Jump to content

Takeover Latest Gossip

saints_is_the_south

By saints_is_the_south,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Colinjb

Colinjb

Posted
Posted

Tony Lynham:

 

'The document the FL want us to sign is illegal.'

 

The league want us to forfeit our right to appeal and confirm in writing that SFC is in administration, even though SLH was.

 

Can totally understand where he is coming from, but ultimately, what f**king difference does it make!? We will start on -10 anyway, the league will make it stick. Cease the boll*cks, sign the paperwork and get on with preparing the club for next season!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gingeletiss

Gingeletiss

Posted
Posted
Tony Lynham:

 

'The document the FL want us to sign is illegal.'

 

The league want us to forfeit our right to appeal and confirm in writing that SFC is in administration, even though SLH was.

 

Can totally understand where he is coming from, but ultimately, what f**king difference does it make!? We will start on -10 anyway, the league will make it stick. Cease the boll*cks, sign the paperwork and get on with preparing the club for next season!

 

Why should they........do you really understand the ramifications of that. Cripes!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
westmidlandsaint

westmidlandsaint

Posted
Posted
Tony Lynham:

 

'The document the FL want us to sign is illegal.'

 

The league want us to forfeit our right to appeal and confirm in writing that SFC is in administration, even though SLH was.

 

Can totally understand where he is coming from, but ultimately, what f**king difference does it make!? We will start on -10 anyway, the league will make it stick. Cease the boll*cks, sign the paperwork and get on with preparing the club for next season!

 

I think the problem is if we sign to say SFC is in admin then we get hit with another -15 thus starting the league with -25 points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
popyto

popyto

Posted
Posted

If we really have a case why are we not rushing it through the courts? surely at least to get some kind of hearing as to the legality of the document. If the FL are in the wrong and the Pinnacle bid fails they must be leaving themselves open to one almighty lawsuit from both Pinnacle and the players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Billy

Saint Billy

Posted
Posted
I think the problem is if we sign to say SFC is in admin then we get hit with another -15 thus starting the league with -25 points.

 

If that is the case where do we go from here. Pinnacle will not take us on with -25 and nor will anyone else for that matter as that will probably relegate us yet again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintRichmond

SaintRichmond

Posted
Posted
Tony Lynham:

 

'The document the FL want us to sign is illegal.'

The league want us to forfeit our right to appeal and confirm in writing that SFC is in administration, even though SLH was.

 

Can totally understand where he is coming from, but ultimately, what f**king difference does it make!? We will start on -10 anyway, the league will make it stick. Cease the boll*cks, sign the paperwork and get on with preparing the club for next season!

 

 

 

OK ... it's illegal .......... so it would be thrown out if challenged in a court of law then ?????

 

SO SIGN IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Northam Girls

Northam Girls

Posted
Posted

Ok all you legal eagles - explain where we have gone wrong after reading the following extract from the FL rulebook ? :-

INSOLVENCY POLICY

A club will not be eligible for membership of The Football League if by the second Saturday in May

in the current year it:-

· Has a manager, receiver or administrative receiver appointed in respect of that club or any

part of its property.

· Has had a petition presented and not discharged in respect of it for an administration order

or if an administration order has been a) applied for; or b) made and not discharged in

respect of that club.

· Has had a winding up order made and not discharged in respect of that club.

· Has passed a resolution for the winding up of that club.

· Has proposed or entered into an arrangement with its creditors or some part of them in

respect of the payment of its debts or part of them as a Company Voluntary Arrangement

under the Insolvency Act 1986 or Scheme of Arrangement under the Companies Act 1985

APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP OF THE FOOTBALL LEAGUE

JULY 2007 3 OF 12

(in each case as amended by subsequent legislation or Regulation) and that arrangement

has not been agreed by the club's creditors or approved by the Court.

OTHER INFORMATION

The criteria for membership of The Football League are part of a membership criteria structure

agreed by The Football Association, The Football League, The Football Conference, The Isthmian

Football League, The Northern Premier Football League and The Southern Football League and

governed by Football Association Rules.

Any club dissatisfied with a decision of The Football League in any matter concerned with these

criteria has a right of appeal to The Football Association, as laid down in Football Association

Rules.

The Football League reserves the right, after consultation with The Football Conference and

subject to the sanction of The Football Association, to make changes to its membership criteria at

any time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintRichmond

SaintRichmond

Posted
Posted
Ok all you legal eagles - explain where we have gone wrong after reading the following extract from the FL rulebook ? :-

INSOLVENCY POLICY

A club will not be eligible for membership of The Football League if by the second Saturday in May

in the current year it:-

· Has a manager, receiver or administrative receiver appointed in respect of that club or any

part of its property.

· Has had a petition presented and not discharged in respect of it for an administration order

or if an administration order has been a) applied for; or b) made and not discharged in

respect of that club.

· Has had a winding up order made and not discharged in respect of that club.

· Has passed a resolution for the winding up of that club.

· Has proposed or entered into an arrangement with its creditors or some part of them in

respect of the payment of its debts or part of them as a Company Voluntary Arrangement

under the Insolvency Act 1986 or Scheme of Arrangement under the Companies Act 1985

APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP OF THE FOOTBALL LEAGUE

JULY 2007 3 OF 12

(in each case as amended by subsequent legislation or Regulation) and that arrangement

has not been agreed by the club's creditors or approved by the Court.

OTHER INFORMATION

The criteria for membership of The Football League are part of a membership criteria structure

agreed by The Football Association, The Football League, The Football Conference, The Isthmian

Football League, The Northern Premier Football League and The Southern Football League and

governed by Football Association Rules.

Any club dissatisfied with a decision of The Football League in any matter concerned with these

criteria has a right of appeal to The Football Association, as laid down in Football Association

Rules.

The Football League reserves the right, after consultation with The Football Conference and

subject to the sanction of The Football Association, to make changes to its membership criteria at

any time.

 

 

 

One vital bit missing ....

 

" In the case of uncertainty in any aspect, The League reserves the right to implement another ruling in their favour as and when it sees fit " .......

 

What DOES annoy me though ....

 

A) We went into Admin ONE WEEK LATE .............. WHY ???????????

 

B) All through this, it was known that we were TOO LATE to challenge the -10 .......... NOW Pinnacle make out that THAT is their reason for pulling out

 

It doesn't wash .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blandford saint

Blandford saint

Posted
Posted

The Football League ought to actually tell us what they are asking Pinnacle to sign. If it's so reasonable, and standard practice, it shouldn't be a problem. We can then make our mind up whether Pinnacle are being pedantic and too influenced by lawyers or the FL are being the total, vindictive ******s that we suspect.

When we bought our business from the previous owner who was doing some dodgy cash deals and using other means of avoiding VAT, we had to put in some legal safeguards to make sure that we were not liable for his actions. However, because the lawyers wanted to waste weeks of our time and money making this 100% watertight, in the end we had to accept what we thought was reasonable and tell the lawyers that they were acting for us, and that we wanted the deal to go through.

The worst thing is, if the FL are being ridiculously unreasonable, nobody is going to buy us and Mawhinney would be guilty of killing our club. He needs to tell us the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
whizz

whizz

Posted
Posted

The following letter is in the comments section of the Daily Echo Swiss consortium article. Genuine?

 

"Dear Mr Mawhinney,

 

We were disappointed at the Football League's decision last Monday to refuse a right of appeal in respect of the 10 point deduction.

 

We are also disappointed that the granting of a licence to play in League 1 is dependent on the club agreeing to waive the right to appeal against the said deduction.

 

Having taken legal advice we understand that, under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, it may be possible to challenge this clause retrospectively.

 

We are further advised that an agreement signed under duress may breach Human Rights legislation.

 

I am sure you will agree that it would be preferable for both parties and for the good of the game at large that these issues be resolved outside of the legal arena.

 

Would you please let us have your response by Friday 26 June. We intend to sign an agreement to allow you to issue the licence at that time.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Tony Lynam

Managing Director

The Pinnacle Group"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andysstuff

andysstuff

Posted
Posted
The following letter is in the comments section of the Daily Echo Swiss consortium article. Genuine?

 

"Dear Mr Mawhinney,

 

We were disappointed at the Football League's decision last Monday to refuse a right of appeal in respect of the 10 point deduction.

 

We are also disappointed that the granting of a licence to play in League 1 is dependent on the club agreeing to waive the right to appeal against the said deduction.

 

Having taken legal advice we understand that, under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, it may be possible to challenge this clause retrospectively.

 

We are further advised that an agreement signed under duress may breach Human Rights legislation.

 

I am sure you will agree that it would be preferable for both parties and for the good of the game at large that these issues be resolved outside of the legal arena.

 

Would you please let us have your response by Friday 26 June. We intend to sign an agreement to allow you to issue the licence at that time.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Tony Lynam

Managing Director

The Pinnacle Group"

 

 

If it is genuine, then it suggests that Pinnacle will be signing come what may tomorrow, and presumably taking appropriate action against the FL (or not...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintRichmond

SaintRichmond

Posted
Posted
If it is genuine, then it suggests that Pinnacle will be signing come what may tomorrow, and presumably taking appropriate action against the FL (or not...)

 

 

 

Sorry, but I don't read it like that at all ........ Pinnacle is asking Mawhinney to do something which they WILL NOT DO ........

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Window Cleaner

Window Cleaner

Posted
Posted
You're not obligated to call anyone Lord.........they're even trying to phase out the use of Mr!!!!!!!!!!

 

Baron Mawhinney is at least entitled to the use of his correct title, Dr Mawhinney.

Probably doesn't give a toss anyway but do none of you remember the first official letter you got after your degree or masters or doctorate that didn't have the correct title? ****ed you off didn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
You're not obligated to call anyone Lord.........they're even trying to phase out the use of Mr!!!!!!!!!!
that is true Ginge, but I doubt it is a good start when you want to get on his good side, perhaps they are trying to pee him off
Link to comment
Share on other sites
itchen

itchen

Posted
Posted

If it is genuine then whoever wrote it is an idiot. While the Football League may be trying to enforce unlawful terms, I can't see how human rights legislation has any place here. We're not talking about individuals, we're talking about a football club, a business and an association. I would say it's a fake and, if it's not, for the first time I begin to doubt Pinnacle's competence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintDonkey

SaintDonkey

Posted
Posted
The Football League reserves the right, after consultation with The Football Conference and

subject to the sanction of The Football Association, to make changes to its membership criteria at

any time.

 

So basically they can make up the rules as they go along?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
The Football League ought to actually tell us what they are asking Pinnacle to sign. If it's so reasonable, and standard practice, it shouldn't be a problem.

 

Absolutely - I posted the same elsewhere on here earlier. As you say, surely the steps of the actual procedure they are asking Pinnacle to follow are not subject to NDAs or secrecy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nick65

Nick65

Posted
Posted

http://www.rivals.net/FORUM/pgeThreads.aspx?boardId=106&clubId=30

 

Apparently Darlington have achieved the 75% creditor agreement, which means they can get their CVA (well done them, BTW).

But one of the replies in their thread mentions a 4-week wait before the club is officially out of administration to allow for appeals. Is this right ?

As I understand it, if a club starts a new season in admin, it will get another points deduction.

 

Is this another reason for Pinnacle not signing (have to admit, I'm not sure when the official start of season is) ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintBobby

SaintBobby

Posted
Posted
http://www.rivals.net/FORUM/pgeThreads.aspx?boardId=106&clubId=30

 

Apparently Darlington have achieved the 75% creditor agreement, which means they can get their CVA (well done them, BTW).

But one of the replies in their thread mentions a 4-week wait before the club is officially out of administration to allow for appeals. Is this right ?

As I understand it, if a club starts a new season in admin, it will get another points deduction.

 

Is this another reason for Pinnacle not signing (have to admit, I'm not sure when the official start of season is) ?

 

August 8th. We have time to accommodate four weeks, if we survive that long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
http://www.rivals.net/FORUM/pgeThreads.aspx?boardId=106&clubId=30

 

Apparently Darlington have achieved the 75% creditor agreement, which means they can get their CVA (well done them, BTW).

But one of the replies in their thread mentions a 4-week wait before the club is officially out of administration to allow for appeals. Is this right ?

As I understand it, if a club starts a new season in admin, it will get another points deduction.

 

Is this another reason for Pinnacle not signing (have to admit, I'm not sure when the official start of season is) ?

 

Blimey....that puts a different perspective on things....(the article quoted actually says "4 to 8 weeks to complete the admin process once the CVA is agreed).....the bottom line being that this will still be going on when (if??) the season starts...during which period we can't sign players etc....

 

One word: bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ken Tone

Ken Tone

Posted
Posted
If we really have a case why are we not rushing it through the courts? surely at least to get some kind of hearing as to the legality of the document. If the FL are in the wrong and the Pinnacle bid fails they must be leaving themselves open to one almighty lawsuit from both Pinnacle and the players?

 

Not reallly. You can only really sue to re-gain what you have lost.

 

So if Pinnacle back out now they *may* have a case against the FL or Fry, but only to attempt to regain their deposit and other expenses. The reality is that if it went to law there'd probably be an out of court settlement if anything, with an agreed part payment. The FL could afford a few hundred thousand without too much trouble. Not much of a position of strength for Pinnacle is it?

 

The players won't have case because if someone else takes over, no loss,and if we go bust their registration goes to the league and they'll find other clubs on free transfers.

 

Pinnacle are in 'cutting off nose to spite face' territory here IMO.

 

K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted

CREDITORS of Darlington Football Club have accepted administrators' proposals which are expected to enable the Quakers to start next season with no points deduction.

 

Companies and creditors with a value of 93 per cent value of the club's £7.8m debt passed the Company Voluntary Agreement (CVA) today.

 

Only one creditor turned up to the meeting with the rest of the creditors voting by proxy.

 

The club needed at least 75 per cent worth of the creditors to accept the proposals for the CVA to be passed.

 

The document also had to be passed by more than half of the creditors unconnected with the club - 85 per cent voted in favour.

 

All football creditors, including players and other clubs, will receive all their debt. Unsecured creditors, including councils, the tax man, local businesses, have accepted just 0.9p in the pound.

 

Dave Clark, from administrator Brackenbury Clark & Co, was confident the CVA would enable Darlington to start the forthcoming League Two season without any further points penalty.

 

He said: "It was a bit of formality really. Most of the creditors voted by proxy which is a piece of paper they submitted instructing the chairman to vote on their behalf."

 

The CVA will return control of the club to former chairman George Houghton, but he is in advanced stages to sell it on to his previous vice-chairman Raj Singh.

 

The administration process will take between four and eight weeks to complete enabling an appeal process and all paperwork to be finalised.

 

After that the sale can be completed with Mr Singh and the club can offer contracts to players and management who have agreed to sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...