The people you probably need to contact are the Quartz Partnership, who are collecting payments on behalf of the administrators.

The company that owes you money was IBS-STL UK, a division of Biblica USA … and they’ve walked away, leaving IBS-STL UK in administration. Gives a whole new twist to the “What Would Jesus Do?” question…

The good news, if there is any in all of this, is that the administrators are collecting monies due from retailers for goods supplied by the old STL, which should be available to pay creditors such as yourself. I suggest you contact them as soon as possible to stake a claim.

It is a horrible situation though, and I guess we should all pray that the money owed to the old STL is all collected so that they can pay out as much of what they are owed as they can.

“Stick with us we have more to offer”

I would like to know what STL can offer creditors like myself who are owed large sums of money?

There is much talk of prayer for STL and staff but what about ministries that could be wiped out because they have not been paid for stock taken and sold by STL.

As a ministry we were Sending The Light.

Koorong do not have UK Bank Accounts set up yet (Even if it weren’t Christmas, international law would mean that it would take quite a bit of time) so the administrators (as previous owners of the stores in question) are handling credit card processing on behalf of Koorong in the interim. As i see it, this would only be possible if the stores did infact go into administration first, but that is all i meant by it, as some form of proof that what i said was the case. All transactions in Koorong owned stores, is between you and Koorong, with D Bailey and R Cash holding money in trust for them.

I suspect that the same is currently being done for this “agent” who has purchased all stock.

The legalities of all of this confuse me greatly, even as an insider. I trust that it is legal, but it certainly seems odd to me.

We are still under the employ of the administrators, not this “agent” but all stock is being sold on behalf of the agent.

I guess it works somewhat like a concession would operating inside of a department store. Staff can be employed by the store, even though the stock is sold on behalf of an entirely separate company.

I guess this agent owns the stock, and has an agreement to sell it in the administrators retail units, using the administrators staff and infrastructure.

I am certain it is legal, if not perhaps the best or most honorable way to proceed, as it really has thrown a spanner into the works for a number of local bidders at some stores, who had relied on being able to purchase the stock themselves.

However, I can assure you, that whatever your opinion of this practice may be, it is Baker Tilley’s decision to make, not IBS-STL/Biblica’s.

And given the number of NDAs and confidentiality agreements signed during the process, I doubt Biblica would be in a position to comment on these matters, even if they wanted to.

That Baker Tilly are helping Koorong by allowing them to use their credit card machines in the short term whilst Koorong sort their own banking out. The Christmas period and an Austrialian firm setting up in the UK at short notice may have made his this more difficult.

…and that the firm trading the 26 shops is doing that on behalf of the administrators, so the financial management will be down between them, hence the header on the credit card machines.

As for Biblica official announcements, maybe they have decided not to talk publically about this situation but keep things internal, their choice. A poor one I think though.

Thanks for trying to be helpful and assuage peoples concerns, it is appreciated.

However given some of the things you are reporting this actually opens the door to more question, whilst putting one to rest.

I think most had/have come to accept transactions happened post administration.

However some of what you say does still raise questions in some cases as it seems still to be a little grey (as you rightly point out much of the work of companies invovled in debt restructuring and administration is often grey to those not involved, though this does not make it any less legal for all that – indeed business and corporate law is greatly made up of shades of grey, probably because as with all law Justice within the legal systems is blind and so likely not prone to seeing colour ;0)

Given what you have said, the following intrigue me:
That both Koorong – a privately owned and traded business with the right to use the Wesley Owen name – and the previous WO shops that are now in administration both say:
‘ “Care of D Bailey and R Cash” on the top. The same Don Bailey and Russel S Cash of Baker TIlley Restructuring and Recovery’

I have to say this boggles my mind a little indeed – unless of course Koorong purchased the stores but not all the stock initially – though this seems somewhat unlikely, but not impossible.

Of course this could also have something to do with this statement you make which also greatly intrigues me:

‘At the same time, Baker Tilley sign a deal agreeing to sell all stock in the remaining units to an agent who is currently trading that stock on their behalf.’

Because at this point it would seem to be that the stock being sold in the previous WO stores that are now in administration has actaully already sold to a third party and is not therefore being traded in administration as such – though obviously from the timeline given it was initially sold by IBS-STL UK whilst in administration but to the third party who are now trading it as a private concern but through the administrated shops as such.
Therefore the money raised from the sales of these stocks would seem to be going to the third party who purchased that stock in this transaction you make mention of.
(I willingly concede that I may have the wrong end of the stick here, I am just trying to clarify some of what you have stated and this is how it is reading to me).

As I have previously said and reiterate, I am sure there is nothing at all untoward in this and it is merely and accounting exercise.

It is just unfortunate that clarity is so unforthcoming on an official level, whether that be from B&T, Biblica etc so as to assauge all these issues.

There are documents which do confirm what I have said is true and accurate. I have seen them. If legally possible i will look into sharing them with you, though i make no guarantees that it will be.

If you want evidence however, I suggest that you go and make a credit card purchase at a Wesley Owen store currently owned by Koorong and take a look at the credit card receipt.

Then go down the road to a local “in administration store” and do the same and compare Credit Card slips.

You will notice that both say “Care of D Bailey and R Cash” on the top. The same Don Bailey and Russel S Cash of Baker TIlley Restructuring and Recovery appointed as administrators of IBS-STL UK, but no-one at all related to the team from Corporate finance who handled the discussions.

http://www.thebookseller.com/news/107408-wesley-owen-stores-enter-administration.html.rss

It would seem odd that if a store purchased by Koorong was never in the hands of the administrators that they would agree to handle Card payments in the interim.

My understanding of events is something like this:

4:00pm D Bailey and R Cash appointed administrators of IBS-STL UK and all of it’s divisions

4:02 ish (or according to paperwork I have seen, “immediately following this”) Koorong Books PTY LTD sign final paperwork to purchase their 8 stores and Authentic Publishing from the administrators. At the same sort of time CLC purchase a further 6 stores.

At the same time, Baker Tilley sign a deal agreeing to sell all stock in the remaining units to an agent who is currently trading that stock on their behalf.

Some time between 5:00pm and the following morning (after the close of play at carlisle on the 18th, but before opening the following day) John Ritchie Sign paperwork to buy Carlisle operations.

Anecdotally, this would seem to be backed up by the fact that no-one was willing or able to announce the sale before the company was already in administration. We, the staff, worked the morning after the night before, and can say with certainty that I have been much more annoyed had a sale been made before administration and kept from us. All the information i have and saw ascertains that all sales (except for authentic music, which is the one i am not sure about) happened after administrators were appointed.

I am not sure where Authentic Music falls into this, but, as i have previously speculated, was possibly deal signed before the administrator was appointed which saw IBS-STL hand over music and video rights in exchange to the writing off of some outstanding debt.

Though Russell Cash seems to have been involved with some negotiations prior placing the company in administration, given that he only works for restructuring and recovery (not corporate finance) it seems that administration was a necessary intermediary for whatever reason. My guess would be that it allowed for the sale of the assets of the business, while leaving debts to be handled by the administrators, though since i am no legal expert, it is pure speculation.

And while I agree fully that press releases could be clearer, i must say that my feeling, given my personal exchanges with people both at IBS-STL and Baker Tilley suggest that, if it is unclear, it is because Baker Tilley, not Biblica want it that way. This is not to cast any negativity upon Baker Tilley, their world is one I know nothing of. All I know is that it is they, not IBS-STL who have orchestrated everything that happened post – 4PM on the 18th

Perhaps the best course of action is to ask Baker Tilley themselves for clarification. They have certainly been accommodating to most questions I have asked of them, even though they have not been immediately forthcoming with some facts until after prompting. I guess that is the nature of administrators. As i have said, theirs is a world i know nothing of, and i am grateful for that small mercy.

Believe me when i say, no matter how transparent IBS-STL would like to be, these sort of firms (completely legally and above board, i might add) do muddy the waters somewhat when it comes to any of these sort of transactions.

And whatever you have heard from the Quartz Partnership, what you can be certain of is that they are NOT administrators, but rather, if legitimate at all (and i have yet to hear whether or not they are from the administrators themselves), a management and support company used by administrators to help with receiving and collections. They are contractors used by administrators, but not appointed administrators themselves.