[antonovka]

Here Apple is dealing with someone who basically invented a fictitious company in a different country (! ! !) and is now trying to collect on payables. What do you expect to have happen? I actually believe vessenes --- he may just never get paid. I wish him the best.

I'm curious -- what reporting to the government/legal paperwork do you see Apple as doing that makes the payout legally more difficult due to the use of a fictitious name?

In the U.S., using a fictitious name is incredibly simple -- is it really that much more complicated in the U.K.? Why is this suddenly an "oh my god" situation?

What is possibly preventing Apple from changing their records to use his personal name?

[jacquesm]

I think you are missing an absolutely crucial point here, Apple already tried paying him, several times now.

The reason it didn't work is because the bank did not want to accept the payment because they would be in violation of the law on money laundering if they did.

[antonovka]

I think you are missing an absolutely crucial point here, Apple already tried paying him, several times now.

With the wrong name (ie, not the name he entered on the bank account form). Which was the original problem.

Is Apple reporting the payment to the tax service? What's to prevent Apple from switching the account to a personal one, or transferring it to an additional legal entity? Why are they taking many months to find any resolution?