Another 'Smiths' Unlimited Company

[Max]

Name & Registered Office:
SMITH ASSOCIATES (TADCASTER) & CO
SMAWS HOUSE, SMAWS HAMLET
TADCASTER
NORTH YORKSHIRE
LS24 9LP
Company No. 04960559

Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 12/11/2003

Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Unlimited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
7011 - Development & sell real estate
Accounting Reference Date: 30/11
Last Accounts Made Up To:  (NO ACCOUNTS FILED)
Next Accounts Due:
Last Return Made Up To: 12/11/2009
Next Return Due: 10/12/2010
Last Members List: 12/11/2009
Previous Names:
No previous name information has been recorded over the last 20 years.

At Companies House: http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/f54a94943beecc5a84e1e8328cfc5e05/compdetails

[bigjim]

According to this house price website, Smaws House exchanged hands on 18/01/2007 for ?785,000

http://www.houseprices.co.uk/leeds-road-tadcaster-ls24/

I wonder who lives there?
 

[OnTheDrink]

There are no company ownership associations with any of the Sam Smiths companies that I can find, and it seems as if the company is in the process of being wound up, so I would say that this is a company set up to develop the site that the company is registered at.

[bigjim]

I wonder if it is connected in some way to SSOB's ownership of Smaws Quarry?

[OnTheDrink]

To be honest I doubt this has anything to do with Hump, as they tend to do everything through their existing companies, but then again, who knows?!

[Max]

What makes me almost certain that Smith Associates is part of Humphs empire, is because it's registered as 'Unlimited', which is very, very rare - and is the same as the main Sam's company, which was status changed from 'Limited' to 'Unlimited' when investigations were in process for the Times Rich List - the same time they then removed all external brewery title livery.

The main differences in status are that whereas a Limited company enjoys limited liability (Directors not liable for finances, with a few legal exceptions such as law breaking and indemnities), an Unlimited company usually has all shareholders personally liable for any company debts.

Bare in mind, a company of either status registered at companies house, is still an entity on it's own, and should be run in accordance to English company law. For example, you can't knowingly destroy the company.

Another main difference - and this would appear why the change was made - whilst Limited company's details (accounts, returns, shareholders info., and articles) are publicly available form Companies House for a small fee, an Unlimited companies details remain out of the public domain.

Speaking of limited companies, I noticed that Lincoln's Widows Cullen Well, is in some places listed as a Limited company, as can be seen here - 'Widow Cullens Well (Tadcaster) Ltd.', which is a bit strange, as no such company is registered at Companies House - if it is a Limited company, it could be registered in another country.

[DarkieBoy]

I've often wondered about Widow Cullen's Well as a legal entity.  The contract work on the property was carried out by Lindum Construction, a Lincoln company on behalf of "Samuel Smith Old Brewery" for ?1.6 million (http://www.lindumgroup.com/case-studies/samuel-smith-old-brewery/).  However, the legal name of the pub company is 'Widow Cullens Well (Tadcaster) Ltd' as Max states.

'Widow Cullens Well (Tadcaster) Ltd' is not registered in Ireland, Guernsey, Jersey nor the Isle of Man.  I wasn't able to check Gibraltar.

Interesting and interestinger!

DB.

[DarkieBoy]

David Lewis Associates were the architects that worked on Widow Cullen's Well...they also worked on Sinclair's Oyster Bar in Manchester and the adjacent Old Wellington.

http://www.davidlewisassociates.co.uk/projectpages/Manchester%20Civic.htm

DB.

[bigjim]

Well I'm glad the subject of Widow Cullen's Well (Tadcaster) Ltd has come up as I too was mystified to find no mention of it at Companies House!

On the subject of Sinclairs Oyster Bar in Manchester - it may be relevant that the same architect was involved in the Wellington as I have a suspicion that the beneficial owner is the same, ie SSOB.

What I feel this is tending to prove is just how much of a machiavellian ownership web we have here! Still - bit by bit we learn a little more each day.

[bigjim]

What makes me almost certain that Smith Associates is part of Humphs empire, is because it's registered as 'Unlimited', which is very, very rare - and is the same as the main Sam's company, which was status changed from 'Limited' to 'Unlimited' when investigations were in process for the Times Rich List - the same time they then removed all external brewery title livery.

The main differences in status are that whereas a Limited company enjoys limited liability (Directors not liable for finances, with a few legal exceptions such as law breaking and indemnities), an Unlimited company usually has all shareholders personally liable for any company debts.

Bare in mind, a company of either status registered at companies house, is still an entity on it's own, and should be run in accordance to English company law. For example, you can't knowingly destroy the company.

Another main difference - and this would appear why the change was made - whilst Limited company's details (accounts, returns, shareholders info., and articles) are publicly available form Companies House for a small fee, an Unlimited companies details remain out of the public domain.

Speaking of limited companies, I noticed that Lincoln's Widows Cullen Well, is in some places listed as a Limited company, as can be seen here - 'Widow Cullens Well (Tadcaster) Ltd.', which is a bit strange, as no such company is registered at Companies House - if it is a Limited company, it could be registered in another country.

Max - I had not fully appreciated how rare 'unlimited' status is - on that basis, I guess it tends to be further circumstantial evidence as to who the beneficial owners of RBNB and RBNBC are?

[DarkieBoy]

Well I'm glad the subject of Widow Cullen's Well (Tadcaster) Ltd has come up as I too was mystified to find no mention of it at Companies House!

On the subject of Sinclairs Oyster Bar in Manchester - it may be relevant that the same architect was involved in the Wellington as I have a suspicion that the beneficial owner is the same, ie SSOB.

What I feel this is tending to prove is just how much of a machiavellian ownership web we have here! Still - bit by bit we learn a little more each day.

It could be just that "Widow Cullen's Well (Tadcaster) Ltd" was what the company was going to be called that would have been charged with the redevelopment of Widow Cullen's Well and the company itself was never actually formed in the end...maybe...and some information, like the telephone number, was registered as this company.  I think most of the information available on the internet has its origin with directory enquiries...if you search "Widow Cullen's Well (Tadcaster) Ltd" on Google you will see what I mean:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%27Widow+Cullens+Well+%28Tadcaster%29+Ltd.%27&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

DB.

[DarkieBoy]

As for the Old Wellington and Sinclairs Oyster Bar in Manchester, it could just be coincidence, or connected to who the City Council chose to redevelop The Shambles area...although the architect's website doesn't allure to the city council.  The two pubs are linked by a toilet block...when I was in SOB last month access to the toilets was closed (due to refurbishment), but signs were up directing people to OW...more evidence of one owner?

Who knows?

DB.

[DarkieBoy]

Just come across this: http://www.nicholsonspubs.co.uk/theoldwellingtonmanchester/offers/

This pub company at least runs The Old Wellington in Manchester...which doesn't necessarily mean they own it!  They also own The Blackfriars in London, plus other landmark pubs across the UK.

It could well be leased from SS.

DB.

[DarkieBoy]

There's also links to Mitchells and Butler plc (formerly Bass) on their website.

The theory/suspicion is not looking too sound.

DB.

[centurion]

As for the Old Wellington and Sinclairs Oyster Bar in Manchester, it could just be coincidence, or connected to who the City Council chose to redevelop The Shambles area...although the architect's website doesn't allure to the city council.  The two pubs are linked by a toilet block...when I was in SOB last month access to the toilets was closed (due to refurbishment), but signs were up directing people to OW...more evidence of one owner?

Who knows?

Dear oh dear DB, It was the IRA who 'chose' to redevelop the 'Shambles'in 1996, money was later provided by Mike Heseltine, the tory government,just before the 1997 election this paid SS and Bass compo and the relocation bills for loss of trade, staff costs etc.I think over 400 milion came from insurance. Lots of dosh to rebuild the city, some say it was an Irish plot to keep the building trrade going as most of the contract winners were Irish companies. MCC had done ther bit long ago by jacking up the two pubs when they were back to back.
The truth is out there