Search results

And the Trust !

I was referring to Highfield Road move - showing my age here ! I was not clear and you too quick to defend!

We are homeless because of decisions made by past Owners and Directors being in cahoots with the Council !

Is that the view from IKEA to the Swanswell?

Following your logic it will make sense to build afresh to a size and specification that meets requirements and affordable And, of course new and not mired with several million pounds of maintenance and upgrade costs

Did WASPS have a need for £32000 or have any money to buy a stadium ?

You can rent theirs! https://warwick.ac.uk/services/sport/facility-hire/athletics-track/

planning for a partnership, which would see ... so it is available subject to the partnership being agreed when it will be provided ( only joking - shows how words can be misused lol )

"available" ?

I do not recall anyone say the land is being "gifted"?

I am not sure SISU can use the complaint process to claim damages from WASPS. Surely the restitution is from WASPS to CCC What damages could SISU claim if the full price has been paid?

I think this case is to correct an error in an ongoing situation where the Company is getting continuing benefits in the market from the error In the Ricoh case it is a one off identifiable and the remedy could be simply to correct the undervalue plus interest?

My understanding is less complicated- I thought the purchaser had to make good any shortfall between approved value and the amount paid. However I have nothing to support this.

I doubt he gets many deals where the vendor also puts up the funding and then assists it trebling the value of the asset

I can read perfectly well, it seems you cannot I said it is not a fine which is what you are saying you said

Its not a fine, it is an order to pay the shortfall in true value and amount paid

WASPS found financial backers in CCC and the Bond Holders so it is possible to build a stadium without using own monies

Depends on who the majority of bond holders are !

If I understood your post I would duly respond 😉 Ps : Don't bother trying to explain lol

There is a Trustee (appointed by WASPS) who is responsible to ensure the covenants are being met. However he does not have to disclose to anyone who is not a Bond Holder so we do not know the position. The understanding is more than 25% of the Bond Holders have to agree to any action or changes