Alan Higgs Charity (1 Viewer)

[RoboCCFC90]

Sir Higgs and his Dad must be spinning in their graves at this newsletter.

Sir Higgs would of never let it come to this..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

---

[James Smith]

Sisu saved the club from admin in '07 and while the Higgs did own half the ground we played at they were rewarded with a share of the huge rent we were paying (which they were fully entitled).

If you mean the rent paid to ACL then the Higgs have seen none of that, ACL have never paid any dividends to shareholders.

 

[shmmeee]

With respect, that's rather a silly post. We're talking about the Higgs taking Sisu court over an unpaid bill and Sisu counter claiming, not a fascist regime throwing people in jail via show trials or talking about murderers, rapists and paedophiles.

Did you read my post or are you just a bot replying on keywords?

You used a rationale that has repeatedly been proven flawed. I explained why. Doesn't matter if it's the Nazis, the UK Government (also used this argument for civilian surveilance) or Sisu, it's flawed thinking.

Just because I use emotive examples to make a point doesn't mean I'm comparing the two.

I'd suggest calling my post silly is the height of hypocrisy when you completely flew off the handle without actually reading what I'd said.

 

[shmmeee]

If you mean the rent paid to ACL then the Higgs have seen none of that, ACL have never paid any dividends to shareholders.

Shhh, facts are not his strong point.

 

[albatross]

This is typical bully boy tactics by SISU.

They have a documented past of not paying bills in this city (even though they entered into an agreement)

They have now challenged the Higgs Charity to Gamble on losing 100k + costs in order to win 30k+costs

 

[shmmeee]

Sisu saved the club from admin in '07 and while the Higgs did own half the ground we played at they were rewarded with a share of the huge rent we were paying (which they were fully entitled).

You're missing my point, I don't doubt they're a wonderful organisation. They've given away millions solely to help deprived people in the city of Coventry but if they choose to launch legal action against somebody (in this case Sisu) then the other party have a right to defend themselves or counter sue if they think they have grounds to.

Neither Higgs nor Sisu "saved" the club from admin, that's a divisive phrase that doesn't bear out the slightest scrutiny. Apart from anything else, in both cases we'd have been better off in hindsight going into admin and starting again.

They also don't "choose" to launch legal action. They are bound to try and reclaim money that is owed to them.

The "they did it first" defence, is about as valid as your previous "if they've done nothing wrong..." one.

 

[skybluetony176]

They certainly helped out a few Councillors and ex CCFC board members...

Remind me, how many under privileged children have sisu helped out? And I mean directly, not through the community work that the football club does and did long before they showed up.

A rough number will be OK

 

[James Smith]

Neither Higgs nor Sisu "saved" the club from admin, that's a divisive phrase that doesn't bear out the slightest scrutiny. Apart from anything else, in both cases we'd have been better off in hindsight going into admin and starting again.

They also don't "choose" to launch legal action. They are bound to try and reclaim money that is owed to them.

The "they did it first" defence, is about as valid as your previous "if they've done nothing wrong..." one.

Actually that's a good point I think you're right about charities having to try and reclaim money they're owed.

 

[skybluetom]

Neither Higgs nor Sisu "saved" the club from admin, that's a divisive phrase that doesn't bear out the slightest scrutiny. Apart from anything else, in both cases we'd have been better off in hindsight going into admin and starting again.

They also don't "choose" to launch legal action. They are bound to try and reclaim money that is owed to them.

The "they did it first" defence, is about as valid as your previous "if they've done nothing wrong..." one.

I don't doubt we would've been better off in admin, would have meant sure relegation but for the longterm it would've been far better for us but hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Point being the club clearly dispute they owe them the money, rightfully or wrongly and they have the right to if they wish to defend themselves via the legal route.

I get what you were saying: just because a court says x is doesn't mean it's right, I just didn't feel there was a need to bring things like rape and murder into it. I never 'flew off the handle' at all.

 

[skybluetom]

If you mean the rent paid to ACL then the Higgs have seen none of that, ACL have never paid any dividends to shareholders.

I know they didn't see a lot as the idea was the Higgs share was a temporary thing while the club sorted it's affairs out, I didn't realise they didn't see jack though. That is sad to be fair.

 

[skybluetony176]

Well they should have done their "due dillegence" then shouldn't they as this is a very predictable outcome.

How do you know they didn't? For all you know sisu have just completed their due diligence and come to the conclusion that they don't have a cat in hells chance of winning so they are........... what was that quote from Joy? Something along the lines of "we will litigate you into surrender"

 

[AndreasB]

Remind me, how many under privileged children have sisu helped out? And I mean directly, not through the community work that the football club does and did long before they showed up.

A rough number will be OK

they gave my son some Haribos and pencil case last week and they are not even a charity!

 

[skybluetony176]

they gave my son some Haribos and pencil case last week and they are not even a charity!

are you saying your son is under privileged?

 

[The Gentleman]

What I think Grendel is trying to say is that the Higgs Trust should have known being Counter Sued was a real possibility when taking Sisu to court.

Maybe Sisu should have just paid the 30k that was owed after it was agreed what would happen if the talks broke down. That to me seems the decent and honorable thing to do, but then again we are talking about Sisu.

 

[cofastreecity]

Very apt and accurate post

 

[Jack Griffin]

Maybe Sisu should have just paid the 30k that was owed after it was agreed what would happen if the talks broke down. That to me seems the decent and honorable thing to do, but then again we are talking about Sisu.

Everyone now knows that if costs are likely then an independent escrow fund needs to be paid into by SISU before opening negotiations with them and negotiations stop when & if the fund is depleted.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

It is your reply that is predicable,

Well they should have done their "due dillegence" then shouldn't they as this is a very predictable outcome.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

What about the current squad have they not help them as well?
They buried the hatchet when sisu came back cap in hand.
Shame the only place Sisu want to bury that same hatchet is in everyone's head.

Are you sure your not related to sisu in some way because that is exactly the sort of response I would expect from them.

They certainly helped out a few Councillors and ex CCFC board members...

 

[blueflint]

i would sign it

 

[lordsummerisle]

Lets look at what we do know then.

* In 2003 the Higgs Charity saved CCFC from administration, which could have resulted in the club disappearing as no one was waiting in the wings.

* The Higgs Charity provided the club with a home for 8 years.

* The Higgs Charity would have allowed the club to buy half the Ricoh at a competitive rate.

* The Higgs Charity allows CCFC to have a cat 2 academy, without which the team would now be nothing.

* The Higgs Charity provides excellent sports facilities in one of the most deprived areas of the city.

* The Higgs Charity have helped countless Coventry children from deprived backgrounds.


What have Sisu ever done for the City of Coventry? (No Monty Python references please)

Could we take away some of the emotive guff being spouted about "deprived children of Coventry" being robbed by Sisu?

The question should be asked, why, as a charity set up to help deprived children(which it has indeed done some good), did it spend money intended for that to bail out a professional football club that had got itself into a mess,without a home, spending a sum of around £18million in the process, which it is very unlikely to get back, and has made no profits from it's involvement in ACL to put back into the community that it was set up to serve?

Surely it's charitable status shouldn't have extended to over-extended football clubs?

 

[chiefdave]

The question should be asked, why, as a charity set up to help deprived children(which it has indeed done some good), did it spend money intended for that to bail out a professional football club that had got itself into a mess,without a home, spending a sum of around £18million in the process, which it is very unlikely to get back, and has made no profits from it's involvement in ACL to put back into the community that it was set up to serve?

In short they were doing the club a favour, something I'm sure they regret now. The original plan was for Higgs to hold the 50% share as a short term measure for resale back to CCFC when their finances were on a better footing. If the plan had been followed through CCFC would have regain ownership of the share without having to pay a large premium which may have been the case if they had sold to another third party and then had to attempt to buy back on the open market. Higgs would have got their money back and everyone would have been happy. This was still the case up to the point SISU decided to liquidate the old Ltd company.

 

[TurkeyTrot]

Could we take away some of the emotive guff being spouted about "deprived children of Coventry" being robbed by Sisu?

The question should be asked, why, as a charity set up to help deprived children(which it has indeed done some good), did it spend money intended for that to bail out a professional football club that had got itself into a mess,without a home, spending a sum of around £18million in the process, which it is very unlikely to get back, and has made no profits from it's involvement in ACL to put back into the community that it was set up to serve?

Surely it's charitable status shouldn't have extended to over-extended football clubs?

Yep take the emotive guff out, then you put it back in

The objects of the Charity are: (a) Such charitable purposes as the Trustees may select which shall benefit wholly or mainly the inhabitants of the area within 25 miles of the centre of Coventry; (b) The Charity Fund shall be applied as far as may be practicable in the promotion of child welfare and particularly the welfare of under privileged children; (c) The Trustees of the Charity may co-operate with or contribute to any other charity having objects substantially similar to the objects of the Charity.

Point (a) the Trusts first objective covers the bailing out of CCFC I would imagine.

 

[thaiskyblue]

Could we take away some of the emotive guff being spouted about "deprived children of Coventry" being robbed by Sisu?

The question should be asked, why, as a charity set up to help deprived children(which it has indeed done some good), did it spend money intended for that to bail out a professional football club that had got itself into a mess,without a home, spending a sum of around £18million in the process, which it is very unlikely to get back, and has made no profits from it's involvement in ACL to put back into the community that it was set up to serve?

Surely it's charitable status shouldn't have extended to over-extended football clubs?

I'm really shocked and saddend by some of the comments on here about the higgs trust, they are a charity who tried to help the club genuinley, i'm fully supporting them against our abhorant owners.

 

[duffer]

Sisu saved the club from admin in '07 and while the Higgs did own half the ground we played at they were rewarded with a share of the huge rent we were paying (which they were fully entitled).

You're missing my point, I don't doubt they're a wonderful organisation. They've given away millions solely to help deprived people in the city of Coventry but if they choose to launch legal action against somebody (in this case Sisu) then the other party have a right to defend themselves or counter sue if they think they have grounds to.

Erm... ACL never paid a dividend. I can't see that the Higgs trust have made a penny out of the Arena.

When they did bail CCFC out, and covered off the half of ACL that the club couldn't afford to buy, they still put in place a formula so that the club could purchase it back at a reasonable price. That seems eminently fair to me.

PWKH has always maintained that SISU agreed to cover certain costs when they wanted to exercise the clubs right to purchase, but then walked away without paying them. If Higgs have something in writing to that effect, then this should be fairly open and shut, in as much as a court case can be.

SISU's claim, that the charity somehow interfered with a plan to conspire to show ACL as distressed, in order to pick up the mortgage from YB on the cheap, will be much harder to prove. I'm not sure how the two cases can be linked together directly, which makes the timing of this interesting.

Personally, I can't wait for all of this to come to court. I'd like to see all of this out in the open.

My guess is that SISU wouldn't, hence trying to threaten Higgs with a much more expensive case.

I take your point about it being entirely fair for either party to sue the other, but as we've seen with SISU threatening to sue the Trust, they tend to use legal threats as a way to bully rather than because they've got a genuine grievance. That's what this looks like to me.

 

[lordsummerisle]

In short they were doing the club a favour, something I'm sure they regret now. The original plan was for Higgs to hold the 50% share as a short term measure for resale back to CCFC when their finances were on a better footing. If the plan had been followed through CCFC would have regain ownership of the share without having to pay a large premium which may have been the case if they had sold to another third party and then had to attempt to buy back on the open market. Higgs would have got their money back and everyone would have been happy. This was still the case up to the point SISU decided to liquidate the old Ltd company.

I'm not sure really that a charity(welcome as it was at the time to the club of course), should as you say "do the club a favour".

I'm not sure how the finances of the lease worked out, but was it £25million for a 50 year lease?

Was the Higgs half paid by them or was it the club beforehand, and they took it over for the £6million they paid the club to bail them out? Which would obviously put the charity quite a bit into profit on the deal(a good thing obviously).

Or did they pay the club £6million, and then also pay £12.5million for the half of the lease, which, if reports are true of the original deal to buy back the lease for around the original £5million(certainly not a lot more) from Higgs would have left the charity seriously out of pocket(not a good thing).

 

[lordsummerisle]

I'm really shocked and saddend by some of the comments on here about the higgs trust, they are a charity who tried to help the club genuinley, i'm fully supporting them against our abhorant owners.

They're a charity set up to help deprived children in the Coventry area, not professional footballers earning 1000's of pounds a week.

 

[thaiskyblue]

They're a charity set up to help deprived children in the Coventry area, not professional footballers earning 1000's of pounds a week.

i don't understand your answer ?

 

[torchomatic]

I don't think any child in Coventry will be going hungry today because of SISU. If they are then it'll be because their parents would rather spend money on fags and the bingo.

Should SISU have counter sued? Probably not. Were they in their rights to do so? Yep. Is it a good situation? Nope. But, come on. Cut out all the "poor little orphans" bollocks and quoting of their mission statement. Like The Lord said, it's emotive crap.

 

[torchomatic]

You said they tried to help the club.

i don't understand your answer ?

 

[duffer]

They're a charity set up to help deprived children in the Coventry area, not professional footballers earning 1000's of pounds a week.

They're not just set up to support deprived children - read again.

The objects of the Charity are: (a) Such charitable purposes as the Trustees may select which shall benefit wholly or mainly the inhabitants of the area within 25 miles of the centre of Coventry;

Presumably supporting the club when they were (once again) in the sh*t financially is covered by this. They've been doing it for a long time. Do you think they should be punished for it?

 

[italiahorse]

What ever your views on this, it is another fan loosing action by the Sisu.
A PR disaster continues and a few more fans move on.

 

[chiefdave]

I'm not sure really that a charity(welcome as it was at the time to the club of course), should as you say "do the club a favour".

I'm not sure how the finances of the lease worked out, but was it £25million for a 50 year lease?

Was the Higgs half paid by them or was it the club beforehand, and they took it over for the £6million they paid the club to bail them out? Which would obviously put the charity quite a bit into profit on the deal(a good thing obviously).

Or did they pay the club £6million, and then also pay £12.5million for the half of the lease, which, if reports are true of the original deal to buy back the lease for around the original £5million(certainly not a lot more) from Higgs would have left the charity seriously out of pocket(not a good thing).

Maybe a charity shouldn't do the club a favour, but by the same token I don't really think that because they chose to do so they should be getting sued for six figure sums.

As far as I know the charity paid CCFC every penny of the net figure the club had put into the Arena project (the £6m figure) and there was a predetermined formula for the club to buy back so that the club didn't have to pay full market rate and Higgs didn't lose money.

The lease wasn't paid directly by the council or Higgs was it? Isn't that what the Yorkshire Bank (now CCC) loan was for?

 

[The Gentleman]

I don't think any child in Coventry will be going hungry today because of SISU. If they are then it'll be because their parents would rather spend money on fags and the bingo.

Should SISU have counter sued? Probably not. Were they in their rights to do so? Yep. Is it a good situation? Nope. But, come on. Cut out all the "poor little orphans" bollocks and quoting of their mission statement. Like The Lord said, it's emotive crap.

I'm sorry but I find it hard to cut out 'the emotive crap'. As I have said earlier I have had direct and indirect helpings from these people as have countless others in and around the Coventry area. The issue here as I see it is that you have a charity having to go to court to fight for what was agreed in the first place and then Sisu coming back with a far larger claim which to my mind is purely for bullying tactics on a charity. I'm sorry that this doesn't stir up emotion in you, but telling other people to cut it out because they are showing emotion (for good reason in some cases) in my book is wrong. All this talk about why did the charity help out a football and rich footballers is nonsense in my eyes. What about looking at it from a point of view that the football club is a huge community centre that is there for people to go to to enjoy something local? to help out local kids? something schools can have a link too? Surely the charity was looking at it from this angle rather than helping out rich footballers?

 

[duffer]

I don't think any child in Coventry will be going hungry today because of SISU. If they are then it'll be because their parents would rather spend money on fags and the bingo.

Should SISU have counter sued? Probably not. Were they in their rights to do so? Yep. Is it a good situation? Nope. But, come on. Cut out all the "poor little orphans" bollocks and quoting of their mission statement. Like The Lord said, it's emotive crap.

In a city where a fair proportion of the population is reduced to needing food banks, I wouldn't be quite so confident that children aren't going hungry for reasons other than their parents fecklessness. Appreciate it's easier to write it off with the standard Daily Mail approach because otherwise it might make people feel a bit uncomfortable. Anyway, that's an argument for another day perhaps - but that sort of statement shouldn't go unchallenged.

Regardless, it's obviously not solely down to the Higgs to resolve this, but it's also hardly surprising if some people are offended at the idea of SISU bullying or stiffing a local charity.

(Incidentally if you want emotive crap, the DM's usually a good place to start imho)

 

[Specs WT-R75]

Maybe a charity shouldn't do the club a favour, but by the same token I don't really think that because they chose to do so they should be getting sued for six figure sums.

As far as I know the charity paid CCFC every penny of the net figure the club had put into the Arena project (the £6m figure) and there was a predetermined formula for the club to buy back so that the club didn't have to pay full market rate and Higgs didn't lose money.

The lease wasn't paid directly by the council or Higgs was it? Isn't that what the Yorkshire Bank (now CCC) loan was for?

Pretty sure that ACL took out a loan with YB to buy the 50 year lease...which got me to thinking and probably this is a question for OSB.

Not sure how much the lease cost but I see figures of £25m floating about... of which we know £14m remains. CCC were obviously paid this 25m for the lease, and then "loaned" them back 14m to buy the mortgage - in theory it is the same money... so at this point even if the 14m was lost which is unlikely CCC are up 11m on this deal.

The question I have (and it is probably available elsewhere) is what was the councils net contribution to the building of the Ricoh after the profit from the sale to Tesco, the grants etc...

It seems reasonable to me that the sale of the lease to ACL probably put CCC in profit on the whole shebang?? I am just curious if they are still in profit even with the recent 14m...