on-line superannuation search
at
> http://www.ato.gov.au/super/content.asp?doc=/content/33301.htm
>
> and it said:
>
> Lost Members Register No match found
> Tax Office Records No match found
>
> I called the ATO on 131020 and they said they are (still) transferring
to
a
> new computer system (it was expected to be up by February but now they
> expect it up in 2-3 weeks). They said the money is probably there as
a
> credit on the Deloitte account (but they are not permitted to check
that
for
> me) and that it can't be distributed until the new system is up.
>
> When the money is distributed, it should automagically appear in your
most
> active super fund. If you want to make sure it goes to the right
fund,
you
> can contact your super fund and tell them there is some SGC money
coming
> through soon and they will organise with ATO to make sure it goes into
that
> fund. Otherwise you don't have to do anything. If you call ATO, they
> cannot tell you what your most active super fund is, because that is
on
the
> new computer system.
>
> rgds
> Tom
>
>
>
> Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members
of
this group) can read this message in the archives.
>
> Useful links:
> OT Mushrooms home page (previous messages)
> http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
> Public file archives (Files for download)
> http://au.geocities.com/nick4mony/otm/index.htm
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> otmushrooms-unsubscribe@...
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://au.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Reminder: this message is not private. Anyone (including non-members of
this group) can read this message in the archives.
Useful links:
OT Mushrooms home page (previous messages)
http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
Public file archives (Files for download)
http://au.geocities.com/nick4mony/otm/index.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/otmushrooms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
otmushrooms-unsubscribe@...
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://au.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Today it became official (in the pipeline for a few weeks).
Telstra have offcially dumped openCI, after 6 years of failed operation.
What more need I say ??
nick4mony wrote:
> Wayne Passlow has made his next move. He's created an entity
> called OT Holdings, to make an offer of 41c per (modern) OT
> share.
Open Tel rejects founder's offer
By Colin Kruger
May 6, 2005
The independent directors of Open Telecommunications have rejected
the $7.4 million takeover bid by company founder Wayne Passlow and
Macquarie Bank, despite the independent expert's report finding the
41c per share offer was "fair and reasonable".
"The independent directors believe that the offer from the bidder
undervalues your company," said Open Telecom chairman Terry
Cuthbertson in the Target's Statement to the Australian Stock
Exchange late yesterday.
"The offer is opportunistic and seeks to gain the benefit of the
turnaround in Open Telecommunication's business before it is
properly reflected in Open Telecommunication's share price," the
statement said.
The directors said the offer did not reflect an appropriate premium
for control of the company and is less than the 48c per share value
calculated by Patersons Securities, which does not include a control
premium.
The Target's Statement said the bid offered only a 2.5 per cent
premium to the volume-weighted average share price for the four
weeks to March 8. The statement noted that the share price from
March 8 to March 23 fell due to trading by an associate of the
bidders and should be excluded from any calculations of a premium.
The bid was launched on March 29.
The directors said control premiums were typically in the range of
25 to 35 per cent and noted that Open Telecom had spent more than
$70 million developing its technology since 1999. "A competitor
attempting to enter the market may take up to two years to develop
alternative software," the statement said.
The independent expert, KPMG, said its finding took into account the
$30 million spent on product development in the past three years as
well as $17.4 million worth of tax losses, to which it gave no value.
Mr Passlow and Macquarie own 21.5 per cent of Open Tel.
http://tinyurl.com/dacnm
which is
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business/Open-Tel-rejects-founders-
offer/2005/05/05/1115092628782.html
nick4mony wrote:
> Wayne Passlow has made his next move.
Wayne together with Macquarie Bank - they own or will own 90% of OT
Holdings (see the bidder's statement).
> He's created an entity called
> OT Holdings, to make an offer of 41c per (modern) OT share.
>
> I'll have to plot the share splits and consolidations, and
> normalise the prices, but that sounds like a pittance (even if
> it is a 24% premium to the current on-market price).
Have a look at the chart (which caters for splits and
consolidations):
http://tinyurl.com/b8kgp
which is
http://www.asx.com.au/asx/research/ChartsSearchAndResults.jsp?
postback=true&asxCode=OTT&compare=index&indices=XJO&compareCode=&Time
Frame=M10&chart.x=48&chart.y=12
The 41c compares to the $1.30 (in today's prices) paid in the rights
issue and the $1.00 paid in the placement by the so-
called "sophisticated investors" (a corp law term for people who
qualify to invest without the protection of a prospectus).
There was a 5 to 1 split on 20 April 2000 so shares originally cost
$20 in the float in today's prices (originally shares were $1, then
there was a 5 to 1 split, i.e. 20c, then a 100 to 1 consolidation
i.e. $20).
Shares went as high as $380 in today's prices. Now they are worth
41c. The lowest exercise price of any of the employee options was
$20 in today's prices.
Also see http://tinyurl.com/7uw65
which is
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business/When-we-went-
pop/2005/04/12/1113251627650.html
Offline 
Send Email
