DFCSS rears its ugly head again

[Taintedice]

Nelms doesn't appear interested in doing anything bar the bare minimum, same as the guy he replaced (appointed by DFCSS). It really is crucial that Keyes wakes up and puts this guy back where he's meant to be, in charge of the non-existant football academy, on a quarter of the wages

[BCram]

DFCSS paid 4 grand for a set of accounts they discussed for a minute at their AGM, probably where islay gets his thinking from

Not true about the accounts being discussed for a minute. There was a detailed explanation given in clear terms that everyone understood. No need to ask questions because of the clarity of the presentation. I had assumed that you were just making a joke, smiley faces usually are a clue, but you still seem to think that this should be an issue. The board of DFCSS discussed at the previous AGM the change in the way the accounts would be treated and the membership agreed that it was a sensible idea to accept a lower level of scrutiny at the lower cost.

[Deeranged]

Not true about the accounts being discussed for a minute. There was a detailed explanation given in clear terms that everyone understood. No need to ask questions because of the clarity of the presentation. I had assumed that you were just making a joke, smiley faces usually are a clue, but you still seem to think that this should be an issue. The board of DFCSS discussed at the previous AGM the change in the way the accounts would be treated and the membership agreed that it was a sensible idea to accept a lower level of scrutiny at the lower cost.

Never question the agenda.

[Taintedice]

Not true about the accounts being discussed for a minute. There was a detailed explanation given in clear terms that everyone understood. No need to ask questions because of the clarity of the presentation. I had assumed that you were just making a joke, smiley faces usually are a clue, but you still seem to think that this should be an issue. The board of DFCSS discussed at the previous AGM the change in the way the accounts would be treated and the membership agreed that it was a sensible idea to accept a lower level of scrutiny at the lower cost.

Scrutiny by whom, 50 people in a darkened room? Worth £4-5K of money that could be spent in the community? Anyway, already established I'm not talking about last year, even DFCSS wouldn't be so dumb as to pay 5-6k on fees from a turnover of, ummm, about £5.7k. It is clear that DFCSS accounts show £5.7k+ accountancy fees to have prepared/audited accounts for 2015/16 which showed a turnover of £17.8k. However, the cost of preparing the accounts has been reported under 'Membership Costs'. Nice little trick or false accounting? Were "Forbes Dave and Associates" preparing the accounts, since no actual accountancy fees that year? Even at their zenith, when the Grand Theft was taking place, they never turned over more than 70k a year, reading from available accounts on their website. That level of income, an audit isn't remotely required under Companies Law, never mind £7-8k being paid to accountants every year prior. DFCSS must be wound up and a successor organisation, for all fans, put in its place. D*** F***** running DFCSS, there is no chance of a reconciliation with FPS, or even money invested into the community, none at all. Hope that clears up my 'agenda' for FCA-man. FCA

[Deeranged]

Because a certain ‘leading light’ in the DSA is well in with JN.
The person posted on Pravda that my post stating Steve Martin was a former partner of FPS was wrong. He posted that Steve Martin was not a member of FPS and he had never been a partner in FPS.
When I posted proving that Steve Marin had been a member of FPS he never apologised. He just stopped posting on that topic.

Hi Islay.

As our resident financial whizz can you just confirm for me that DFCSS is a mutual society regulated by the FCA?

[BCram]

Scrutiny by whom, 50 people in a darkened room? Worth £4-5K of money that could be spent in the community? Anyway, already established I'm not talking about last year, even DFCSS wouldn't be so dumb as to pay 5-6k on fees from a turnover of, ummm, about £5.7k. It is clear that DFCSS accounts show £5.7k+ accountancy fees to have prepared/audited accounts for 2015/16 which showed a turnover of £17.8k. However, the cost of preparing the accounts has been reported under 'Membership Costs'. Nice little trick or false accounting? Were "Forbes Dave and Associates" preparing the accounts, since no actual accountancy fees that year? Even at their zenith, when the Grand Theft was taking place, they never turned over more than 70k a year, reading from available accounts on their website. That level of income, an audit isn't remotely required under Companies Law, never mind £7-8k being paid to accountants every year prior. DFCSS must be wound up and a successor organisation, for all fans, put in its place. D*** F***** running DFCSS, there is no chance of a reconciliation with FPS, or even money invested into the community, none at all. Hope that clears up my 'agenda' for FCA-man. FCA

The scrutiny was by the independent accountant who was appointed to carry out the examination of the books. I don't understand how you can be so far wrong with your interpretation of the facts. Getting a firm of accountants to audit the books seems a very sensible step. Imagine the rubbish that could be heaped on DFCSS by ill informed malicious people who disagree with the concept of DFCSS. Whatever you think and say is entirely your opinion, but IMO, it is not a view that is supported by a rational understanding of the facts.

[Deeranged]

The scrutiny was by the independent accountant who was appointed to carry out the examination of the books. I don't understand how you can be so far wrong with your interpretation of the facts. Getting a firm of accountants to audit the books seems a very sensible step. Imagine the rubbish that could be heaped on DFCSS by ill informed malicious people who disagree with the concept of DFCSS. Whatever you think and say is entirely your opinion, but IMO, it is not a view that is supported by a rational understanding of the facts.

telt

[Taintedice]

Hi Islay.

As our resident financial whizz can you just confirm for me that DFCSS is a mutual society regulated by the FCA?

Or registered under the Co-Operative and Communities Benefit Societies Act 2014 as per the latest set of accounts Dfcss have published

[Taintedice]

telt

You should report me to the FCA

[Taintedice]

The scrutiny was by the independent accountant who was appointed to carry out the examination of the books. I don't understand how you can be so far wrong with your interpretation of the facts. Getting a firm of accountants to audit the books seems a very sensible step. Imagine the rubbish that could be heaped on DFCSS by ill informed malicious people who disagree with the concept of DFCSS. Whatever you think and say is entirely your opinion, but IMO, it is not a view that is supported by a rational understanding of the facts.

Are you only able to deal with one sentence at a time, without actually answering the actual point. An auditor who fails to notice false accounting, worth 4k? should I wait here for the response to DFCSS spending over 7k on accoutancy fees, and hiding the fact in their accounts? You agree that it is reasonable for a non-entity like DFCSS to spend tens of thousands of pounds on accountancy fees, which is the whole point of this current examination of DFCSS