Search results

A key point in this is if the new owner of the debt can vary the repayment terms. Lets say you owed Yorkshire Bank £100K on your mortgage and you were paying £750 a month with no problems. Bank of Tim then buys that mortgage, with say £75K remaining on it and tell you that want it all paid off...

Well given that ACL never missed a payment and are still in business why did YB suddenly become worried about their ability to pay at the same time SISU stopped paying rent and Fisher was telling anyone who would listen they were about to go bust?

Think we should setup a fund to keep Rob and Simon topped up with a supply of Greggs sausage rolls until the end of the court case!

Of course. But from the CCC / Higgs side they have, at least publically, appeared to remain open to this kind of arrangement, it is SISU who have stated there is no way they are coming back without ownership which appears to indicate it is their stance that has changed.

Was that before or after Fisher had unsettled YB and given the impression ACL would be going out of business at any minute?

So CCC would still have owned 50%? Not sure why that same deal can't be done no matter who the debt is to? Pay Higgs for their share, pay the loan off (or pay the £8m they were going to pay YB) in return for the logner lease and you end up in the same place. What's to stop that happening now?

This is probably why Fisher was constantly on CWR telling everyone ACL was about to go bust. I think basically they were trying to unsettle YB so even tho no payments had been missed they were worried about future payments and would be open to an offer to pay off at a lower rate.

That would be my interpretation but Labovich has claimed it was a plan between all parties involved which then brings up the question of legallity based on what he has stated relating to Higgs and CCC working together.

Interesting point. I guess in business you can but aren't you into the area of hostile takeovers? If the money was suddenly owed to SISU rather than YB what would prevent SISU from altering the repayment terms or requesting the full balance be paid?

Not sure there's any legal reason CCC would have to keep SISU informed of any contact they had with YB? Have SISU stated that they kept CCC and Higgs fully informed of their approach to YB?

That's always been the case I think. Wasn't the originally plan for Higgs to hold the share in the shorterm while the club sorted out it's cashflow and then for the club to buy it straight back. My impression was always they were trying to help the club out and came unstuck. Don't think they...

They're either trying to get PWKH to fall into a trap for something down the line or are desperately short of any actual evidence as nothing they're bringing up seems to have any relevance to the case.

Morning all, ready for another fun day of court action. Who needs the World Cup when you can spend all summer following our court cases! Has anyone apart from SISU ever mentioned that the mortgage was available for £8m? Not saying it's not true but with SISU's track record it would be good...

That's got to be worth a ban :D

Personally I think you're giving SISU way too much credit there.

Wasn't there something related to the JR where they tried to gain access to CCC and / or Higgs information and the judge refused the request?

I think people are forgetting that it was Higgs that took this to court in the first place not SISU so it's not like its part of some grand master plan to get information.

Yes, Simon also reporting on twitter it seems the counterclaim has been thrown out.

That sounds like it gone about as badly as it could possibly go for SISU today. Seems like he's close to telling SISU to go away and stop wasting everyones time!

Should SISU lose I wonder where the debt for all that is going to end up?