Guided Missile

And I think my post above explains why Marc Jacob was fired by "his" law firm... Clueless...

Interesting News Article from this site. Balram Chainrai had exercised a clause in a loan agreement with Arab businessman that in case of not timely payment he would take over Al-Faraj’s 90 per cent ownership of the Portsmouth. However, his takeover may be challenged by the British lawyer Mark Jacob, appointed to the board by Al-Faraj, who argues that neither party complied with the loan agreement. The club itself confirmed the change of ownership. In the club statement it is said that the security arrangement with the BVI company was based on documents drawn up by law firm, owned by Jacob, as part of the original draw down of the loan, depositing with Mr. Chanrai the original share certificate and a signed share transfer with open date in favor of Mr. Chanrai, which could be dated and exercised in the event of default on the terms of the loan agreement.

Portsmouth News Reports suggest that HMRC has questioned whether Balram Chainrai had the legal right to put the club into administration

My wild guess is that HMRC are going to question the validity of Chanrai placing the club in administration. I have been banging on about this for a while, but the problem I have is that he either owns 90% of the shares in the company or is a creditor. IF he has taken possession of the shares in Portsmouth City Football Club, that suggests that he has satisfied his charge. He is then a shareholder, is holds shares worth f*** all. If he claims he is a secured creditor, then IMO, he had to prove the validity of his charge to the court before placing Pompey into administration. Just saying you're owed money is not enough. We'll see tomorrow, but I wouldn't be suprised that he made a big mistake taking ownership of the shares. I also think that he might have some problems proving the validity of his loan. The paperwork surronding Portpins loan to Al Mirage is bound to raise more questions than it answers.

Harry Redknapp is the living embodiement of the dangers of allowing a football manager to run a club. There are hundreds of great managers out there, but we'll never, ever find a better, more qualified owner...

Man United was a bigger rival for us than your lot for many years, as anyone that went to the Dell in the 70's will tell you. As far as Chanrai's plans and their legality, I'm sure we'll find out more over the next few months, but I see that Fratton Park still belongs to Portsmouth City Football Club Limited with a Portpin charge on it, despite Chanrai saying it belonged to him and he was leasing it to the club for £1M a year. You lot really do believe, on a regular basis, every morsel of sh !t that's fed you from Fratton, don't you. What a clueless bunch....and you'll never learn. From John Deacon, through Terry Venables and now Gaydamak, you sailors get a regular bumming and still take it with a toothless grin...

Thanks Ron. Nice to see something posted by someone who remembers. It just shows how quickly football can change. In the 70's Man U were a second division and lower first division side...

The assumption that Pompey is our great rival ignores the history of our club and is, IMHO, just plain wrong. Pompey were never our rivals, in my lifetime, nor anyone elses. Our true rival for many years was Manchester United and that fact just shows how far we have fallen. The good thing is, I can see, again in my lifetime, that rivalry resuming... ...and Pompey. My feelings towards them at the moment are pretty close to the feeling I have when I scrape dog sh !t off my shoe. Glad to be rid and my only concern is the lingering smell...

I really think I should start reading the Telegraph and give up trying to be a journo, Benjii. It seems my "story" was reported in yesterdays paper here. Seems like these guys know more about asset stripping and tax avoidance than I ever will...

I would bet a pound to a pinch of sh !t that the subsequent charge, following the date the winding up petition was served, was a modification of the original charge related to the original loan, not fresh money. I don't know many lenders that would be happy to lend new money to a club that is subject to a winding up order...

For those that are interested, here is the difference between a mortgage and a charge, from the Companies House website: 1. What are mortgages and charges? A charge is security for the payment of a debt or other obligation that does not pass 'property' or any right to possession to the person to whom the charge is given. A mortgage is security for the payment of a debt or other obligation that passes 'property' but no right to possession to the person to whom the mortgage is given. The original particulars filed by Portpin Limited with Companies House which was created on the 6th October described the loan instrument as a "Charge Deed".

I guess it depends on his contract with Portsmouth City Football Club and Fuglers, the former in the role as a Director and the latter as a Partner providing clients with legal advice(?). I would not want on of my Directors working in the interest of a company who had lent me money, let's put it that way...

My opinion is (as a totally unqualified layman) that it is hardly likely that the new charge registered by Jacob was meant to make Portpins position as a creditor weaker, as a result. I think that any creditor with a "floating charge" may rank ahead of a creditor that simply has a "charge deed" registered. I guess it depends on the legal instrument lodged with Company's House that the legal charge refers to. This normally has to be lodged within 21 days of the charge being registered. That may be why Barclays jumped to the head of the queue this week.

I believe that the Directors of Portsmouth City Football Club have to get court approval to transfer any assets after the date of the winding up order. It would seem polite...

I think Jacobs has tried to stick a floating charge on Portsmouth City Football Club, in addition to the fixed mortgage that was originally registered in October 6th, the date Al Mirage took over the cesspit. So...if my memory serves me right, I can't remember Aviva marching into St. Mary's the minute we missed a mortgage payment and taking possession. They got what they could from Markus when Mark Fry negotiated the sale My suspicion is that Mark Jacobs has attemped to strengthen Portpin's security, AFTER the date of the winding up order. For those interested, he was a Director of Portsmouth City Football Club Limited at the time he registered the additional charge for Portpin Limited. The term North London Yobbo springs to mind...

I did post an extract from the Government Insolvency Website, earlier on this thread as follows: The general rule is that any transaction entered into by the company after the commencement of a winding up is void unless the transaction is authorised or validated by the court. The invalidation of dispositions of an insolvent’s assets after the date of presentation of a winding-up petition or a petition for bankruptcy is designed to prevent the directors of a company or the bankrupt, when insolvency proceedings are imminent, from disposing of the assets to the prejudice of the creditors and to preserve those assets for the benefit of the general body of creditors. The general rule is that any transaction entered into by the company after the commencement of a winding up is void unless the transaction is authorised or validated by the court.

What if Chanrai's £17M loan was originally secured against Al Mirage's 90% shareholding in Portsmouth City Football Club Limited as I thought was the case? All Chanrai can take possession of, perhaps, is some shares that will be worth Jack Sh !t come tomorrow. I wonder what HMRC's position on all this will be....?

Now, this is what I don't get. Chanrai lends Al Mirage £17M in October, 2009. Seemingly oblivious of the financial mess Pompey are in, he suddenly wakes up and smells the roses when the winding up petition is served on December 23rd, 2009. Courtesy of the Companies House website and after spending the grand total of £1, I downloaded the particulars of the mortgage or charge, which was created on the 7th January, 2010. The mortgage form was completed and submitted by a Mr. Mark Jacob, then of Fuglers LLP, costing Chanrai all of £13 to register. The date of the registration is the 21st January, 2010 and is for "Any freehold or leasehold or other immovable property now vested in the Company including without limitation the property known as Fratton Park......all buildings, trade and other fixtures, fixed plant and machinery...by way of Floating Charge....by way of Legal Mortgage or fixed charge...." So...Mark Jacobs, AFTER the winding up petition, slaps a charge on Fratton Park on behalf of Portpin Limited, Intershore Chambers, P.O. Box 4342, Road, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. The observant reader may wonder about the timing of this and why the charge was not made, when the loan was made back in October. You might also note that Portpin is registered in Tortola. As late as 1792, British authorities called Tortola "a pirate's nest." For many years Tortola was a major base for pirates bent on terrorizing professional sailors and soldiers, attacking treasure ships, and distributing the loot in strict accordance with the Pirate Coda or Code. Seems like history is repeating itself, although I hope HMRC has as much success as Her Majesties Royal Navy did, in preventing our tax money and VAT from being looted. *There was an earlier charge deed on the assets dated 6th October, limited just to Fratton Park. The latest one was a debenture and sounds more wide ranging, but I'm not a lawyer...

I think that I speak for a number of people here who don't give a sh !t what happens to Pompey. The large number of posts on this thread is more akin to rubber neckers on the M27 slowing down to look at an overturned caravan on the other carriageway. A long slide into obscurity will happen to Portsmouth and no-one cares outside Portsmouth..

I think this may be worth highlighting, in view of the new information:

Good call...

The numbnuts in charge at Portsmouth must have failed to get the legal charge removed. This must mean that there is some form of ongoing liability, perhaps in the form of additional interest or bank charges or that Storrey was just inept...quelle surprise...

Guys, guys, I know that to some people, the prospect of Pompey surviving the winding up order is disappointing, as they seem to have cheated death yet again, but just think of this. They will never, IMHO, regain the status above Saints that they temporarily and fraudulently attained. The crippling points deduction they and any future owner will be saddled with, will gaurantee a rapid descent, even if they survive the winding up order that has been temporarily suspended. The best they can hope for is the daily reminder of Southampton Football Club marching upwards to the Premiership on the back of a wealthy owner and a sustainable income, culminating, eventually, in Champions League Football in our lifetime, IMO. Their outcome provides us with the opportunity of many happy hours of posting at their expense, while we watch their club on the down escalator to the basement. Who would want them made extinct and miss out on the fun, another 26 years of fun, reminding them who is the number one club in the South....