Mirandaj - you certainly implied in your post that Ken Brooks was claiming not to be involved in the Company, which is what I, and I believe Quinn, were trying to make a point of. Quite frankly whethere he had title of a director or not, is surely not the real point. As I see it, you either purposely left out mentioning that KB was actually involved with the Company in title as Company Secretary and was receiving funds from that said Company - and tried to play on semantics with the word "director" in your post, or you genuinely did not realise the extent of KB's involvement there. Which one is it?
In addition, what do you then make of KB telling you he had no shareholding, when Aldington has revealed that Ken Brooks is a Director - not Company Secretary - of Oxford Capital Group Plc who has a 13.7% shareholding in Oxford Capital plc? Are we again playing on semantics, i.e. KB personally has no shareholding, but his Company does?
Regards
Adie2001