Director discrimination possibly?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Director discrimination possibly?

    A leaseholder is threatening bringing a discrimination case against company as they are the only flat who is not a Director and many directors have come and gone also a director is appointing directors as per the AOA and not holding any AGMs to endorse the appointments.There is no automatic right to be a Director when flats are purchased.

    #2
    What protected characteristic is being discriminated against?

    RTMs dont' have AGMs and therefore don't have AGM endorsement processes.

    Comment


      #3
      In my opinion the lease holder should request the reasons why not been appointed. Also I've never heard of a situation where a director can appoint another director under AOB.
      Let us know the management organization so more informed comment can be given. What is the stated way to make a director appointment.

      Comment


        #4
        The ability of the directors to appoint other directors is in all the model AoA. E.g. for RTMs it is:

        22.—(1) Any person who is willing to act as a director, and is permitted by law to do so, may be appointed to be a director—

        (a)by ordinary resolution, or

        (b)by a decision of the directors.

        Article 16(3) even allows this to be done when there are insufficient directors to form a quorum (typically because the company only has one director).

        Comment


          #5
          What is the reason for the leaseholder not being invited to be a director?

          Comment


            #6
            There is no "Right" to become a director just because you own shares in a company.
            Unless you have more experience than current Directors, or can bring to the table properties that the current directors lack, then there is no need to have more directors ! and you wont be accepted as a Director if you apply.

            If people don't like you, then you cannot force them to make you a Director.

            Regarding R.T.M's, i thought they had to abide but the companies act that states shareholders vote in directors ?

            But is Stacker's place an R.T.M. or R.M.C. ?

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
              What is the reason for the leaseholder not being invited to be a director?
              Basically they are giving no reasons for not appointing the leaseholder as a DIrector, each flat is a Director but this one!

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by ram View Post
                There is no "Right" to become a director just because you own shares in a company.
                Unless you have more experience than current Directors, or can bring to the table properties that the current directors lack, then there is no need to have more directors ! and you wont be accepted as a Director if you apply.

                If people don't like you, then you cannot force them to make you a Director.

                Regarding R.T.M's, i thought they had to abide but the companies act that states shareholders vote in directors ?

                But is Stacker's place an R.T.M. or R.M.C. ?
                That is the issue RAM, the current Directors have less experience than the leaseholder who wants to be a Director and one Director knows nothing about company law, RICS, even the lease is being breached, they are doing what they like and he alleges they are outing their personal interests ahead of the Lease so hence they wont entertain his request. They wont give reasons to him.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
                  What is the reason for the leaseholder not being invited to be a director?
                  They wont give any

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
                    What is the reason for the leaseholder not being invited to be a director?
                    The non director is stating that if he sold his flat tomorrow the person taking on the flat would be a DIrector so all the flat owners would be Directors. He makes sense but the others wont appoint him as they dont like him however they cant seem to see past the fact that he would be an asset as he is fair and transparent unlike one Director there.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      It does seem odd that there is just one leaseholder who is not invited to become a director but ram is correct, there is no obligation to appoint a leaseholder. The usual problem is that there are no volunteers, here it is the opposite. I am not sure how he would prove discrimination and no doubt the other directors would come up with spurious reasons for not appointing him. It seems to be a case of the face not fitting for whatever reason. It could be worse, he could be appointed a director and the others always vote against him, that way he would waste his time as well.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
                        It does seem odd that there is just one leaseholder who is not invited to become a director but ram is correct, there is no obligation to appoint a leaseholder. The usual problem is that there are no volunteers, here it is the opposite. I am not sure how he would prove discrimination and no doubt the other directors would come up with spurious reasons for not appointing him. It seems to be a case of the face not fitting for whatever reason. It could be worse, he could be appointed a director and the others always vote against him, that way he would waste his time as well.
                        Yes agree with you- it is odd, as every time a new leaseholder come along and buys a flat they are appointed as a Director and he is not. So now he is going out of his way to disrupt but he has valid reasons and cant fault him for that...I said appoint him as he would be an asset but there are some controlling personalities so he has no chance and yes his face does not fit, lots of non transparency going on which does not help.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by ram View Post
                          There is no "Right" to become a director just because you own shares in a company.
                          Unless you have more experience than current Directors, or can bring to the table properties that the current directors lack, then there is no need to have more directors ! and you wont be accepted as a Director if you apply.

                          If people don't like you, then you cannot force them to make you a Director.

                          Regarding R.T.M's, i thought they had to abide but the companies act that states shareholders vote in directors ?

                          But is Stacker's place an R.T.M. or R.M.C. ?
                          Its an RMC RAM..

                          Comment


                            #14
                            There is no requirement in the Companies Act for the members to vote in directors. These are set in company articles, and, as I said none of the current model articles requires the members to appoint the directors, although they all allow them to do so.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              As I already hinted, for a discrimination case to succeed, one has to demonstrate that the the rejection was based on a protected characteristic, and nothing has been said here that suggests that that is the case.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X