This might be clearer to read,
Arena Coventry Limited have issued a press release explaining why they voted against the CVA proposals made by Administrator Paul Appleton.
The statement reads as follows:
The board of ACL was informed that its amendments to the CVA were not accepted. They were therefore asked to vote on the proposals put forward by the administrator Paul Appleton.
ACL, jointly owned by the Alan Edward Higgs Charity and Coventry City Council, voted not to approve the administrator's proposals.
This decision was based on ACL's twin aims: first, to keep Coventry City Football Club playing in Coventry; and second, to ensure that Coventry City Football Club is financially viable for the next few years and beyond.
This last point is especially important given that CCFC has been the subject of a 'catastrophic insolvency' in the hands of its previous owners.
The CVA proposals put forward by Mr Appleton simply do not address these obvious concerns.
And these concerns are not only the concerns of ACL - they are the concerns of all Sky Blues' supporters, and should be the central concerns of both The Football League and The Football Association.
Mr Appleton has the ability to put forward new proposals, and we would welcome these as soon as possible.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr Appleton said:
At today's reconvened creditors' meeting, all parties except Arena Coventry Limited and HMRC accepted the CVA proposals.
At the meeting held on Tuesday, ACL had put forward modifications that were not compliant with the terms of the Insolvency Act and Rules. This was explained to both them and their legal representatives at the time.
The adjournment provided them with an opportunity to put forward modifications that were compliant with the law in order to make use of the time made available by the adjournment that they themselves proposed.
However, despite being given this further opportunity, they declined. Accordingly, when asked whether they were in favour or not of the Proposals, ACL confirmed their rejection.
Therefore, the CVA has been rejected.
Reacting to ACL's statement, Mr Appleton added:
I have noted ACL's statement released today with some interest.
Put simply, we do not understand the comments being made by ACL with regard to the ability to put forward new proposals.
As I said in my earlier statement, the proposals ACL required simply did not comply with the law. They were offered the chance to submit modifications, which DID comply with the law, yet for reasons best known to themselves, they chose not to do so.
The Company will now proceed according to our proposals made as Administrator that were accepted by the majority of creditors including ACL.
imp:
