The arrogance of the filthy rich

I think he might cough up if he wants to keep his knighthood. Frank green said as much this evening.

So is that how much a knighthood is worth?
Long way from the medieval ideal!

I so, so hope they take his knighthood! I've always hated him, so smug and greasy looking.

Which is more important to him a knighthood or 500 million? It will be interesting to see. There is a petition on change .org if you want to sign. It's the first time I've ever seen DH sign one. Green's lawyers are suing Frank Field. I am so hoping green wins and gets awarded damages of one farthing. And has to pay costs.,

Depends how much you think a knighthood is worth. No, it will be the little people, the taxpayer, who foots the final bill.

Just watched Dispatches this evening showing how much taxpayers' money goes to those who own the Academies and their relatives or spin off companies. Margaret Hodge was in it giving her opinion on whether their spending was acceptable. Gathered, pretty decisively, she thought not. Still, it's only taxpayers' money.

What other companies does he profit from?
Is it still the Arcadia group?
Should be boycotted.

He profits from property ownership. He owns many of the buildings where his shops are sited. His property company is called based in Jersey. Even after he'd sold BHS for £1 and was making a loss, it had to pay rental income to Green.

www.drapersonline.com/news/sir-philip-greens-family-to-gain-from-70m-bhs-property-sale/5073468.fullarticle

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3667084/How-Master-Shifty-tidy-3m-profit-BHS-property-Philip-Green-s-stepson-bought-store-just-days-chain-sold-1.html

delete 'is called'

@Devorgilla

I'm glad the scandal of academies is finally getting into the mainstream, because people have been banging on about it for years. Even when the principals of academies aren't being fraudulent (which some of them have been proved to be) they are taking money out of the budget, which could pay for books, extra classroom teachers, maintenance, etc.

djen Allegedly he opened company after company, shifting the money from one to another with the help of his banker and lawyer friends, and with Mrs Green as ultimate owner of all these companies.

I say allegedly - don't want to end up in court with Frank, although if Frank needs a fiver towards a fighting fund I am willing to cough up.

His real wealth is probably now in property. He's bought up existing retail chains and asset stripped them. He charges his own retail chains rental on the property and 'lends' them money on which he charges interest.

After he sold the BHS business for a £1, he still owned the buildings in a separate company.

He really is the ugly face of capitalism.

It really makes me angry that Cameron appointed him as some kind of 'tsar' to make public services more efficient. The catch is with public services that they can't be bought and sold on a whim and off-shored in a tax haven.

He sold it for £1 to a previous bankrupt, who then took millions out of the till before the company folded. Disgusting. Should pay back AND lose his knighthood, not one or the other. As for the academies , another case where shysters are getting rich at the taxpayers expense and siphoning off money that should be spent on children and schools. When schools were under local,authority control, a director of education would be in charge of , say 100 schools and get paid £120k tops, now a director of an academy chain can print their own salary usually £300k+ for controlling maybe 12 schools or fewer. All this from taxpayers money. Another disgusting scenario.

This type of stuff bothers me a lot. I see the result in mansion type houses not that far from me.
Admittedly parts of their wealth seeps into the local economy.
But I am left seeing their houses, and wondering who they have likely ripped off to acquire such vast wealth.

I acknowledge they work hard. Part of that can be seen because they are not living in the house for most weeks of the year[but they also have houses elsewhere].

I think May is going to start to get with grips with it?

But it isnt just what people think of as the filthy rich. It goes "down" to lawyers, accountants and other jobs as well.

Maybe I am just jaded and a bit biased, as I have seen it go on for a number of years now.

We all,agree about this. He must be made to give back and cover the pension fund deficit.

He's just plain greedy. How on earth can anyone like him be given a knighthood for 'services to retail' - bought and paid for??? I'd be delighted to see Thereas May step in and sort him out.

I for one will in future boycott top shop and any other business he is involved in .I invite others to join me

PS to the above post -----any info on his other business interests would be very much appreciated ---- thankyou !

Anyone provide a list of his business enterprises? I'd be happy to add them to my list of 'places I refuse to shop in' because they don't pay their taxes, employ cheap labour (eg sweat shops making T- shirts for Corbyn), haven't paid families in India who lost mothers in the fire, companies who test on animals, .........

Top shop is one. But as I have never shopped in there that's no good for me.

The other shops in the group are Burton, Dorothy Perkins, Evans, Miss Selfridge, Topman, Wallis.

Thanks DD useful information. Sadly I can't withdraw my custom from those as I never shop there

I also never shop in any of these places.

Knighthoods are distributed two a penny these days. I also do not believe it should be bestowed on someone cycling around a cycle track and picking up a gold medal at the end of the run. Green I hope will have it removed.

Absolutly disgraceful,three bleddy luxury yachts,while other people don't even have enough to eat.How do they get so bleddy rich anyway.Skullduggery going on somewhere.Take all the goodness from their lands and throw them back the crumbs,(in so called aid) A good shake up is needed in the world.

The factor that enabled PG and family to asset strip BHS for personal gain is that the holding company, Arcadia Holdings is a private company so is not quoted on the Stock Exchange, has no outside share holders and is generally exempt from much of the oversight and accountability that applies to public companies.

I am wondering whether it would be possible for the law to be changed so that private companies with either assets or turnover above a certain limit have to meet enhanced disclosure and corporate governance rules that would restrict the proprietors ability to transfer company assets into personal assets.

This is a subject on which I am ignorant so I have no idea if it is possible. A number of the constituent parts of Arcadia were public companies until bought up by the group.

Asset stripping is a filthy business