Request to waive NDA - email to Wasps, CCFC & Sisu (3 Viewers)

Forums New posts
Mucca Mad Boys

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
I agree we deserve answers. I'm just not convinced this will lead to us getting them. Just more counter claims and muddying of waters.

As you say things can be very carefully worded. For example:
“We did not require the football club or its owners to sign any indemnity around legal action over the Ricoh Arena"
could be taken as you suggest. It could also be taken that it incorporates future legal action based around the complaint.

Similarly the statement by Boddy:
"Coventry City and its Owners last year, during failed talks for the 2019-20 season, made a written undertaking to irrevocably cease all proceedings against Wasps relating to the sale and lease of the Ricoh Arena. No legal action against Wasps or its Owners exists, and Coventry City and its Owners have again made this same undertaking this year."
could also be said to be carefully worded legalese as it ceases all proceedings against Wasps, but not all proceedings which could have a material effect on Wasps. Similarly it could be pointed out it says legal proceedings relating to sale and lease of the Arena, not legal proceedings in their entirety. Also no legal action exists, but this does not explicitly rule out future legal action. So an agreement could have been signed and SISU start legal action the day after and no legal contract would have been broken.

This is why the legal system is so backed up because there are cases based around the tiniest little interpretations in the wording.
Click to expand...

From the original statement, it alludes to the indemnity and the ‘restriction of basic legal rights‘. So there may be something to what you say. However -

Ultimately, I agree with the principle that the club should reserve its right to take legal action against Wasps and CCC if the EU complaint is successful. I do not know how this works exactly, but club should be able to claim some sort of damages caused if it is proven that the sale of the RICOH is indeed dodgy.
 
D

djr8369

Well-Known Member
mark82 said:
Because being in Coventry benefits Coventry City.

I suspect Wasps won't agree to waive the NDA anyway but, if they do, documents can be independently checked to verify them. Aside from the forensic side there are 3rd parties who have been involved in discussions who will be able to confirm validity.
Click to expand...

I’m sure they won’t waive it. Will just say something like “it’s a legal process and can’t just be disregarded blah blah” and tbf SISU probably know they won’t waive it so have nothing to lose by saying they are happy to waive.

It might mean wasps have something to hide but who knows.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
mark82 said:
Because being in Coventry benefits Coventry City.

I suspect Wasps won't agree to waive the NDA anyway but, if they do, documents can be independently checked to verify them. Aside from the forensic side there are 3rd parties who have been involved in discussions who will be able to confirm validity.
Click to expand...

But why does Coventry City benefiting from being in Coventry allow pressure to be applied to Wasps to take us back when they'd be doing business with someone who had been proven to be untrustworthy?

People know how to cover their trail - they know it's a lot more than shredding documents and deleting/wiping files. So don't think any forensic examination etc would end the argument. Either would claim faults in the process or 'witnesses' were unreliable. It'd drag on for ages.
 
M

Maupet

Active Member
It seems to me, that Wasps have already broken the NDA by releasing a statement saying we do not require ccfc to sign an indemnity, so Boddy can bring out his evidence.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Mucca Mad Boys said:
From the original statement, it alludes to the indemnity and the ‘restriction of basic legal rights‘. So there may be something to what you say. However -

Ultimately, I agree with the principle that the club should reserve its right to take legal action against Wasps and CCC if the EU complaint is successful. I do not know how this works exactly, but club should be able to claim some sort of damages caused if it is proven that the sale of the RICOH is indeed dodgy.
Click to expand...

I agree that the club and SISU should be allowed to reserve the right to legal action if fault is found. But on the same lines I also believe CCC/Wasps should be allowed to take legal action against SISU/the club if no fault is found.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Maupet said:
It seems to me, that Wasps have already broken the NDA by releasing a statement saying we do not require ccfc to sign an indemnity, so Boddy can bring out his evidence.
Click to expand...

But didn't the club then break the NDA first in their initial statement announcing us staying in Birmingham by saying that Wasps required indemnity?
 
Mucca Mad Boys

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
I agree that the club and SISU should be allowed to reserve the right to legal action if fault is found. But on the same lines I also believe CCC/Wasps should be allowed to take legal action against SISU/the club if no fault is found.
Click to expand...

If you agree on that, then you can see why the club refuses to sign up to an indemnity and ceasing of legal action in 2019, and probably in 2020 also.
 
mark82

mark82

Moderator
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
But why does Coventry City benefiting from being in Coventry allow pressure to be applied to Wasps to take us back when they'd be doing business with someone who had been proven to be untrustworthy?

People know how to cover their trail - they know it's a lot more than shredding documents and deleting/wiping files. So don't think any forensic examination etc would end the argument. Either would claim faults in the process or 'witnesses' were unreliable. It'd drag on for ages.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure people do know how to cover their trail. For instance, if it's on an email unless they hack into the account of every recipient of that email there will be a trace and it can be forensically examined (and relatively easily). It's not the 60's where you could just shred everything.

Why would Wasps being shown up put pressure on them? Are you asking why a club who are new in a city would be put under pressure if they are shown to have deceived the people of that city? Do you think people wouldn't be bothered? Ok, some would still support but their chances of growing local support would be slim.
 
mark82

mark82

Moderator
There are also loca
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
But didn't the club then break the NDA first in their initial statement announcing us staying in Birmingham by saying that Wasps required indemnity?
Click to expand...

You'd assume there's a reason they are happy to do that. Maybe that it's outside the scope of the NDA or doesn't give enough detail to constitute a breach. Sure it would've been calculated.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Maupet said:
But the club have been careful not say anything about an indemnity
Click to expand...

"Unfortunately we are unable to disclose full details due to the requirement to sign a non-disclosure agreement prior to negotiations taking place.

Last year the critical issue was Wasps’ insistence of indemnity clauses into the license agreement, with this indemnity for themselves and for a third-party."
Click to expand...

It's a very careful way of mentioning the indemnity without specifically saying it was the problem this year, although this was confirmed in the second statement and thus the intent of it being mentioned is pretty much revealed.

“The principle and concept of an indemnity against Wasps and a third party was absolutely a requirement, and this indemnity would have put the Football Club at substantial risk and jeopardise its very future.
Click to expand...
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Mucca Mad Boys said:
If you agree on that, then you can see why the club refuses to sign up to an indemnity and ceasing of legal action in 2019, and probably in 2020 also.
Click to expand...

I've never said I don't agree with the refusal to sign any contract with an indemnity clause.
 
tisza

tisza

Well-Known Member
mark82 said:
Because being in Coventry benefits Coventry City.

I suspect Wasps won't agree to waive the NDA anyway but, if they do, documents can be independently checked to verify them. Aside from the forensic side there are 3rd parties who have been involved in discussions who will be able to confirm validity.
Click to expand...
what 3rd parties?
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Maupet said:
But that was in the Boddy statement in reply to the wasps statement
Click to expand...

It was mentioned in the original statement, but carefully worded saying 'last year'. His later response all but confirms that was what he was alluding to in that first statement.
 
Frostie

Frostie

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
the best thing the Trust can do now is push for more transparency from both sides and make it clear how what the support have been through and are going through is unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Yes, you'd have thought they may have commented again since Boddy's statement to demand transparency as our guys have done.

Interesting that Linnell chose to Retweet the original announcement & then Wasps response but totally ignored Boddy's statement... :unsure:
 
Frostie

Frostie

Well-Known Member
Ring Of Steel

Ring Of Steel

Well-Known Member
usskyblue said:
Knowing the truth, while it’d be ‘interesting’, isn’t going to get us back in Coventry is it?

And that’s ALL that anyone wants.

Muddying through brinkmanship and bollox will do absolutely zero to help that.
Click to expand...

yes- I would say though that if the truth came out, assuming it’s as per Boddy’s version, then it would sway a lot of people who only know what they’re told in the CET, therefore a whole lot more pressure could be heaped upon Wasps/ council etc. At the moment its a minority view that Wasps/ CCC are playing games to keep us out of Cov, if that became a majority view then it’s a different proposition- and finally getting the facts on the table would be a good way of getting a lot more people to see the reality.
 
ccfcchris

ccfcchris

Well-Known Member
usskyblue said:
TBH ..I don’t give a flyingfuck about the NDA anymore. It’s moot and so is the Ricoh. It’s history, has been for years.

The onus is on SISU now, more than ever.

Our energy needs to be directed firmly at them to follow through on tangible steps towards the new stadium.

It’s the only way forward.
Click to expand...
So very true. We have to look to the future now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top