Are you insured to drive that vehicle? No problem, here's my insurance certificate.
Did your football club come out of administration?
Now the above question can easily be answered by the likes of Dundee (twice), Livingston and Dunfermline.
They have out of administration certificates to prove that they did.
As do Heart of Midlothian. Below is the one they received back in 2014.
Rangers were that club back in February 2012 and, if you believe the utterances of a number of their fans and indeed one or two 'award winning' journalists, they appear to have come out of it.
Well they must be out of administration if they're talking about 'winning their 55th top flight title' ahead of the new season and talking about reviving 'Old Firm' rivalries with Celtic.
They must be out of administration because the 10-point deduction they received back in February 2012 seems to have vanished.
They must be out of administration given they've been signing players for the last four years (some of them cash purchases too).
Because as the SPFL rules state:
Can you produce an out of administration certificate like the one Heart of Midlothian have?
This is where things go 'all quiet on the legendary Albion Road car park front'.
Such a certificate is either slow in being produced or one doesn't exist.
Because one was never awarded to the Ibrox club? We await proof stating otherwise.
Instead, we do have a bit of paperwork confirming something far more serious than administration.
Fine - bad stuff happens. Form a new club and start over.
Which indeed happened - only.......
Club officials, fans and sections of the media appear to be at best, in denial as to what happened, or at worst, telling a gigantic fib.
Yes people are carrying on as if liquidation never happened and that the entity playing out of the iconic Ibrox stadium (complete with marble minaret for wild-eyed press release purposes).
Thing is, if liquidation was just a fleeting moment of fantasy and a new club was not set up, then aren't Rangers technically still in administration?
After all, at the time of writing, there is no evidence to confirm that they have exited it.
Such as a certificate owned by the likes of Heart of Midlothian (shown earlier in this article).
So some questions have to be asked - especially of the Scottish Football Association (SFA) and the Scottish Professional Football League (SPFL).
If Rangers are the same club despite the liquidation event that took place back in June 2012 and was confirmed in November of that year (see liquidation certificate above), have the club formally exited administration?
If so, have you seen a certificate from Rangers confirming this?
If you haven't, then why have you removed the 10-point deduction handed to them back in February 2012?
If you haven't seen proof of them exiting administration by means of an out of administration certificate, such as the one Heart of Midlothian had to show you back in 2014, why did you 'relax' your rules by doing the following:
- Allow Rangers a window to buy players in the summer of 2012 when a transfer embargo was on before resuming said embargo.
- Why were other clubs who had previously and since entered administration not given a similar window to buy players en masse in an allocated period of time.
- Why, when the transfer embargo was resumed in September 2012 did it only last another 18 months given that no evidence had been produced that this 'same club' had come out of administration.
- Why is it that a club that has not yet proven it has come out of administration had the embargo closed and given permission to buy players again contrary to your rules.
- Will other clubs who have the misfortune to slide into administration in the future be allowed the same privileges with regards to access to the transfer market and removal of any points deduction originally enforced if they cannot prove they've exited administration.
- Is it not the case that by buying players when still in a state of administration that Rangers have broken the rules and will punishment, according to your rule book, be enforced on them.
- If it is, who within the SFA and SPFL allowed this to happen on their watch and will they be resigning.
- Or, can you confirm that the reason Rangers are not of of administration is because that club were liquidated back in 2012 and a new club bearing a similar name is in their place.
Questions need to be asked of Rangers as well.
If, as many officials employed by your club, past and present, have said, you are the same club as the one founded back in 1872, can you produce a certificate stating you are out of administration?
If you can't produce this certificate, can you confirm if the club is still in administration?
If so, why has the club broken SPFL rules that state clearly that any club in administration cannot buy new players until they are out of it?
You would expect an investigative media to hold Rangers, the SFA and the SPFL to account with a thorough scrutiny of all of this.
Yet the liquidation event that happened in the summer of 2012 and was officially confirmed in November of that year has been swept under the carpet by many within the field I work in.
It's been "Rangers going for title number 55" this and "Old Firm revival" that.
In short, carry on as if liquidation - and the new club being set up as a result of that - never happened.
Even though it did.
Since this saga began, one or two have been acting very uncomfortably recently when reminded of this.
Not to mention telling an intelligent public to 'drop it'.
I'll update this blog in due course should they respond.
If indeed, the entity playing out of Ibrox is the 'same club', then why is an independent media not holding them to account over not only the in/out of administration issue but also of the money still owed to their 276 creditors?
Maybe if our budding cut and pasters of PR statements could phone all 276 creditors individually to see if they have been paid either in full or by a CVA agreement (as Hearts recently did with theirs as an agreement to being allowed to come out of administration two years ago).
I've heard the term 'media conspiracy' being bandied about in relation to this issue.
I don't believe it for a minute (besides one can hardly imagine anyone from Glasgow's fourth estate having the capacity to be Scottish football's version of Clay Shaw).
Given the print sector of Scottish journalism (in terms of falling sales - Press & Journal excepted of course as they seem to be bucking the trend) is 'circling the drain' holding on to whatever readership you have left is seen as life-saving.
After all, administration and liquidation is a very nasty state of affairs.
When I entered sports journalism 20 years ago, I was told from the get-go, "80 per cent of our readers want to know about Rangers and Celtic. That's why the bulk of our coverage is on them".
The blue pound especially being vital to keeping things running along nice and smoothly.
The east coast pounds of the maroon, green, red, blue and tangerine variety don't bring along as much revenue as the blue and green coinage of the west.
So, despite rubbing up the green pound of Glasgow the wrong way with recent coverage, one can draw an assumed conclusion that the blue pound brings in most of the revenue.
Therefore standards and integrity appear to convey the impression of being compromised.
Given the coverage upon liquidation happening, do the newspapers of Glasgow officially refute their front pages of June 2012?
Were they wrong with the above? If so, what was wrong and will they publicly refute what was written?
Some, step forward Martin Williams of The Herald, have tried to cite Hearts in 1905 being 'liquidated' and still carrying on as 'the same club'.
A bit of digging would have quashed that line from the off (with thanks to Twitter user @pureraygin):
Rangers were liquidated owing money to 276 creditors - a comparison with Hearts in 1905 (especially an unchecked one) is erroneous.
However, fast forward to 2014 and it's CVA decision day at Tynecastle.
Instead of getting it (as what actually happened), the creditors vote it down thus sending Hearts to liquidation alley in the process.
A new club is formed and has to start again at the bottom - sound familiar?
Yet the footballing authorities and the media perform no white-washing of history and continually refer to the new entity as a new club.
And rightly so - many supporters opined at the time that a new club - if liquidation happened to Hearts - would be just that.
The cup wins of recent years would have been achieved by a club that no longer exists.
Given Hearts' dignified conduct during the administration year that saw a 15-point deduction and a transfer embargo, one can safely assume that there would be no re-writing of history.
Ditto any other club.
But those wearing maroon scarves don't buy as many west coast newspapers and click on as many west coast websites as another set of supporters on the other side of the M8 motorway.
Indeed, their club doesn't command a TV audience like the one in the west of Scotland that was liquidated in 2012.
So, you get a state of the truth only being applied in selected cases.
Which means the Scottish game itself is being propped up on a foundation of sand.
Only don't expect to read about all about it any day now.
Banana republics don't prop themselves up you know.