FOLLOWUP: MG Rover execs reportedly strike back amidst fraud accusations
The soap opera that is unfolding in the United Kingdom regarding the death of the once-proud MG Rover automobile company continues unabated. Four former MG Rover executives who purchased the automaker from BMW back in May of 2000 for a £10 fee have responded to Lord Mandelson's decision to send the aging case to the Serious Fraud Office with a terse statement. Here's a snippet:
The announcement is mystifying given that at no stage during the last four years of the government inspectors' investigation has there been any suggestion of fraud or criminal activity of any kind.Sounds like the former execs are none too pleased with the delay in publishing the findings of the four-year investigation into the automaker's final days, not to mention the inference that there may have been some sort of fraud on their watch. As an added bonus, the execs are openly questioning why the government has declined to discuss its own dealings with MG Rover around April of 2005 as the company collapsed into administration. As we said before, this case sounds like it's far from over.
Both the National Audit Office and the MG Rover administrators, PWC, carried out thorough investigations into the company's affairs and concluded there was no evidence whatsoever of any wrongdoing.
Lawyers advising the directors who have sat through all of the interviews and read every scrap of evidence have confirmed there has never been any suggestion of fraud during the investigation. At all times, the directors have willingly and openly accounted for their actions.
[Source: Autocar]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Bloke 9:28AM (7/08/2009)
Personally I always believed the Phoenix Four were venture capitalists rather than company directors who were truly interested in furthering MGR. Whilst lining their own pockets, they devoted little time to administering the development of new products and disgustingly cheap moves such rebadging the Tata Indica as the CityRover was a complete joke. The only promising new product developed under their charge was the RDX60 in collaboration with SAIC, with the Chinese company doing mouch of the donkey work in any case.
Reply
Avinash machado 9:48AM (7/08/2009)
Sad end to a once glorious British industry.
Reply
Bloke 10:13AM (7/08/2009)
I'd disagree. The British car industry produces more cars and commercial vehicles now than it did during the days of MGR and even during the height of BL and Rootes in the mid 1970's - and those days were hardly glorious. It also employs some 850,000 people.
The vast majority of the British motor industry these days is in the hands of foreign parents. But that's no bad thing; outside investment is always a great asset to have as it's a sign of the value placed in your workmanship. Furthermore, the key to a successful car industry is the productivity it brings and therefore its contribution to the country's economy. The name on the share certificates has no such bearing whatsoever.
artandcolour 10:27AM (7/08/2009)
Bloke" i don't think foreign owned companies using production plants and personnel has much at all to do with workmanship. the reason Toyota builds cars in the southern states of the USA has NOTHING to do with any better workmanship available. it has to do with CHEAPER labor and cheaper shipping costs etc. i am fairly certain that is why foreign companies like that have set up production shops in the UK as well. i'm not saying British workers aren't decent, but it has more to do with being able to access a cheaper workforce and lower costs than what is available in their native countries. the bottom line is ALL that counts these days.
Bloke 10:44AM (7/08/2009)
Artandcolour - naturally cost is a prime factor, but British skilled labour doesn't come cheap. And the reason Japanese companies set up in Europe to supply European markets is to skirt import duties. The UK has long been a target for foreign companies, arguably moreso than many other countries in continental Europe. Skilled workmanship has long been an attraction - few countries produce a luxury car for example quite like the British and back in the 1970s, real walnut veneer for example was a common feature even in common-or-garden saloon cars; what lacked was productivity and different methods adopted by companies such as Nissan and Toyota have turned that around.
artandcolour 10:20AM (7/08/2009)
was that large Rover coupe ever built? it's a gorgeous addition to that platform. i don't remember if it was just a prototype or actually built.
Reply
Bloke 10:45AM (7/08/2009)
No, it remained a one-off concept. The last large production Rover coupe was the 800.
Ben 10:24AM (7/08/2009)
That Rover 75 coupe would have been awesome. Reminds me of an Audi A5.
Reply
Gardiner Westbound 1:38PM (7/08/2009)
Is there a "Less Serious Fraud Office"?
Reply
Bloke 1:58PM (7/08/2009)
No - the majority of fraud cases are dealt with by police fraud squad departments in the respective county in which the fraud takes place.
The SFO usually deals with major fraud cases which exceed £1 million in losses.
haudit 7:09PM (7/08/2009)
It speaks volumes that the Phoenix 4 are clamouring for the report to be released, while the government are trying to suppress it by referring the case to the Serious Fraud Office.
It also speaks volumes that there hasn't even been a hint of potential wrongdoing on the part of the Phoenix 4 until now - you'd think someone, either at Price Waterhouse Coopers, or on the Inquiry team, would have noticed any glaring financial irregularities that could result in a fraud case being prosecuted. It's highly improbable that it took 4 full years to track down the evidence in the company's accounts, even with MG Rover's notoriously convoluted accounting procedures.
The MG Rover story long ago descended into one resembling a badly written farce. This latest turn in the demise of a once proud British manufacturer simply reeks of the government trying to cover its own backside before a general election. It would be very imprudent to release a report that is critical of the government's handling of the MG Rover collapse, or implies that the government was perhaps even complicit in the company's downfall.
Reply