TWO Coventry MPs are demanding Ricoh Arena bosses tell taxpayers the extent of the legal bill for court action against the Sky Blues.
The call comes after the part-council-owned Arena Coventry Limited declined to tell the Telegraph how much had been spent so far in its year-long legal dispute with Coventry City Football Club.
ACL is a private company jointly owned by Coventry City Council and the Alan Edward Higgs Charity, which made £1million profits last year.
But it has effectively been subsidised by council taxpayers since January – after the club refused to pay £1.3m rent for using the stadium. didnt the club stop paying the rent last April, and wasnt the council the conduit for central government money not local taxpayers money ?
The council in private, fearing ACL could be heading for insolvency, unanimously agreed to invest £14m – initially from “council balances” set aside for future council spending. well as the PWLB loan is in place that future spending is still protected isnt it?..... are councils not required to hold reserves by law?...... ccc own 50% of ACl would they not protect their investment?
The £14m bought out ACL’s mortgage, with ACL now paying back the mortgage to the council at much cheaper interest rates.makes good economic sense to do that doesnt it ? assuming that ACL is here to stay and key to CCC
But sources speculate ACL’s legal bill could have already spiralled beyond £1million after this month’s High Court action. and the legal bill for CCFC is ? or do we assume that sISU are picking up that cost out of the goodness of their heart?
Jim Cunningham (Labour, Coventry South) said: “As council taxpayers’ money is involved, they should tell us the legal costs, which are ongoing.” at some point they possibly should and will (it will be disclosed in the next accounts )but in the middle of the current crisis why and what end? I wouldnt expect SISU to
Geoffrey Robinson (Labour, Coventry North West), a former Sky Blues chairman who wrote off £20millon of personal money when current Sky Blues owners Sisu took over in 2007, said: “ACL, the council and the charity are wasting money on an unnecessary load of legal battles.clearly they think GR is wrong in his assessment.... they may of course be right
“They should be transparent about the costs and why they have done this. Where’s it going to end? Sorry but this is coming from GR isnt it ? Do we actually know how much GR has lost ? Do we know the deal the club did with Richardson for instance ? Do we know the details of the reasons why ever got SISU here, do we know why the deal was done rather than let CCFC go into admin in 2007 then be acquired/ ..... sorry but as part of a regime that got us to the brink in 2007 then smacks of pot calling kettle. BTW Do we know who guaranteed the Escrow account?
“The way to solve it is to get the charity out and make a new start with Sisu.” how does that solve it?
ACL wants a takeover of the club by a business it would be happy to also see invest in the stadium. Sisu has been fighting ACL’s legal attempts to force a club takeover.
Conservative opposition councillor John Blundell said he was not aware of the “inevitably expensive” High Court legal costs, but added: “The legal costs, if reasonable, are justified if this results in clarity (a club takeover), working with somebody with the football club and the city at heart. I think Sisu have lost everybody’s trust.” would seem the ccc and its opposition see things similarly
With Coventry City Football Club Ltd now in voluntary administration and CCFC (Holdings) Ltd still owned by Sisu, the Telegraph asked for a breakdown of ACL’s legal bills. did they ask the same of ccfc which is afterall the important entity to its fans ?
An ACL statement said: “This is commercially confidential information” and “ACL has made provisions for legal costs”.
It added: “ACL is an independent business. It is funding this action from its own financial resources.”
Not saying they shouldnt ask ........... not saying they should get a reply clearly both sides have used the commercial confidentiality card ....... but keep it balanced ask both sides, yes taxpayers want to know but the fans also want to know what the club are being saddled with in this dispute.
I would bet SISU wouldnt answer either........ so the point of this article is?