The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.


Jill Havern
Forum owner

Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Al Capone

Post by PeterMac on 19.06.14 16:25

Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated
Capone
Born 1899
1919 started his criminal life in Chicago
1929 Valentines Day massacre
1931 convicted of Tax evasion

These things take time to prepare.
Particularly when the authorities know know that the target is surrounded by
Lawyers, both good and corrupt,
Police officers- corrupt,
officials in many government departments - corrupt
Lots of others prepared to lie for money

No similarities to any other case, of course !

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 145
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Doug D on 19.06.14 17:30

Cordelia:
 
‘actually it was only the Royalties that went into the Fund, not the Advance paid to Kate , not for one ,but two books. Plus the £200,000 paid by the Sun for sole rights to print extracts from the Book’
 
Can you give sources for this please?
……………………………………
 
An ‘advance’, which is calculated in accordance with the expected initial print quantity and the retail price, is royalties in advance.
 
Serialisation rights and the division of the spoils are also likely to have been agreed at the outset, but not where the abridged versions would be placed.

Accounts figures courtesy of McCannfiles.com:
 
The advance did not show in the accounts to March 2011, but should have been paid to KM in that tax year as the book was originally due for publication at the beginning of April 2011.
 
y/e March 2012 Donation £550k in ‘restricted funds’ category  (Notes say £738,487 post-tax royalties & other income from sales, therefore gross income < £1m), so £188k in ‘unrestricted’ (could be the Sun money possibly as not subject to restriction printed on book?).
 
y/e March 2013 Total income £70k, none specified as book income
………………………………….
 
As an aside, I have just noticed that ‘Objective 3 – to provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine’s family’ dropped off the accounts as a stated objective w.e.f. March 2012, although it still shows on the OFM site.

Doug D

Posts : 2184
Reputation : 674
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Bishop Brennan on 19.06.14 17:56

@Doug D wrote:Cristobell,
 
I know I’m not Enid, but will give you my take on the costs issue anyway.
 
Any liability for costs must be on a personal basis, as they are seeking damages on an individual and personal basis.
 
However, Objective 3 of the fund:
 
‘To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family.’
 
pretty much lets them do what they like with the money and if faced with a large legal bill, ‘including financial assistance’ fits admirably for drawing down whatever is left in the fund.
 

Even with the famous "support and financial assistance" line in the company's objectives, the tax man is critical here. The Fund (a limited company) cannot simply transfer money to one or more of its Directors for no reason. Director's Remuneration is the most likely method. And a Director cannot receive it without paying tax (and NI) at the appropriate rates. IMO this would not be good use of the Fund money as over 50% of it would be lost to HMRC during that drawdown.

You may hear fans of the Fund say that it is a "not for profit" company. In tax terms this is entirely meaningless. Not for profit" simply means that it is not the goal of the company to make a profit. It confers no special HMRC treatment of any sort. The fund may or may not generate a profit - but if it does, then it will be taxed using the appropriate corporation tax rates. And it is subject to HMRC restrictions in terms of dishing out cash to anyone - Directors or otherwise.


Bishop Brennan

Posts : 695
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Newintown on 19.06.14 18:14

@JohnyT wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:I venture to suggest that if you or I were to set up a not for profit limited company for whatever purpose it's unlikely the year end accounts would show a surplus of several million £s Bishop, and, just as many other aspects of this case appear to be without precedent, I suspect that it may be unique in the annals of HM Customs & Revenue.

Enid O'Dowd has been casting her forensic accounting magnifying glass over the company's 'transparent' accounts since its inception http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8990-analysis-of-fund-accounts-by-enid-o-dowd-2013-mccannfiles#219242 and has found them to be as clear as mud but, although its not possible to ascertain what sums have been expended for this purpose, one of the company's directors has told us the Towers is, or has been, used as their office and, presumably, in addition to flights and accomodation, the cost of childcare would be a legitimate expense if 2 directors were required to be absent from their home for an extended period on company related business.      

As with all things McCann, one simple question gives rise to a hundred others and it's to hoped that, at some point in time, all of them will be answered.
Makes my blood boil.......sounds more like a business plan than a fund that's to be used for a search for Maddie.
JohnyT

They didn't take on high profile lawyers, consultants, PR gurus for nothing.  They knew what they were doing when the "Fund" was set up and made into a Limited Company and what it could lead to in future (i.e. for the upkeep of the extended family).

Some of the companies taken on by them were proficient in money laundering i.e. Metodo 3, but had no background in finding missing children.

____________________
Laurie Levenson, Quoted in the Guardian ........

"Never trust an eyewitness whose memory gets better over time"


Newintown

Posts : 1597
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-07-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Enid O'Dowd on 19.06.14 18:28

Christobel – Yes the Fund is a private limited company. It was set up less than 2 weeks after Madeleine vanished.

 If the McCanns lose and have substantial costs awarded against them it would be up to the Board of Directors to decide if the Fund will pay all or part of the costs. The issue of costs surely must have been discussed before at board meetings.  

There are 6 directors : the McCanns, Brian Kennedy (Kate’s uncle), Edward Smethurst (lawyer), Jon Corner (film maker and close friend), M J Linnett (retired accountant).
 
In making the decision the Board must consider the objectives of the company as set out in the Memorandum and Articles of the company – as these relate to searching for Madeleine and bringing to justice those responsible for her abduction IMO paying legal fees incurred by two directors who are the parents of Madeleine in trying to stop what they considered to be activities that hampered the search for Madeleine would be a justifiable payment by the company. Whether HMRC would agree I cannot say. A prudent board might seek advice from the the auditors and/or HMRC before making any substantial payment which might not meet Revenue rules because if it turned out not to be allowable, it would have to be added back in the corporation tax computation, and additional tax paid. 

The litigation, including the banning of the book and the High Court and Supreme Court cases which overturned the ban and the libel case, has been ongoing for several years now. Lawyers on both sides must have had substantial payments on account.  We do not know to what extent, if any, the Fund has paid the legal costs to date. If the accounts were open and transparent as promised in the book madeleine we would have this information.

When people take on litigation that could go badly wrong – I am talking in general here – it is sensible to take precautions to protect the family home and other assets though of course there is no guarantee that a court may not later overturn actions taken in this regard depending on the specifics of the case.


Your suggestion that some sort of bond might be necessary when a foreigner embarks on a major case is interesting. I hope one of our Portuguese members may know this. It certainly makes sense that there would be such a system.

____________________
Author of Fateful Decisions: there's a fine line between acceptable parenting and neglect.   www.enidodowd.com
Author of A Review of the background to setting up the limited company Madeleine's Fund: leaving no Stone Unturned and a forensic examination of the company accounts. Available on www.mccannfiles.com

Enid O'Dowd
Researcher

Posts : 107
Reputation : 20
Join date : 2013-11-14

View user profile http://www.enidodowd.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by canada12 on 19.06.14 18:37

@Enid O'Dowd wrote:
When people take on litigation that could go badly wrong – I am talking in general here – it is sensible to take precautions to protect the family home and other assets though of course there is no guarantee that a court may not later overturn actions taken in this regard depending on the specifics of the case.
I think it might be interesting to find out - if it's actually possible - whose name(s) are currently on the ownership papers at Rothley Towers, and also the name(s) on registrations of cars belonging to the McCanns.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 194
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Cordelia on 19.06.14 18:45

@Doug D wrote:Cordelia:
 
‘actually it was only the Royalties that went into the Fund, not the Advance paid to Kate , not for one ,but two books. Plus the £200,000 paid by the Sun for sole rights to print extracts from the Book’
 
Can you give sources for this please?
……………………………………
 
An ‘advance’, which is calculated in accordance with the expected initial print quantity and the retail price, is royalties in advance.
 
Serialisation rights and the division of the spoils are also likely to have been agreed at the outset, but not where the abridged versions would be placed.

Accounts figures courtesy of McCannfiles.com:
 
The advance did not show in the accounts to March 2011, but should have been paid to KM in that tax year as the book was originally due for publication at the beginning of April 2011.
 
y/e March 2012 Donation £550k in ‘restricted funds’ category  (Notes say £738,487 post-tax royalties & other income from sales, therefore gross income < £1m), so £188k in ‘unrestricted’ (could be the Sun money possibly as not subject to restriction printed on book?).
 
y/e March 2013 Total income £70k, none specified as book income
………………………………….
 
As an aside, I have just noticed that ‘Objective 3 – to provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine’s family’ dropped off the accounts as a stated objective w.e.f. March 2012, although it still shows on the OFM site.

Doug D, 

 Doesn't the above prove it was only the Royalties that were shown on the Accounts??? I don't ever remember seeing how much Kate was paid in advance . I do have copy of the Letter from the News of the World before it was closed down , it even gave the account number in the HKSB that the money had been transferred to ,  Interestingly , the McCanns  moved their Mortgage account from Northern Rock to HKSB some time later. There is another strange bit of News. I have copy of a BWB notice dated 8th May 2009 naming 2 Members of Staff who set up Madeleine's Fund within 48 hrs of Madeleine.s disappearance .....how could the McCanns know that Madeleine would not be found in the interim???

P.S. The £200,000 was reported  in The Sun at the time, it gave the Paper sole rights to printing from the Book 




Cordelia

Posts : 51
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by ultimaThule on 19.06.14 19:06

In order that your responses can be clearly seen by others, you should commence typing afteryou see [/quote], Cordelia, and it's sometimes necessary to scroll down the reply page to see it.  

According to her book, Kate says that she and her spouse were advised by IFLG during the weekend commencing 11 May 2007* to set up a 'fighting fund'  and that they would instruct BWB to draw up articles of association.  

With regard to the "copy of a BWB notice dated 8th May 2009 naming 2 Members of Staff who set up Madeleine's Fund within 48 hrs of Madeleine's disappearance" which you have in your possession, can you please reproduce it here?

*page 125

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Enid O'Dowd on 19.06.14 20:23

@ultimaThule wrote:I wondered whether the annexe/orangery/extended garage is used as one of the company's offices or as its headquarters, tigger, and no doubt a building which was formerly used for another purpose can undergo a change of use and become a deductible cost in terms of the limited company's expenditure.  

As get I the feeling that none of the McCann/Healys do owt for nowt, I suspect that Ma Healy bills the company for her services and that her rate per hour is considerably higher than minimum wage, Enid

I love your sense of humour ultima Thule!

Now if Ma Healy bills the Fund for her childminding services and it pays her bill, the cost is not an allowable deduction in the company accounts. If she bills her daughter and son in law, the charge is not allowable against their personal income tax.  But as she has received money for her work she should include it on her tax return and pay any relevant tax.  In Ireland we have a term 'nixer' which means casual work not returned to the authorities for tax. Babysitting would be counted as a nixer and I have never met a babysitter who told the Revenue. Maybe I have led a sheltered life!

____________________
Author of Fateful Decisions: there's a fine line between acceptable parenting and neglect.   www.enidodowd.com
Author of A Review of the background to setting up the limited company Madeleine's Fund: leaving no Stone Unturned and a forensic examination of the company accounts. Available on www.mccannfiles.com

Enid O'Dowd
Researcher

Posts : 107
Reputation : 20
Join date : 2013-11-14

View user profile http://www.enidodowd.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Guest on 19.06.14 22:02

OT Enid There were talks recently in Ireland to tax "grannies" that mind their grandchildren!

They don't know where to draw the line.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Enid O'Dowd on 19.06.14 22:17

Bellisa wrote:OT Enid There were talks recently in Ireland to tax "grannies" that mind their grandchildren!

They don't know where to draw the line.

I just checked this point Bellisa.  The plan is to make grannies (and other childminders) complete and return a tax form.

Currently in Ireland childminders (including grannies) are exempt from paying income tax if their income from childminding does not exceed €15,000 pa and they did not have to file a tax return. 

Now compulsory returns are coming in it would appear - the argument is to see all childminders are know/registered  and are properly trained (whatever that means). I thinks its to find out how many childminders including grannies are working in this area unknown to Revenue. When they find out and perhaps see they could bring in lots of money by taxing them, then the current exemption will vanish and because you have admitted to working in childcare they wont' believe you if you now claim you don't mind children.

Perhaps I am being a little cynical? But I think the current government would tax grannies/family members providing a great service to their young relatives for very little money if they could get away with it.

____________________
Author of Fateful Decisions: there's a fine line between acceptable parenting and neglect.   www.enidodowd.com
Author of A Review of the background to setting up the limited company Madeleine's Fund: leaving no Stone Unturned and a forensic examination of the company accounts. Available on www.mccannfiles.com

Enid O'Dowd
Researcher

Posts : 107
Reputation : 20
Join date : 2013-11-14

View user profile http://www.enidodowd.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Guest on 19.06.14 22:31

Yes its ridiculous.
Although it will be compulsory I imagine most would not bother stating that they do it? Apart from childminders that perhaps look after a few children?

Once again they don't see the bigger problems it will create.
My friends and I would not be able to work only for our parents. Creche fees are €900-1000 per month,our earnings have already been obliterated,throwing the odd few quid to parents has been a lifesaver.
Sorry for rant and OT!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Enid O'Dowd on 19.06.14 22:38

Don't apologise for your rant Bellisa. I really understand. I can't imagine that grannies/other family members will comply with the latest nonsense.  The Irish government is looking for new sources of taxation and there's no chance they will look at their own salaries and expenses. Did you know that TDs (MPs) living within 25km - 59 km from the Dail (our Parliament) (ie normal commuting distance) are paid €25,295 pa tax free and unvouched for 'travel' expenses to work?  Ordinary mortals have to pay their own travel costs to work out of their over taxed salaries.

____________________
Author of Fateful Decisions: there's a fine line between acceptable parenting and neglect.   www.enidodowd.com
Author of A Review of the background to setting up the limited company Madeleine's Fund: leaving no Stone Unturned and a forensic examination of the company accounts. Available on www.mccannfiles.com

Enid O'Dowd
Researcher

Posts : 107
Reputation : 20
Join date : 2013-11-14

View user profile http://www.enidodowd.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by aquila on 19.06.14 22:39

@Enid O'Dowd wrote:
Bellisa wrote:OT Enid There were talks recently in Ireland to tax "grannies" that mind their grandchildren!

They don't know where to draw the line.

I just checked this point Bellisa.  The plan is to make grannies (and other childminders) complete and return a tax form.

Currently in Ireland childminders (including grannies) are exempt from paying income tax if their income from childminding does not exceed €15,000 pa and they did not have to file a tax return. 

Now compulsory returns are coming in it would appear - the argument is to see all childminders are know/registered  and are properly trained (whatever that means). I thinks its to find out how many childminders including grannies are working in this area unknown to Revenue. When they find out and perhaps see they could bring in lots of money by taxing them, then the current exemption will vanish and because you have admitted to working in childcare they wont' believe you if you now claim you don't mind children.

Perhaps I am being a little cynical? But I think the current government would tax grannies/family members providing a great service to their young relatives for very little money if they could get away with it.
How much can a government do to destroy family units with a tax for looking after their own?

At least it'll help to pay for social workers (not).

Enid, I don't think you're cynical.

aquila

Posts : 7957
Reputation : 1183
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Guest on 19.06.14 23:17

The travel allowance is ridiculous Enid. Even those living in Dublin receive about 5grand I think?

Do they also still receive an allowance for a secretary ? I see jobsbridge and ce scheme "jobs" regularly for secretaries, so they could cut this to €2600 or €1040 byemploying someone through these schemes,which they love to recommend! Every little helps.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Enid O'Dowd on 19.06.14 23:26

Bellisa wrote:The travel allowance is ridiculous Enid. Even those living in Dublin receive about 5grand I think?

Do they also still receive an allowance for a secretary ? I see jobsbridge and ce scheme "jobs" regularly for secretaries, so they could cut this to €2600 or €1040 byemploying someone through these schemes,which they love to recommend! Every little helps.
Dublin based TDs get €9,000 pa for travel - even if they have the free travel pass you get when you are 66.  They sign a form at the end of the year to certify that they spent all their travel money on travel - nobody queries these forms; they are just filed. One of my local TDs lives 1 km from the Dail and walks there yet he takes the €9,000.

TDs get a full time secretary and a full time parliamentary assistant (skilled job involving research, speech writing etc) - they are paid by the state not by the TD from an allowance. Often they employ their spouse/son/daughter/cousin etc and this is within the rules.

I am an expert on Irish politicians' expenses as I am on the Fund!

____________________
Author of Fateful Decisions: there's a fine line between acceptable parenting and neglect.   www.enidodowd.com
Author of A Review of the background to setting up the limited company Madeleine's Fund: leaving no Stone Unturned and a forensic examination of the company accounts. Available on www.mccannfiles.com

Enid O'Dowd
Researcher

Posts : 107
Reputation : 20
Join date : 2013-11-14

View user profile http://www.enidodowd.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Cordelia on 20.06.14 0:30

@ultimaThule wrote:In order that your responses can be clearly seen by others, you should commence typing afteryou see
, Cordelia, and it's sometimes necessary to scroll down the reply page to see it.  

According to her book, Kate says that she and her spouse were advised by IFLG during the weekend commencing 11 May 2007* to set up a 'fighting fund'  and that they would instruct BWB to draw up articles of association.  

With regard to the "copy of a BWB notice dated 8th May 2009 naming 2 Members of Staff who set up Madeleine's Fund within 48 hrs of Madeleine's disappearance" which you have in your possession, can you please reproduce it here?

*page 125[/quote]

Hli ultima Thule, How can I reproduce it here??? Don't know what page 125 means , all I can confirm is it is a copy of  the Bates Wells & Braithtwait solicitors"Recent Work" page.  It shows the names of the 2 persons" involved with setting up Madeleine's Fund : Leaving No Stone Unturned within 48 hours and helping to present its launch on BBC and sky TV".


"http://www.bwllp.com/Transactions /Detail.aspx?Transaction ID=83      8/5/2009

Can't be more expliciit than that surely.??

Cordelia

Posts : 51
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by canada12 on 20.06.14 2:10

Just as a point of clarification, the name of the law firm is
Bates Wells Braithwaite
And the URL for the law firm is:
http://www.bwbllp.com/

Found it - but only by going through McCann Files...!

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id58.html
Scroll down



Rosamund McCarthy and Philip Kirkpatrick were involved with setting up Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned within 48 hours and helping to present its launch live on BBC and Sky TV.

Note: '48 hours' here refers to the length of time it took to set up Madeleine's Fund, not the length of time following Madeleine's reported disappearance.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 194
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Cordelia on 20.06.14 16:08

@canada12 wrote:Just as a point of clarification, the name of the law firm is
Bates Wells Braithwaite
And the URL for the law firm is:
http://www.bwbllp.com/

Found it - but only by going through McCann Files...!

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id58.html
Scroll down



Rosamund McCarthy and Philip Kirkpatrick were involved with setting up Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned within 48 hours and helping to present its launch live on BBC and Sky TV.

Note: '48 hours' here refers to the length of time it took to set up Madeleine's Fund, not the length of time following Madeleine's reported disappearance.


Thanks canada 12. I printed a copy at the time and not very good at finding information , especially going back to 2009 LOL

According to the first Accounts to 31st March 2008. BBWB (N0.2 Ltd ) were appointed on 15th May and resigned on the 16th May when most of the Directors were appointed., so it took 12 days to form and register the Company....as i say, how could the McCanns know Madeleine would not be found in the interim. Also all the Directors were family and friends  , not one person experienced in finding missing children who would be responsible for appointing the right people.



Cordelia

Posts : 51
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Enid O'Dowd on 20.06.14 16:15

In my first report on the FUND published on www.mccannfiles.com I go into great detail about the setting up of the limited company known as the Fund. Those following this discussion thread who haven't read my report may find it interesting to do so.

____________________
Author of Fateful Decisions: there's a fine line between acceptable parenting and neglect.   www.enidodowd.com
Author of A Review of the background to setting up the limited company Madeleine's Fund: leaving no Stone Unturned and a forensic examination of the company accounts. Available on www.mccannfiles.com

Enid O'Dowd
Researcher

Posts : 107
Reputation : 20
Join date : 2013-11-14

View user profile http://www.enidodowd.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Why haven't the McCanns been charged with misuse of Fund Money: strange that this subject has not been investigated

Post by Cordelia on 20.06.14 16:53

@Enid O'Dowd wrote:In my first report on the FUND published on www.mccannfiles.com I go into great detail about the setting up of the limited company known as the Fund. Those following this discussion thread who haven't read my report may find it interesting to do so.


Hi Enid, I did read it , can't remember all of it now. Apparently Kennedy of Everest double glazing appointed Metodo 3 , the first Detective Agency to "search" for Madeleine , he invoiced NSU and paid Metodo who later said in an interview with ABC es that they did not receive the £50,000 pm quoted in the British Press , but E 160,000 plus E 40,000 expenses for 6 months. I did read your Report, very informed except I didn't quite understand what "restricted Fund" means.

You know that old saying, "follow the money", had that applied to the Fund, this case would have been closed by now. thinking

Cordelia

Posts : 51
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum