Possibility of a Legal Case with regards to business ownership

Good day to all.
I have a problem that's been bugging me for quite some time now.
My father and two of his partners established a Medical Clinic and a diagnostic center. Partner A would be my father; Partner B would be the second partner; and Partner C would be the third partner.
The business serves as a center for processing medical clearance requirements such as but not limited to: urine analysis, stool analysis, HIV testing center, x-ray;

The problem now lies on the type of ownership they declared in the business registration.

Even though there are three of them, they decided to register the business as sole proprietorship with the name of Partner C as the owner. This has been going on now for approximately 10 years with Partner C running as CEO of the company. Earnings are divided to the three of them with Partner C earning an additional managerial fee.  

Although the business is prospering, there have been rumors that Partner C have been allocating some of the funds for personal commitments which would be considered "illegal" since the company is owned by three persons. Earnings are still dived to three parts yet it keep me wondering if this really is the total amount of the earnings since Partner A and Partner B have given their full trust on Partner C with regards to running the company from operations, finance, to marketing. And since this "trust" is now to great to be broken, they have no further plans to convert the business to a partnership.

I definitely believe in time that Partner A and Partner B would realize their big mistake as rumors would pile up and their finances would probably go down while Partner C's would be increasing. ( The last I heard is that Partner C has now 2 clinics in 2 different locales, often using the personnel and equipment from their first clinic to satiate the demands of her 2 new clinics)

This realization would lead them to corner Partner C for a very bad confrontation.

In regards to an inevitable future where Partner C would blatantly declare that the company is hers because technically, the papers all indicate that the company belongs to her since the business, tax, etc permits all indicate her name as the Owner without the names of Partner A and Partner B ever written in any legal document - I would like to ask if Partner A and Partner B would still have legal grounds on claiming their part of their property and press charges against Partner C for the things she were rumored to have done?


An answer to this problem of mind would really be appreciated.
Pleas and Thank you.

Do they have CONTRACT saying equal split?

Of whole or defined what's included?

Are all REINVESTING as much as the others?
Otherwice that POSSIBLE can be a CORECT reason for having additional parts not belonging to the others.

I don't think there exist a written contract on an equal split. As what I've heard, apparently everything is verbal. With regards to reinvesting, Partner C (CEO of the company) would just tell the other partners that there would be no dividends this quarter due to some necessary company expenses e.g expansion, new equipment, new staff.

theseeker wrote:I don't think there exist a written contract on an equal split. As what I've heard, apparently everything is verbal. With regards to reinvesting, Partner C (CEO of the company) would just tell the other partners that there would be no dividends this quarter due to some necessary company expenses e.g expansion, new equipment, new staff.

Of no contract. It can be hard to prove what's agreed then. Can they prove they have got 1/3 each during many years?
If so they have some signs the contract is as they say.

Have A or B asked to check the acounting?

A and B have their full trust on Partner C. I believe Partner C does the accounting also. Which is really a bad idea. This opens a lot of possibilities for mismanaging funds. Since the company is audited by the CEO too.

theseeker wrote:A and B have their full trust on Partner C. I believe Partner C does the accounting also. Which is really a bad idea. This opens a lot of possibilities for mismanaging funds. Since the company is audited by the CEO too.

Yes.
So A and B newer check the acounting and if there are anything not corect?

Are you sure A and B don't get share from the new places too?

They never do their own auditing. They don't get any share from the new places since its "solely" owned by Partner C

theseeker wrote:They never do their own auditing. They don't get any share from the new places since its "solely" owned by Partner C

It's a problem you can't demand controil, but A and B can.

Thank you for the advice sir/maam. You're absolutely right. The only thing I could contribute is to convince them to have proper control of their company before it goes really worse.

theseeker wrote:Thank you for the advice sir/maam.  You're absolutely  right. The only thing I could contribute is to convince them to have proper control of their company before it goes really worse.

Don't forget it can become trouble, IF they can't prove they have got 1/3 each earlier and it become a case.