An interesting find (1 Viewer)

[AStonesThrow]

I couldn't sleep, so I decided I'd kill some time by browsing through the online business profiles of those involved in our plight, taking note of ACL's most closely so far. On the site there is a list of charges which have been submitted to the company during the period of their existence. I came across this little gem of a document, detailing how much CCC loaned to ACL for the mortgage of the Ricoh Arena. As far as I can read into this, CCC loaned the full sum to ACL (who list Wasps Holdings Ltd as their parent business) in order for them to outright purchase the Ricoh, the fixtures, the screen and it's supports, the bridge over the a444 and the businesses attached to the Ricoh. I may have missed this before but I wasn't aware this had happened, stinks to me of corruption, and potentially suggests why CCC have played hardball, possibly attempting to hold out until they receive total and full payment of their loan. If this has already been mentioned or discussed before let me know, just it was news to me that CCC paved Wasps way to Coventry with yellow bricks. Scroll across and it should show the front page of the document also, naming CCC as the company/person entitled to receive the financial charge.

Also shows the amount paid for the Ricoh

 

---

[Nick]

Isn't this when the Council "bailed out" ACL and gave them the loan?

 

[Captain Dart]

Its was no secret. There was some bull about the council benefiting from charging ACL more than they paid to borrow the money (Mutton again).
Council agrees multi-million pound bailout of Ricoh Arena

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

This has been SISU's point in seeking to bring a judicial review against Coventry City Council for providing state aid to a commercial organisation, contrary to EU law.

You have to admit, they had a point!

 

[Colin Steins Smile]

Someone may correct me on this, but the terms of the loan from CCC provided an enhanced interest to be paid back to them over 20 years, which the council mean't a better return than money in reserve accounts at the bank.
However, I thought that Wasps did a quick "double cross" and issued the bond, so paid off the loan to CCC in full.
If anyone else can shed light on this......

 

[Magwitch]

This has been SISU's point in seeking to bring a judicial review against Coventry City Council for providing state aid to a commercial organisation, contrary to EU law.

You have to admit, they had a point!

Judges didn’t think so....yet.

 

[oldskyblue58]

its the assignment to CCC of guarantees given by Robinson & McGinnity to ACL in 2003. It forms part of the security for the £14.4m loan given to ACL by CCC.

Those two characters had never been released from their guarantees, and the benefit of those guarantees was transferred from ACL to CCC

It was all cleared in 2015 when the loan was repaid and satisfied in full. It is unclear whether the guarantees by Robinson & McGinnity are satisfied at the same time but i think they probably were.

It is nothing to do with the purchase of the Ricoh.

It would be normal commercial practice to transfer such guarantees and is not evidence of any corruption

The £14.4m loan was examined in all its detail by JR1. If there had been any evidence of malpractice or corruption you can be sure that SISU would have raised the issue.

Nothing to see

The Judges examine much more than what is placed in front of them in a court room, there are boxes and boxes of documents. The case of state aid relating to JR1 and the £14.4m loan was firmly thrown out not just once but several times by different judges. SISU had no case

 

[chiefdave]

Its was no secret. There was some bull about the council benefiting from charging ACL more than they paid to borrow the money (Mutton again).
Council agrees multi-million pound bailout of Ricoh Arena

One of many things that doesn't quite add up. On the one hand you had the council saying it could get ACL a better interest rate as it could access loans at a discounted rate then when questioned on it they said it was at a commercial rate and any lender would have given the loan.

Why the need for the council to step in then? If commercial lenders were happy the loan could have stayed with Yorkshire Bank or moved to another lender. Reeks of BS.

Someone may correct me on this, but the terms of the loan from CCC provided an enhanced interest to be paid back to them over 20 years, which the council mean't a better return than money in reserve accounts at the bank.
However, I thought that Wasps did a quick "double cross" and issued the bond, so paid off the loan to CCC in full.

That's exactly what happened. The council claimed it wasn't a bail out as ACL were sound financially and there was no pressure from Yorkshire Bank. They claimed it was good for the taxpayer due to the interest that would be received. It was then paid back early with no benefit to the taxpayer.
​

 

[skybluetony176]

This has been SISU's point in seeking to bring a judicial review against Coventry City Council for providing state aid to a commercial organisation, contrary to EU law.

You have to admit, they had a point!

Not “has”, was. This was JR1. Turns out they didn’t have a point.

 

[Captain Dart]

Someone may correct me on this, but the terms of the loan from CCC provided an enhanced interest to be paid back to them over 20 years, which the council mean't a better return than money in reserve accounts at the bank.
However, I thought that Wasps did a quick "double cross" and issued the bond, so paid off the loan to CCC in full.
If anyone else can shed light on this......

In reality there was no need to justify the decision further, it was a loan at risk on favourable terms to protect a public asset .
I don't think Wasps double crossed, they bought out the loan and took it on in its entirety leaving the council with no loan risk. An integral part of the sale.
SISU had talked about the loan a few years earlier but at that time it was their intention to negotiate it down with the Yorkshire Bank whom it was with at the time.

 

[coop]

I would like to know how we moved from Highfield road sold some land to Tesco for 60m and still didn't own anything to do with the Ricoh.​

 

[chiefdave]

In reality there was no need to justify the decision further, it was a loan at risk on favourable terms to protect a public asset .

Haven't you just described state aid?

 

[Captain Dart]

Haven't you just described state aid?

No, as confirmed in JR1 judgement.

 

[chiefdave]

No, as confirmed in JR1 judgement.

But what you've described is what SISU claimed. The council's defence was that it wasn't on favourable terms and was equitable with the terms available to ACL from a commercial lender.

 

[Captain Dart]

But what you've described is what SISU claimed. The council's defence was that it wasn't on favourable terms and was equitable with the terms available to ACL from a commercial lender.

Oh Ffs read the judgement and don' t just attack my words to point score.

 

[Nick]

Oh Ffs read the judgement and don' t just attack my words to point score.

Aka catching you out

 

[Captain Dart]

Aka catching you out

You too