Judicial Review (4 Viewers)

James Smith · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
So why didn't they do that in the first place?

They did, they originally had a loan from the Yorkshire Bank if you recall, who got itchy feet because of the distressed state of ACL thanks to the rent boycott by our club. The council could offer far better rates than ACL could probably get in that situation and bought the loan. Now ACL are apparently (according to PWKH) in a much better position financially and as they're on a firmer footing as it were, they might find getting a loan far easier and more likely to get reasonable rates of interest so could pay off the Council.

James Smith · Nov 29, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The court are interested in what happened originally so no, even it has been repaid I don't think it would matter from the court's point of view.

So in that situatuon SISU could then claim victory over the council, they would still have nowhere for us to play in Coventry and ACL continue on their merry way unaffected. Doesn't get us back to Coventry anytime soon.

bezzer · Nov 29, 2013

James Smith said:
They did they they had a loan from the Yorkshire Bank if you recall, they got itchy feet because of the distressed state of ACL thanks to the rent boycott by our club. The council could offer far better rates than ACL could probably get and bought the loan. Now ACL are apparently (according to PWKH) in a much better position financially and as they're on a firmer footing as it were, they might find getting a loan far easier and more likely to get reasonable rates of interest.

Well let's hope that if ACL have to pay the 'loan' back to CCC they can go out and get funding from the open market. It begs the question then, if ACLs finances were in such good shape why didn't they do it?

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Nov 29, 2013

Nick said:
I guess so, but if on the other hand the Council suddenly budge and give SISU what they want whether it is discount, terms of sale blah blah, is that not slightly admitting guilt or worry? (That is if they were to give in or give cut terms etc).

It's not admitting guilt at all; it's pragmatism. I've been involved a couple of times with litigation within a business context, for example. Not only are legal bills horrendous, but the distraction for senior managers and officials within the business is a nightmare. Sure, the two legal sides do their chatting like Furbies, but they are constantly batting questions back and forth between the two parties. This would be - from the council's perspective - a nightmarish distraction

bigfatronssba · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
Well let's hope that if ACL have to pay the 'loan' back to CCC they can go out and get funding from the open market. It begs the question then, if ACLs finances were in such good shape why didn't they do it?

Because if you could get a loan for 2% off the council, why would you go and pay 5% from the bank?

James Smith · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
Well let's hope that if ACL have to pay the 'loan' back to CCC they can go out and get funding from the open market. It begs the question then, if ACLs finances were in such good shape why didn't they do it?

I don't think ACL's finances were in such good shape after a year of the rent boycott, that was the problem and that's why the Yorkshire were getting concerned. If your credit rating is bad you find it hard to get credit and if your business has been getting negative publicity and people saying that it can't survive it will doubtless affect lenders views of you as a going concern.

RPHunt · Nov 29, 2013

Let's be clear here about what SISU have actually 'won':

They can now spend, probably, several million on presenting their case.
They can now expect the rock they live under to be turned over and their business practices to be held up for scrutiny.
They can now expect their hedge fund investors to question how they can spend more than the company earns on litigation and whose money is ultimately funding the litigation.

I would imagine that celebratory glass of champagne is already tasting a bit flat.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
Well let's hope that if ACL have to pay the 'loan' back to CCC they can go out and get funding from the open market. It begs the question then, if ACLs finances were in such good shape why didn't they do it?

It suited both parties. It is alleged that CCC made money by taking low-rate cash from central reserves and loaning it out at profit; and ACL got exceptionally competitive rates from a more stable landlord than a commercial bank. In theory, for the people and businesses of Coventry, a win:win situation.

Makes you wonder what SISU don't like about it; and why they would fritter their hard-earned cash on investigating the prudence of expenditure/investment from the public purse? :thinking about:

bezzer · Nov 29, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
It suited both parties. It is alleged that CCC made money by taking low-rate cash from central reserves and loaning it out at profit; and ACL got exceptionally competitive rates from a more stable landlord than a commercial bank. In theory, for the people and businesses of Coventry, a win:win situation.

Makes you wonder what SISU don't like about it; and why they would fritter their hard-earned cash on investigating the prudence of expenditure/investment from the public purse? :thinking about:

True.

However, we may find out is was illegal and wasn't such a prudent investment.

James Smith · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
True.

However, we may find out is was illegal and wasn't such a prudent investment.

Unlawful maybe but illegal indicates a crime, and I'm not sure that criminal activity is suggested here is it?

Grendel · Nov 29, 2013

James Smith said:
I don't think ACL's finances were in such good shape after a year of the rent boycott, that was the problem and that's why the Yorkshire were getting concerned. If your credit rating is bad you find it hard to get credit and if your business has been getting negative publicity and people saying that it can't survive it will doubtless affect lenders views of you as a going concern.

It wasn't a year without rent they had £500,000 from Escrow.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
True.

However, we may find out is was illegal and wasn't such a prudent investment.

As might be proven at Sixfields or at other places too:

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/n...strike-12m-deal-to-expand-sixfields-1-5245529

Again; wonder why SISU aren't pursuing JR of that transaction?

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Nov 29, 2013

James Smith said:
Unlawful maybe but illegal indicates a crime, and I'm not sure that criminal activity is suggested here is it?

Agreed. About three times I've made this correction

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Nov 29, 2013

Grendel said:
It wasn't a year without rent they had £500,000 from Escrow.

That's not 'rent' though, is it?

Grendel · Nov 29, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
That's not 'rent' though, is it?

It's paid to ACL and the liquidator calculated the amount owed as under £600,000 so in effect yes it was.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Nov 29, 2013

Grendel said:
It's paid to ACL and the liquidator calculated the amount owed as under £600,000 so in effect yes it was.

Again; it's not rent. It's provision held by third party. It's cash value may have been there; but it's not rent paid by SISU.

I think you know that, and you're just being an arse. Either way, you're either an arse for being on the wind-up, or an arse for not knowing the difference. But certainly an arse

bezzer · Nov 29, 2013

James Smith said:
Unlawful maybe but illegal indicates a crime, and I'm not sure that criminal activity is suggested here is it?

Apologies. Unlawful it may be.

Grendel · Nov 29, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Again; it's not rent. It's provision held by third party. It's cash value may have been there; but it's not rent paid by SISU.

I think you know that, and you're just being an arse. Either way, you're either an arse for being on the wind-up, or an arse for not knowing the difference. But certainly an arse

Sound a bit arsey MMM? My statement was aimed at James Smith who claimed the justification for loan restructuring was distress at not receiving rental values for a year.

That's misleading as the final debt was 6 months rent and they is a fairly small percentage of ACL turnover.

martcov · Nov 29, 2013

No it's not. The rent is still due. The money on escrow is a security and should be repaid. Or at least that is what happens with my tennants.

James Smith · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
Apologies. Unlawful it may be.

Sorry possibly being a bit too pedantic.

James Smith · Nov 29, 2013

martcov said:
No it's not. The rent is still due. The money on escrow is a security and should be repaid. Or at least that is what happens with my tennants.

Same with mine - it's the law that the landlord must place the deposit in one of the following tenancy deposit protection schemes: Deposit Protection Service, MyDeposits, Tenancy Deposit Scheme.

skyblueinBaku · Nov 29, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
What I do not understand ....... from purely a fans point of view ....... how does this benefit the football club, or the fans ............ looks like several more years at Sixfields with the increasing financial pressure that brings in terms of FFP etc. How does that benefit the team or fans?

It doesn't benefit the club or fans, OSB. But that seems to be of little or no interest to Otium, Sisu or whatever else they choose to call themselves this week.

No future with SISU · Nov 29, 2013

bezzer said:
True.

However, we may find out is was illegal and wasn't such a prudent investment.

Even if ACL go bust the lease will go back to the council

robbiethemole · Nov 29, 2013

Coventry City CEO Tim Fisher, speaking at a Supporters Consultation Group meeting earlier this month, stated that legal action was going to be taken against those who had wronged SISU but refused to say exactly who this action would be against.
Following today's news, there appears little to stop SISU taking legal action against any person, group, consortium or organisation, who SISU or Otium Entertainment Group may feel have criticised them or attempted to force them out of the club, in public, via the media either in print or on-line or via social media such as Facebook and Twitter or in forums.

WARNING!!!!! watch what you post now as SISU do monitor these forums.

No future with SISU · Nov 29, 2013

Hobo said:
To get a case actually before the court I would think 12 months is a reasonable guess, then the normal delays followed by appeals.....meanwhile fans will be following a new leisure pursuit.

As For SISU being prepared to invest in the team on the back of three loan signings??? Some fans are easily pleased, enjoy your season ticket at Sixfields!

The wheels of justice turn so slow, but must seem so fast compared to SISU building a new stadium

skyblueinBaku · Nov 29, 2013

robbiethemole said:
Coventry City CEO Tim Fisher, speaking at a Supporters Consultation Group meeting earlier this month, stated that legal action was going to be taken against those who had wronged SISU but refused to say exactly who this action would be against.
Following today's news, there appears little to stop SISU taking legal action against any person, group, consortium or organisation, who SISU or Otium Entertainment Group may feel have criticised them or attempted to force them out of the club, in public, via the media either in print or on-line or via social media such as Facebook and Twitter or in forums.

WARNING!!!!! watch what you post now as SISU do monitor these forums.

How the hell can it be right that legal action can be taken against anyone who crtiticises them? It smacks of a police state like 1984.

bezzer · Nov 29, 2013

No future with SISU said:
Even if ACL go bust the lease will go back to the council

And your point is?

I've not mentioned anything about freeholds/leaseholds in this thread.

bigfatronssba · Nov 29, 2013

robbiethemole said:
Coventry City CEO Tim Fisher, speaking at a Supporters Consultation Group meeting earlier this month, stated that legal action was going to be taken against those who had wronged SISU but refused to say exactly who this action would be against.
Following today's news, there appears little to stop SISU taking legal action against any person, group, consortium or organisation, who SISU or Otium Entertainment Group may feel have criticised them or attempted to force them out of the club, in public, via the media either in print or on-line or via social media such as Facebook and Twitter or in forums.

WARNING!!!!! watch what you post now as SISU do monitor these forums.

If this is true I think its going to have the opposite effect of its intended outcome to be honest.

Godiva · Nov 29, 2013

Does anyone have a link to the CT article where TF told how distressing the Yorkshire Bank mortgage was a 'joint plan' (CCC/sisu)?
I think this part is center point for sisu in the JR.
Apparantly CCC and sisu agreed sisu should buy the mortgage at a discount (and then discharge it) as a prelude to the club buying the Higgs shares.
If they can prove this, then CCC knew the mortgage could be acquired for much less than £14m and so CCC have used public money to buy above market rate.

Next question would then be 'why did CCC buy the mortgage if they had agreed sisu should buy it'?
All argumentation would then lead to the conclusion if CCC wanted to force sisu out of CCFC in favor of Hoffman/Elliott/Haskel.

I don't believe one second that AL or any one at CCC involved in the decision to buy the mortgage feel safe right now.

Ashdown1 · Nov 29, 2013

Just came in to hear this piffle. As I said a couple of days back, if there was money in it for the legal system then this will run and run. SISU might eventually win this battle and crush all opponents one way or another but whilst they are doing this they must be losing the goodwill of thousands of Coventry City supporters. Huge numbers will have been disenfranchised by the whole seedy and immoral journey that they will have been dragged through. There is only one way forward for CCFC and somehow that is without this despicable hedge fund bleeding it dry and loading debt against it !

hill83 · Nov 29, 2013

double post :thinking about:

skybluetony176 · Nov 29, 2013

Godiva said:
Does anyone have a link to the CT article where TF told how distressing the Yorkshire Bank mortgage was a 'joint plan' (CCC/sisu)?
I think this part is center point for sisu in the JR.
Apparantly CCC and sisu agreed sisu should buy the mortgage at a discount (and then discharge it) as a prelude to the club buying the Higgs shares.
If they can prove this, then CCC knew the mortgage could be acquired for much less than £14m and so CCC have used public money to buy above market rate.

Next question would then be 'why did CCC buy the mortgage if they had agreed sisu should buy it'?
All argumentation would then lead to the conclusion if CCC wanted to force sisu out of CCFC in favor of Hoffman/Elliott/Haskel.

I don't believe one second that AL or any one at CCC involved in the decision to buy the mortgage feel safe right now.

so timmy admited in public that he was also riding 2 horses as well. distresing ACL while trying to aquire shares. sounds like ACL have a case for JR against Mr Fisher.

it will be interesting to see what the outcome is of RBS distressing companies who banked with them and owed money to aquire their assetts is. because from what you say timmy has already publicly admitted to doing the same thing.

hill83 · Nov 29, 2013

Godiva said:
Does anyone have a link to the CT article where TF told how distressing the Yorkshire Bank mortgage was a 'joint plan' (CCC/sisu)?
I think this part is center point for sisu in the JR.
Apparantly CCC and sisu agreed sisu should buy the mortgage at a discount (and then discharge it) as a prelude to the club buying the Higgs shares.
If they can prove this, then CCC knew the mortgage could be acquired for much less than £14m and so CCC have used public money to buy above market rate.

Next question would then be 'why did CCC buy the mortgage if they had agreed sisu should buy it'?
All argumentation would then lead to the conclusion if CCC wanted to force sisu out of CCFC in favor of Hoffman/Elliott/Haskel.

I don't believe one second that AL or any one at CCC involved in the decision to buy the mortgage feel safe right now.

All i could find with a quick google search was this.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-council-accused-trying-3312579

Godiva · Nov 29, 2013

hill83 said:
All i could find with a quick google search was this.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-council-accused-trying-3312579

No - not that one. Think it was an interview with TF.

Godiva · Nov 29, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
so timmy admited in public that he was also riding 2 horses as well. distresing ACL while trying to aquire shares. sounds like ACL have a case for JR against Mr Fisher.

it will be interesting to see what the outcome is of RBS distressing companies who banked with them and owed money to aquire their assetts is. because from what you say timmy has already publicly admitted to doing the same thing.

I think you miss the point - if ACL's owners (CCC and Higgs) had agreed to the plan to distress the YB mortgage then why/how would ACL have a case against sisu?

Judicial Review (4 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency