Oh no, not again !

[neep___docker]

This is unbelievable.

The April 2005 issue of Batteries International carries the headline:

"AEA Technology faces financial uncertainty"
www.batteriesinternational.com (the link is at the bottom of the home page)

In February 2005 CASE (Caithness and Sutherland Enterprise) approved a grant of £2.6million to AEA Technology Battery Systems.


Surely we're not heading for de ja vu again, are we ?!

Could make Norfrost, Hunters of Brora, etc. look like a small clerical error in comparison.[/url]

[champagnebaby]

Aye shame you've got to subscribe and pay money to view the article.

Have you actually read it yourself?

[neep___docker]

Have you actually read it yourself?

Yes. As it's a subscription article I can't reproduce it here for copyright reasons, but basically the company has financial problems, and the Chief Executive has been given the bullet.

[Fifi]

Aye, that's correct for AEA Technology as a whole - but the Batteries part is going quite well with a full order book. It will probably be sold off to make a large profit to bail out the rest and AEAT will 'refocus' their busiiness once again. Oh, if only they had listened to the workers who could see what would happen when they split the business like this for privatisation!!

[neep___docker]

the Batteries part is going quite well with a full order book

That's interesting - so what on earth does it need to get £2.6million of cash from the taxpayer for ?

[neep___docker]

I was messaged today with some more interesting info.....

AEA Technology Battery Systems Ltd is, like what Norfrost was, way overdue in submitting its annual audited accounts to Companies House.

It's most recent audited accounts only go up to March 2003 - Companies House confirm that accounts are more than a year overdue from this company.

Here again, is an example of CASE ploughing £2.6million into a company which is not meeting its statutory obligations in terms of financial reporting. Therefore CASE has made this finance available without the last two years financial performance of the business being statutorally verified by independent auditors.

It is never a good sign when a company is long overdue submission of its audited accounts - it is a legal obligation to file audited accounts annually.

It is even poorer form if CASE is handing over taxpayers money in such situations.