Coventry City face more questions over accounts after seeking to re-assure fans (4 Viewers)

Nick

Administrator
Coventry City today sought to re-assure fans following auditors’ concerns over the club’s future - as it faced more questions over late accounts.
The Telegraph yesterday revealed[/FONT] the newly filed overdue accounts for club owner, Sisu-related company Otium, contained auditor BDO’s concerns about the club’s ability to stay afloat as a “going concern” in the next year.

BDO - responding to Otium’s own assessment in the accounts that it was confident but could not be certain about its future financial performance - stated there was “fundamental uncertainly” over the club’s funding, revenues and cost savings.
The club today re-iterated its investors managed by hedge fund Sisu/Arvo Master Fund boss Joy Seppala were committed to the club’s long-term future.

It came as further questions were raised about the continued non-filing of late accounts for two other club companies - Coventry City Football Club (Holdings) Limited, and Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Limited - after Companies House threatened prosecution last month.

Fans hostile to Sisu involved in the Not One Penny More campaign have been awaiting the late 2012 accounts for Holdings in particular, due in February.
Campaigners want to see if the accounts would record any movement of assets including players from CCFC Ltd's last filed accounts.

CCFC Ltd was placed in administration in March and has now entered liquidation - with only the lease and licence to play at the Ricoh contained in it.
The club said yesterday it was “working to provide all outstanding information to Companies House”. But it would not elaborate on whether it would be submitting the accounts for CCFC Holdings Limited.

One theory is the club may seek to move to dissolve Holdings - whose assets have now been transferred to Otium - and avoid having to file the 2011/12 accounts.

Insolvency expert and Coventry City supporter Alan Limb, of BRI (Business Recovery and Insolvency), which has offices in Coventry, said: “A company that has been dissolved doesn’t have to file any accounts, even if they are overdue.

“Companies House may take action against Holdings and its directors for not filing the accounts. It may also seek to refuse an application by Holdings for it to be struck of the register or dissolved.

“Ultimately, I don’t know what can be done to force the company to prepare the accounts.”
He added Holdings could be dissolved without an investigation following insolvency if it had paid all creditors, including Sisu-related ones which could write off debt.

Asked about the issue, Companies House said only: “We can’t comment directly on any correspondence between ourselves and the company(ies) in question. However I can confirm that at this time the case is still ongoing.

“Also I’m unable to clarify your question regarding historic accounts as this very much depends on what happens with the ongoing case.”

Football League chairman Greg Clarke
is among businessmen who say late filing of accounts is commonplace, particularly when there are insolvency events. Other commentators say club directors may face a fine at worst.

A club statement today reads: “We would just like to clarify a couple of points which have been raised from the article which appeared in the Coventry Telegraph about Otium’s accounts for the period which ended on May 31, 2012.
“As in previous years, the club’s owner continued to fund the club and supplied a letter of support to the auditors, essential for the auditors to sign off the accounts.

“Added to this, it should be remembered that the Football League required an undertaking from the owner to continue to provide financial support in order to able to acquire the golden share.
“As we have stated many times before, the club’s owner has funded the club every year to the tune of tens of millions and is committed to the long-term future of CCFC.”

BDO’s statement in the accounts concludes there is “fundamental uncertainty which may cast doubt over the company’s ability to continue as a going concern.”

Meanwhile, a spokesman for part-council-owned Ricoh firm Arena Coventry Limited denied club allegations, re-issued yesterday, that its then chairman Nicolas Carter had written to BDO in February when talks over stadium ownership, revenues and rent collapsed, to “dissuade” the auditors from signing off the club’s accounts.

An ACL spokesman said: “The allegation that we put pressure on the club’s auditors not to sign off the accounts is completely false.
“There is quite simply no mechanism through which ACL could put pressure on the auditors not to sign off accounts. We look forward with interest to reviewing the filed accounts.”

The club insists BDO had confirmed in writing that Mr Carter had written to it on February 28 to state negotiations had collapsed and rent debts due to the Ricoh firm would need to be considered by BDO in relation to the completion of the 2012 accounts, and the club’s “going concern” status.
The club says it has “cleaned up the untidy structure we inherited by scrapping the old CCFC Limited/Holdings set-up and putting the club’s business and assets under one company, Otium.”

As reported yesterday, the Otium accounts reveal just under £8million of debts owed relating to loans from Arvo Master Fund over the last two years.
Sisu boss Joy Seppala, in an exclusive Telegraph interview, insisted total liabilities were £60m.

Taken from this link : http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-face-more-questions-6168086
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
“As in previous years, the club’s owner continued to fund the club and supplied a letter of support to the auditors, essential for the auditors to sign off the accounts.

I wish they'd stop saying this. Giving someone a loan isn't funding it's a commercial relationship. Not one penny has been put in since ownership it's all there on the clubs accounts.

Also, how has an organisation that's only been active for 2 months built up £60m of liabilities? Surely all Ltd's debts disappeared when they liquidate? If not how come the lease doesn't move over with the other liabilities?
 

st john

Well-Known Member


“Ultimately, I don’t know what can be done to force the company to prepare the accounts.”
He added Holdings could be dissolved without an investigation following insolvency if it had paid all creditors, including Sisu-related ones which could write off debt.

Asked about the issue, Companies House said only: “We can’t comment directly on any correspondence between ourselves and the company(ies) in question. However I can confirm that at this time the case is still ongoing.

“Also I’m unable to clarify your question regarding historic accounts as this very much depends on what happens with the ongoing case.”

Is it true that a company can get out of submitting accounts if they liquidate?
Surely the SFO would want to investigate any company who don't submit accounts where there are allegations or suspicion of impropriety.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Is it true that a company can get out of submitting accounts if they liquidate?
Surely the SFO would want to investigate any company who don't submit accounts where there are allegations or suspicion of impropriety.

I think we might need to accept that the laws definition of impropriety and your man on the streets definition are two different things.
 

Sub

Well-Known Member
As reported yesterday, the Otium accounts reveal just under £8million of debts owed relating to loans from Arvo Master Fund over the last two years.
Sisu boss Joy Seppala, in an exclusive Telegraph interview, insisted total liabilities were £60m.

so how the hell can that be right then? why is there so much difference and what is the truth is it 8 million now or 60 million ?
 

RPHunt

New Member
To me, one of the critical statements from the auditor's notes is:

“The company have received written confirmation from group shareholders and other significant funders of their intention to continue to provide support to the company by not demanding repayment of debt due for a period of not less than one year from the date of approval of the financial statements.”

So they are saying they will not demand repayment of the debt from a company that they know can't pay it anyway, but only for a year. Not a word about providing additional funding.

Go on Tim, tell us that bit about finding the money for building a new stadium again.
 

Noggin

New Member
If they avoid filing holdings accounts everyone will understandably assume criminal behaviour has taken place. I'm not saying it has but everyone will assume that.
 

Warwickhunt

Well-Known Member
What happened to the UMBUNGO????
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
the club keep saying this too

The club says it has “cleaned up the untidy structure we inherited by scrapping the old CCFC Limited/Holdings set-up and putting the club’s business and assets under one company, Otium.”

then Arvo lend Otium money which they then lend to Sky Blue Sports & Leisure. so they have deliberately set up a structure where 1 Shitsu related company has loaned money to another Shitsu related company who have then in turn loaned that money to yet another Shitsu telated company. that doesn't sound like cleaning up an untidy structure to me, it sounds very untidy and unnecessarily comlicated.
 
Last edited:

James Smith

Well-Known Member
They left it in the Congo :claping hands:

A hippo took an apricot, a guava and a mango.
He stuck it with the others, and he danced a dainty tango
 

kmj5000

Member
When questioned about the overdue accounts on CWR two months ago, Fisher said that the auditors were in and they would be filed in a few weeks. Although not specifically mentioned, there was no doubt about the implication/context of the question and that the interviewer was referring to the accounts of CCFC.

I can't imagine that Fisher was trying to mislead us and that he had no intention of submitting the accounts of CCFC or CCFCH. He wouldn't do that would he, surely?
 

lapsed_skyblue

Well-Known Member
The FL admit to errors in respect of player registrations but decline to give the detail which would settle the issue of impropriety.
SISU/ Otium claims that the FL statement exonerates them from responsibility for the "mess" despite its incompleteness.
Mr Appleton makes an amibiguous statement on the same subject.
CCFC goes into liquidation and the overdue accounts don't need to be filed, so another means of shedding light on the subject is closed.
What's left in Holdings? Putting that company into liquidation and thereby avoiding the filing of their overdue accounts would seem to be the next logical step.

Conspiracy theorists must be revelling in this. As a bonus we also have a grassy knoll, admittedly at Sixfields.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top