I’ve been sent a brain teaser. What legal reasons would someone have to discretely pay another individual £500k? The people are not currently in business together, although the recipient previously worked for the sender. No goods have been provided.
It’s a puzzle.
Looking for legal reasons only, no crazy illegal notions or wild speculation about real persons, this is purely a theoretical exercise.
Apparently I’m being sent a moral dilemma tomorrow: Will the recipient, with off-shore accounts but living in interesting times, declare the £500k?
1,406 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 37
- »
Obtusive rankers chairman
Offshore Revenue Cache?
Allegedly!
i wonder if a certain visit to murray park has any meaning to mr pauls cryptic comments?
Afternoon,
Anything to do with a Mr Ogilvie?
Hail Hail!
Sally,s cousin certainly set the heather on fire in his second stint at Ipox.Wonder if they had to pay him anything
I just say this because I’ve recently heard that Rangers 2012 will adopt the 4-3-3 system – with Sebo, Flo and Fat Sally.
Fassreifen:
I wiz gonni use onanism
Gonni no dae that…
danso_1888
Yes, I think that sounds more likely.
We need more clues from the Boss on this one I reckon. ;)
Before Declan enquires, discretely or discreetly?
Or maybe both?
(E)verything (B)ut (T)axes
Paul 67
This could relate to a previous contractual obligation. Bearing in mind that in Scotland a verbal agreement is nontheless a binding contract (though sometimes hard to prove).
For example, had I speculated that I might need some busienss services that company A provides but that I would require company A to deliver those services to a particular standard and that I might be in absentia when those services were being delivered I might agree to make a ‘special’ payment on reviewing the implementation of said services and finding that they had indeed been delivered in the manner that I supposed in advance of delivery.
or
I fancy the pants off you and I’ll send you money in the hope that you might love me back (that isn’t very legal as a tease, more financial)
or
(there is a film about this) the person paying the money has just slept with the wife of the person receiving the money.
The difficulty you have with the teaser is that is about ‘people’ rather than ‘companies’. There is nothing to stop individuals making any kind of personal transaction and not receiving ‘goods’ as part of that. This would be gifting.
If I sent you £500k tomorrow because I like what you do on CQN and you accepted this there is nothing illegal in such a transaction.
HH
Offending Reprehensible Crass
SDM to HR for taking AH?
I did come up with a nice conspiracy theory the other day, but it won’t now happen.
Here’s how it would have worked.
Sir Walter takes over at Wolves. All of Wolves’ goalkeepers mysteriously get injured. Wolves receive special permission to sign a goalkeeper outside the transfer window. Guess who Sir Walter buys for £20M or so?
Curiouser and curiouser ,malice in hunderland.
The SFFS good enough for the 3rd division
Slow on up take on this Declan thing but thoroughly enjoying it now.
Estadio?
There could be a lot of reasons: blackmail, bribery, hush money.
But none of them are legal.
So maybe it was just an act of charity.
The Tax Free Titles era…
Got a ring to to it.
EBT = Evading Britains Taxes
Omerta Related Carry-on
Celtic v v St Johnstone moved from 31/03/12 to Sunday 01/04/12
Hail Hail
Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon says:
24 February, 2012 at 16:38
Fraser Forster?
12.45pm k/o
Can you not just accept it as the nice gift in kind it is meant to be. Don’t be so scepticle and I really never took you for a cynic, hmm, hmm!
Minty to Ally Johnstone
Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon
You may well be on to something there, perhaps the cardigan is waiting for a post with a high spending club rather than Wolves. One to keep an eye on anyway. Sir Furious will give him every kind of recommendation to any club looking for a manager.
I can’t remember who to thank for posting this before, but here it is again:
http://www.grapheine.com/bombaytv/publicite-en-b391f6191759f066e3e3d761a2523691.html
FF
Orangatangs Rated Cleverer
As sure as night follows day, Declan is philvisreturns, or phivisreturnsreturns, as he should properly be known following his recent brush with the CQN spam-filter.
petec
Not available right now. His halo is away getting all the sh** wiped off from his years at the hunny bears. He’ll stay in hiding till he gets it back all polished with orange brasso and shinning like a masonic star!!
Swiss Tony – Re the Portsmouth landlady v Sky battle, it’s an interesting case. I remain unconvinced by the suggestion that if the landlady in Portsmouth hears the Premier League anthem (whatever that is) or views a logo then she puts herself at risk of copyright infringement and prosecution.
If the means of transmission and receiving have proven to be legal, then I can’t see how the viewer can be held accountable for the content. That scenario would be akin to a viewer being prosecuted for listening to rangers sectarian singing on TV.
Celtic match moved from 31 March to 1 April to accomodate Sky Sports. Presumably they want a title decider/presentation game.
Was just about to book flights for the game on the Saturday, thank goodness I didn’t.
Mort
thecat,
Is that so the cameras can see us celebrating having won the league at Ibrox the week before?
Sue Barker to Swally?
Love the fact that huns past and present are turning on each other.
Like at the end of Goodfellas when they start ratting and bumping each other off, only this time it’s much funnier.
is that only 4 home games live on TV rule still in existance ?