I still can't get my head around it all. The board collectively have money. Lots of it.
The problem is they don't have the will to use it. I don't understand why there is a need to raid the charity collection boxes. This move looks to me like a way of them dodging their responsibility as directors of our club.

Many of them could bail out this mess they have made whenever they want to. They just won't. My question is why. I know I am being very naive. But how can we be expected to believe our club faces this crisis that is being played out when in fact the crisis is actually about the the lack of collective will in the boardroom. Shame on the lot of them

Multi-millionaire directors who wouldn't pay the heating bill in the cold snap, relying on the team manager to stump up - wouldn't pay the staff anything at christmas, relied on the excellent staff collection organised by people on this site - wouldn't pay the last tranch of their tax liability, relied on taking funds from the fans' youth charity. All very, very sad individuals.

Who's the snitch?

Well, the question was raised in The Guardian so even if The Guardian didn't ask The Charity Commission to have a look, I suspect there is probably a Guardian reader somewhere in Charity Commission Towers.

The Guardian have been playing close attention to our troubles and the club announced the loan on its website.

Not really a surprise that they're having a look is it?

Who's the snitch?

Well, the question was raised in The Guardian so even if The Guardian didn't ask The Charity Commission to have a look, I suspect there is probably a Guardian reader somewhere in Charity Commission Towers.

The Guardian have been playing close attention to our troubles and the club announced the loan on its website.

Not really a surprise that they're having a look is it?

I'm aware it's been covered in the press, Mark. It was the line: "Concerns have been raised with the Charity Commission..." that made me think they'd received an email or phonecall from someone, rather than just read about it.

Feelings have clearly been running high about this loan in Plymouth, so it's still my hunch that someone has flagged this up rather than the Commission finding out about it themselves.

Anyway, it's irrelevant how or why they're looking into it. It's more bad publicity for the club at a time when we could really do without it.

I think your hunch would be right Paul.

That's the downside of the interwebby thing, once touch of a keyboard and job done.

Sigh!

Who's the snitch?

Well, the question was raised in The Guardian so even if The Guardian didn't ask The Charity Commission to have a look, I suspect there is probably a Guardian reader somewhere in Charity Commission Towers.

The Guardian have been playing close attention to our troubles and the club announced the loan on its website.

Not really a surprise that they're having a look is it?

I'm aware it's been covered in the press, Mark. It was the line: "Concerns have been raised with the Charity Commission..." that made me think they'd received an email or phonecall from someone, rather than just read about it.

Feelings have clearly been running high about this loan in Plymouth, so it's still my hunch that someone has flagged this up rather than the Commission finding out about it themselves.

Anyway, it's irrelevant how or why they're looking into it. It's more bad publicity for the club at a time when we could really do without it.

Fair enough but, one way or another, I think it was inevitable that The Charity Commission would ask questions about this.

Who's the snitch?

Well, the question was raised in The Guardian so even if The Guardian didn't ask The Charity Commission to have a look, I suspect there is probably a Guardian reader somewhere in Charity Commission Towers.

The Guardian have been playing close attention to our troubles and the club announced the loan on its website.

Not really a surprise that they're having a look is it?

I'm aware it's been covered in the press, Mark. It was the line: "Concerns have been raised with the Charity Commission..." that made me think they'd received an email or phonecall from someone, rather than just read about it.

Feelings have clearly been running high about this loan in Plymouth, so it's still my hunch that someone has flagged this up rather than the Commission finding out about it themselves.

Anyway, it's irrelevant how or why they're looking into it. It's more bad publicity for the club at a time when we could really do without it.

Fair enough but, one way or another, I think it was inevitable that The Charity Commission would ask questions about this.

I think it was inevitable too. After all, that is why the Charity Commission exists, to regulate charities. The Argyle position isnt exactly low key at the moment, so the CC are just doing their job. Talk of conspiracies or snitches is a bit sensational really.

Totally chancellor...Surely the issues surrounding the payment were flagged up on both the baggo AND on pasoti. Why there may well be a "snitch" / concerned individual it's just as likely a journalist spent 20 seconds being a journalist. Or the charities commission spent 20 seconds being a charities commission.

Not surprising at all to honest.

It's odd to see people talking about snitches or that interested parties should keep their noses out.

If any irregularities are found then the Trustees reputations will be tarnished for a very long time. It's misappropriation of the Trust funds and while most people can understand their intentions they've not been very clever.

Yes, it's just as likely the Commision found out on their own. I was just pointing out a hunch of mine that someone snitched - which could well be wrong.

I hope I am too, because I find that sort of thing really sneaky.

Yes, it's just as likely the Commision found out on their own. I was just pointing out a hunch of mine that someone snitched - which could well be wrong.

I hope I am too, because I find that sort of thing really sneaky.

Bit pejorative isn't it? If someone had a legitimate concern with the transaction between a charity and a business, they'd be right to raise it with the body that regulates charities. Just because it's Argyle doesn't mean the regulations should be broken.

Last-minute loan that kept Plymouth Argyle afloat is under investigation

The Government's charities watchdog says it will be contacting PAST&DT for further details over the deal.

A Charity Commission spokeswoman said:

"Concerns have been raised with the Charity Commission regarding the Plymouth Argyle Supporters Training and Development Trust.
We are currently considering these in order to determine what, if any, regulatory interest there may be for us."

Tell the nosey sods to mind their own business. The club only has to fart and some people stick their nose in. The house that provided the original money was part of Argyle in the first place.

The house belonged to the Trust, funded by contributing fans, so it is their business

If nothing has been done wrong, there's nothing to worry about is there? I personally don't believe the Trust should be propping up a dodgy regime, I wonder how the commission sees it.

Whats more important is how we should use that money going forward (assuming we still have it), couldn't it be used to improve coaching facilities for the youths or something? Sitting in a bank is wasted.

Makes me wonder why the Trustees or their legal advisors didn't approach the Charity Commission voluntarily for a ruling before committing its entire capital in such a sensitive and high-risk venture.

I still can't get my head around it all. The board collectively have money. Lots of it.
The problem is they don't have the will to use it. I don't understand why there is a need to raid the charity collection boxes. This move looks to me like a way of them dodging their responsibility as directors of our club.

There's a difference between having a net worth and being cash-rich. The likes of Kagami may well have assets and the like to the value of £million, but that doesn't mean he can go to the bank and withdraw £500,000.

Yes that is probably the reality of it in most cases, but that doesn't absolve them of any blame or make them deserving of any sympathy.