€100,000 wedding cake, billed to Quinn Company

Slurryface

I'M sure all of my fellow boardsies will be deligted to know that they have contributed to paying for this act or corporate fraud!
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/100000-wedding-cake-billed-to-quinn-company-3244277.html
Can't wait to see how the Quinn apologists explain this away.

2011abc

Let them eat cake !Jeez!

Wanderer2010

No point in trying to open the eyes of the Quinn lovers, truth is if that man commited multiple murder in full public view, some people would still love him and support him. And for what? Creating a few hundred jobs years ago, wow, that gives you some amount of slack with the Irish people. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Cee-Jay-Cee

Maybe we'll all get a slice seeing as we're paying for it!

cloud493

Spending 100 grand on a cake :eek: Christ, wish I was rich.

Remmy

But he fixed the road!!

LenaClaire

Slurryface wrote: »

I'M sure all of my fellow boardsies will be deligted to know that they have contributed to paying for this act or corporate fraud!
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/100000-wedding-cake-billed-to-quinn-company-3244277.html
Can't wait to see how the Quinn apologists explain this away.

The cake was from a wedding in 2007. To my knowledge their business did not get taken over until 2009 or so...

How is this a taxpayer cake then?

Praetorian Saighdiuir

€100,000 and not a single sprinkle!

KKkitty

Tiers are coming into my eyes reading that

davetherave

Slurryface wrote: »

I'M sure all of my fellow boardsies will be deligted to know that they have contributed to paying for this act or corporate fraud!
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/100000-wedding-cake-billed-to-quinn-company-3244277.html
Can't wait to see how the Quinn apologists explain this away.

How did the taxpayer pay for it if Quinn group paid for it five years ago?

Slurryface

LenaClaire wrote: »

The cake was from a wedding in 2007. To my knowledge their business did not get taken over until 2009 or so...

How is this a taxpayer cake then?

Because it was paid for with money from a dodgy business that the quinn gang ran which now owes us, the taxpayer, billions.
Every non life insurance policy sold in this country for the next 40 years will have a levy on it to pay for the quinn gangs activities, never mind the billions they owe us from their dodgy share dealings in Anglo!

mikemac1

Solicitors get all the wimmins

LenaClaire

Slurryface wrote: »

Because it was paid for with money from a dodgy business that the quinn gang ran which now owes us, the taxpayer, billions.
Every non life insurance policy sold in this country for the next 40 years will have a levy on it to pay for the quinn gangs activities, never mind the billions they owe us from their dodgy share dealings in Anglo!

So... are you saying that every dollar they ever spent was taxpayer money? How far back does this accounting go?

van_beano

Don't forget he built that roundabout outside Quinndirect on the way into Cavan Town!

Slurryface

LenaClaire wrote: »

So... are you saying that every dollar they ever spent was taxpayer money? How far back does this accounting go?

As far back as the billions those thieving lowlifes owe us!:mad:

CatFromHue

LenaClaire wrote: »

The cake was from a wedding in 2007. To my knowledge their business did not get taken over until 2009 or so...

How is this a taxpayer cake then?

I was thinking the same to be honest.

LenaClaire

Slurryface wrote: »

As far back as the billions those thieving lowlifes owe us!:mad:

Does that include the money they used to pay all the people employed at the company for the past 30 years, or just the money they spent on their family?

JustAddWater

CatFromHue wrote: »

LenaClaire wrote: »

The cake was from a wedding in 2007. To my knowledge their business did not get taken over until 2009 or so...

How is this a taxpayer cake then?

I was thinking the same to be honest.

As much as I don't like the quinn family, this is really just clutching at straws TBH.

It happened 5 years ago and was charged to his company. Nothing wrong with that at the time

mikemac1

Would have been a better article if they had a picture of this cake

I want to know what 100,000 will buy you

jd007

100K on a ****ing cake?! What is wrong with people?

Ehm...you're not supposed to bill your wedding cake to your business.

breffni666

CatFromHue wrote: »

LenaClaire wrote: »

The cake was from a wedding in 2007. To my knowledge their business did not get taken over until 2009 or so...

How is this a taxpayer cake then?

I was thinking the same to be honest.

So its ok for Quinn customers to pick up the tab then, ultimatly thats what happened.

Light Switch

What did it do, make your **** smell like roses?

T'would want to fir that money!!

Slurryface

JustAddWater wrote: »

As much as I don't like the quinn family, this is really just clutching at straws TBH.

It happened 5 years ago and was charged to his company. Nothing wrong with that at the time

Actually, under company law there might be a whole lot wrong with it, either way it's the taxpayer who is now actually picking up the tab for it, amongst the billions of Euros these slime have cost us.
2007 by the wqay was about the time they started their dodgy share dealings in an attempt to make a quick killing in Anglo!

Ted_YNWA

So if the company paid for this 5 years ago, does that mean the taxpayer has paid for all expenses the business incurred ?


Stop the presses !!!!!!!

The tax payer has bought 6000 rolls of bogroll for Quinndirect staff !!!!!

Poor Uncle Tom

I like cake........

Slurryface

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

So if the company paid for this 5 years ago, does that mean the taxpayer has paid for all expenses the business incurred ?


Stop the presses !!!!!!!

The tax payer has bought 6000 rolls of bogroll for Quinndirect staff !!!!!

Like I said at the start it waould be interesting to see how the apologists for this crime gang would go about defending their greed, criminality , and excess.

my friend

Remmy wrote: »

But he fixed the road!!

no, he didnt, he ran HGV goods vehicles all over the republic wearing the roads

to add insult to injury, he bought said Lorries in N.I. thus avoiding Irish taxes and Motor Tax

The Queen was grateful for Sean Quinns loyalty to her exchequer

Bruthal

Slurryface wrote: »

Like I said at the start it waould be interesting to see how the apologists for this crime gang would go about defending their greed, criminality , and excess.

Is it not you who got rid of "overpaid" minimum wage workers here, to pay chinese workers instead? So is it just the quinn illegality you have a problem with, or the greed?

Slurryface

robbie7730 wrote: »

Is it not you who got rid of "overpaid" minimum wage workers here, to pay chinese workers instead? So is it just the quinn illegality you have a problem with, or the greed?

What the hell are you on?

Bruthal

Slurryface wrote: »

What the hell are you on?

Very aggressive there slurryface, calm down.

ejmaztec

Just because a non-business expense gets billed to a company doesn't mean that the company claims it as a business expense. For all we know, it could have been charged to a director's account, in which case a director paid for it and not the tax-payer.

Not enough info to go on to know what happened.

My name is URL

Are they sure it was a cake and not just a massive pile of coke? =/

ejmaztec

My name is URL wrote: »

Are they sure it was a cake and not just a massive pile of coke? =/

That would be the icing on the cake if it were.

Pumpkinseeds

Jesus, looking at the state of your woman in the photo it just goes to show that you can't buy taste. She looks like she put that outfit together from the bargain basement at Oxfam. I'm sure it cost a fortune though. Shame she looks so bovine in it.:D Who doesn't know who paid for their wedding?

Zaph

Slurryface wrote: »

Like I said at the start it waould be interesting to see how the apologists for this crime gang would go about defending their greed, criminality , and excess.

Personally I'd like nothing more than to see Sean Quinn, Sean Fitzpatrick and the rest of their buddies live out the rest of their days in Mountjoy. But however crass and immoral it is to spend 100 grand on a wedding cake, and however illegal it may be under company law to charge it to a business (and maybe it isn't, I'm not a lawyer), the title of this thread is completely disingenuous. The wedding happened two years before we were lumbered with the Quinn group, and while it could be argued that it forms part of the liabilities that the state acquired, it was not "billed to the taxpayers" as the thread title suggests. If this thread title appeared as a headline in a tabloid people would rightly deride it as sensationalist or populist, and so calling people apologists for stating the obvious is more than a bit unfair imo.

entropi

Was the cake made of gold or something? Another fine example of theivery.

Pherekydes

Master of Nothing wrote: »

Was the cake made of gold or something? Another fine example of theivery.

Maybe they flew it on Ryanair.

"The excess on that will be €99500 please."

krudler

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Ehm...you're not supposed to bill your wedding cake to your business.

the Quinns are like the real life Bluth family. I bet one of them got cartography lessons.

Biggins

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Ehm...you're not supposed to bill your wedding cake to your business.

Legally, its a misappropriation of funds UNLESS the purchase of the cake can be show for example as a (PR?) expense which might be seen to be advancing the interests of the business from which it was purchased.

ehmjay

Was it insured?

ehmjay

ehmjay wrote: »

Was it insured?

Yeh for hundreds and thousands

the culture of deference

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeh for hundreds and thousands

Anyone know why we are all paying a levy for this lot

ejmaztec

Biggins wrote: »

Legally, its a misappropriation of funds UNLESS the purchase of the cake can be show for example as a (PR?) expense which might be seen to be advancing the interests of the business from which it was purchased.

See my post No.33:P

I don't think that a business can claim an expense on the grounds that it would advance the interests of another unrelated business.

Biggins

ejmaztec wrote: »

See my post No.33:P

I don't think that a business can claim an expense on the grounds that it would advance the interests of another unrelated business.

We're thinking upon the same lines.

I agree but a good solicitor/account can be very imaginative when it comes to 'creative accounting' of expenses - and sadly lord knows we have had many examples of that in Ireland!

ejmaztec

Biggins wrote: »

We're thinking upon the same lines.

I agree but a good solicitor/account can be very imaginative when it comes to 'creative accounting' of expenses - and sadly lord knows we have had many examples of that in Ireland!

It's unfortunate that in true Indo style, we've been given only a fraction of the story i.e. the bit that winds up the tax-paying public.

All of the audit firms that I've worked for over the years wouldn't have allowed the company to claim it, and would have charged it to the relevant director.

kowloon

Pretty sure a wedding cake for the daughter isn't a valid business expense. Probably got away without paying the reduce VAT for cake. €13,500 right there :pac:.

recyclebin

How can a cake cost €100,000? Did Bertie make it or something?

jimmynokia

anyone got a photo of this cake?

Biggins

recyclebin wrote: »

How can a cake cost €100,000? Did Bertie make it or something?

Na, he has a good alibi.
He was busy else where cooking the books ...horse racing ones of course!

Misleading thread title changed