Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

washsaint

washsaint

Posted
Posted

ummmmm....wonder if this has anything to do with the SOA that Vantis prepared for the High Court. vantis were hugely critical of PFC in the SOA, by all accounts, and it could be that HMRC have enough evidence that Admin is a sham/something else is very wrong to go ahead with this expensive option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ericofarabia

ericofarabia

Posted
Posted
Just on Sky now Premier League have delayed their meeting to ratify the -9 point penalty until they've seen what happens at the high court tomorrow.

 

LOL .... Android was right, they've got away with the -9 point deduction :p

 

(For the time being ..... 48 hours anyone ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Keith

Saint Keith

Posted
Posted
LOL .... Android was right, they've got away with the -9 point deduction :p

 

(For the time being ..... 48 hours anyone ;) )

 

PL must think there is something in it. they wouldn't want to change the league table for 9 point deduction, and then have to change it again the same day to a 19 team league :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigShadow

BigShadow

Posted
Posted
On 5live they said that the taxman was fuming especially against Pompey as well as football in general. They dispute Chanrais ownership and so his validity in putting them into administration. They are demanding to see the paperwork. Jacob signed it off didn't he? Is there something about him leaving Fuglers last week, as in they want to have him at arms length.

 

There is something very strange about Jacobs leaving Fuglers. I also thought that maybe they figured out he had done something and wanted to distance themselves from it.

 

Either that, or Jacobs has been promised a prominent role in the post-admin PFC - but as that future is by no means certain something just doesn't make sense. Why leave a good job to join a sinking ship? Its got a fishy smell all over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Keith

Saint Keith

Posted
Posted
Isn'tit amazing that the reistrar the first time gave them 7 days and it took weeks to find some time in court and then the HRMC put in an appeal and they find time tomorrow.

Pompey will get away with it again.

 

quite possibly, but their arses will be flapping like a japanese flag in the meantime

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted (edited)

How about this:

 

1. Baloo has 2 registered charges, one of which (the stadium) pre-dates the WUP, but the other ("floating charge") post-dates the WUP and can be set-aside

2. 10 days ago there were numerous reports that Baloo had taken the freehold of the stadium, thereby discharging that part of the debt which was secured on it

3. If that's all true, then Baloo is (probably) not a secured creditor

4. It was a surprise (to me anyway) when Android said on Friday that the stadium was still on PCFC balance sheet - a bit of back-tracking or fiddling with the books gone wrong?

5. Gayda's debt is not secured against PCFC assets - it's secured against the land next door which he thinks they want - so he's not a secured creditor

6. Post WUP, only a secured creditor can appoint an administrator, absent Court consent

7. Are there, in fact, any secured creditors?

 

Discuss.

 

Edit: With credit to GM, who is already ahead of me on a similar theory

Edited by hutch
To give credit to one who is sharper than me
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Channon's Sideburns

Channon's Sideburns

Posted
Posted
There is something very strange about Jacobs leaving Fuglers. I also thought that maybe they figured out he had done something and wanted to distance themselves from it.

 

Either that, or Jacobs has been promised a prominent role in the post-admin PFC - but as that future is by no means certain something just doesn't make sense. Why leave a good job to join a sinking ship? Its got a fishy smell all over it.

 

Do you remember when one of our Skates on here said that PFC had been using Fugler's bank account for transactions??

 

That could be the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Channon's Sideburns

Channon's Sideburns

Posted
Posted
How about this:

 

1. Baloo has 2 registered charges, one of which (the stadium) pre-dates the WUP, but the other ("floating charge") post-dates the WUP and can be set-aside

2. 10 days ago there were numerous reports that Baloo had taken the freehold of the stadium, thereby discharging that part of the debt which was secured on it

3. If that's all true, then Baloo is (probably) not a secured creditor

4. It was a surprise (to me anyway) when Android said on Friday that the stadium was still on PCFC balance sheet - a bit of back-tracking or fiddling with the books gone wrong?

5. Gayda's debt is not secured against PCFC assets - it's secured against the land next door which he thinks they want - so he's not a secured creditor

6. Post WUP, only a secured creditor can appoint an administrator, absent Court consent

7. Are there, in fact, any secured creditors?

 

Discuss.

 

Wouldn't that be funny.

 

They couldn't even get a cover up right. :-D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JackFrost

JackFrost

Posted
Posted
Isn'tit amazing that the reistrar the first time gave them 7 days and it took weeks to find some time in court and then the HRMC put in an appeal and they find time tomorrow.

Pompey will get away with it again.

 

The fact they've found time tomorrow indicates this case has been pushed right up the priority list. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gorgiesaint

Gorgiesaint

Posted
Posted

Talksport have just said that been in contact with HMRC - apparently this is HMRC's way of getting information about the administration. They expected it to be adjourned for a few days for the administrator to come back to them with the info.

 

Adrian Durham's response was their query was "where's our money?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted
How about this:

 

1. Baloo has 2 registered charges, one of which (the stadium) pre-dates the WUP, but the other ("floating charge") post-dates the WUP and can be set-aside

2. 10 days ago there were numerous reports that Baloo had taken the freehold of the stadium, thereby discharging that part of the debt which was secured on it

3. If that's all true, then Baloo is (probably) not a secured creditor

4. It was a surprise (to me anyway) when Android said on Friday that the stadium was still on PCFC balance sheet - a bit of back-tracking or fiddling with the books gone wrong?

5. Gayda's debt is not secured against PCFC assets - it's secured against the land next door which he thinks they want - so he's not a secured creditor

6. Post WUP, only a secured creditor can appoint an administrator, absent Court consent

7. Are there, in fact, any secured creditors?

 

Discuss.

 

When did the freehold story thing break in respect to the timing of the SoA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ericofarabia

ericofarabia

Posted
Posted
I was flabbergasted when the HMRC never made a comment on PCFC going into administration. They have obviously being working very hard behind the scenes to make sure that it doesn't happen and they get their day in court. Fair play!!

 

Maybe just giving the skates time to find some more rope with which to hang themselves with .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Faz

Faz

Posted
Posted

Is there in clue in the Administrator refering in the Daily mail article to HMRC testing the validity of the "Debenture". GM showed us, I believe, that the Debenture was registered after the Winding Up process had started.

 

If the Admin is based upon the debenture, that could be HMRCs grounds to have it struck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reggie Dunlop

Reggie Dunlop

Posted
Posted

Cannot get this song out of my head just apt for the them at the moment

 

 

Is everybody happy?

knock, knock, knock, knock

You can't come in

knock, knock, knock

You can't come in

 

You're wondering now,

What to do, now you know this is the end

You're wondering how,

You will pay, for the way you did behave

 

Curtain has fallen,

Now you're on your own

I won't return,

Forever you will wait

 

You're wondering now,

What to do, now you know this is the end

 

Curtain has fallen, now you're on your own

I won't return, forever you will wait

 

You're wondering now, what to do,

Now you know this is the end

You're wondering how, you will pay,

For the way you did behave

 

You're wondering now, what to do,

Now you know this is the end

You're wondering now, what to do,

Now you know this is the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guided Missile

Guided Missile

Posted
Posted

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kingsland Red

Kingsland Red

Posted
Posted

HMRC certainly took their time.

 

If they were certain of PFC trading insolvently at the court appearance in February then any financial deckchair movement would have made no difference before last Friday when they were supposed to make their announcement regarding PFC avoiding them by moving into administration.

 

Maybe justice will be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toadhall Saint

Toadhall Saint

Posted
Posted
Cannot get this song out of my head just apt for the them at the moment

 

 

Is everybody happy?

knock, knock, knock, knock

You can't come in

knock, knock, knock

You can't come in

 

You're wondering now,

What to do, now you know this is the end

You're wondering how,

You will pay, for the way you did behave

 

Curtain has fallen,

Now you're on your own

I won't return,

Forever you will wait

 

You're wondering now,

What to do, now you know this is the end

 

Curtain has fallen, now you're on your own

I won't return, forever you will wait

 

You're wondering now, what to do,

Now you know this is the end

You're wondering how, you will pay,

For the way you did behave

 

You're wondering now, what to do,

Now you know this is the end

You're wondering now, what to do,

Now you know this is the end.

 

Ala the Specials - love it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
St Chalet

St Chalet

Posted
Posted
How about this:

 

1. Baloo has 2 registered charges, one of which (the stadium) pre-dates the WUP, but the other ("floating charge") post-dates the WUP and can be set-aside

2. 10 days ago there were numerous reports that Baloo had taken the freehold of the stadium, thereby discharging that part of the debt which was secured on it

3. If that's all true, then Baloo is (probably) not a secured creditor

4. It was a surprise (to me anyway) when Android said on Friday that the stadium was still on PCFC balance sheet - a bit of back-tracking or fiddling with the books gone wrong?

5. Gayda's debt is not secured against PCFC assets - it's secured against the land next door which he thinks they want - so he's not a secured creditor

6. Post WUP, only a secured creditor can appoint an administrator, absent Court consent

7. Are there, in fact, any secured creditors?

 

Discuss.

 

Edit: With credit to GM, who is already ahead of me on a similar theory

 

So basically it rests on whether by taking control of the club his secured charge was nullified. I can't see a reason why we would want to drop Portpin's charge against the stadium.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/feb/03/balram-chainrai-portsmouth-owner

 

Chances are they can get away with it based on this as I suspect Portpin are still secured creditors. What might be interesting is if they had screwed it up on a technicality and someone / thing other than Portpin had constituted the voluntary administration. Now that would be LOL time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guided Missile

Guided Missile

Posted
Posted

Even the club itself has screwed up the Chanrai deal, by posting this.

 

The security arrangement with Falcondrone Ltd is based on documents drawn up by Fuglers law firm as part of the original draw down of the loan, depositing with Mr Chainrai the original share certificate and a signed but undated share transfer in favour of Mr Chainrai, which could be dated and exercised in the event of default on the terms of the loan agreement.

 

Muppets...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
When did the freehold story thing break in respect to the timing of the SoA?

Around 2 days after, IIRC. On the same day they lost in injury time to 10 man Stoke, and we beat Norwich. I think I remeber that being a good day, but my memory's not what it used to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
St Chalet

St Chalet

Posted
Posted
Even the club itself has screwed up the Chanrai deal, by posting this.

 

The security arrangement with Falcondrone Ltd is based on documents drawn up by Fuglers law firm as part of the original draw down of the loan, depositing with Mr Chainrai the original share certificate and a signed but undated share transfer in favour of Mr Chainrai, which could be dated and exercised in the event of default on the terms of the loan agreement.

 

Muppets...

 

So based on this, the security arrangement was with Al-Faraj's company, not PCFC Ltd?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
So based on this, the security arrangement was with Al-Faraj's company, not PCFC Ltd?

Chalet,

 

Is that PCFC Ltd.?

 

or PCFC (in administration) Ltd.?

 

or PCFC (maybe in administration, we're not sure) Ltd.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tony13579

tony13579

Posted
Posted
BBC Inside Out South tonight. 7.30pm.

 

Jon Cuthill follows Pompey's awayday at Burnley.

 

Includes TCWTB - from what I heard on Solent earlier, the audio suggested TCWTB was in the pub til the 2nd half.

 

Let's see if it's a good advert for the club eh??!? :-D

 

dont forget more LOL-age... 10 min

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

Of we look for potentially stupid erros, Chanrai put them into Admin.

 

But Portsmuffsabin are the bond holders.

 

Was there a Board Meeting to ratify that decision?

 

Did Chanrai sign his name or Portsmuffsabin on the Admin order?

 

This looks like a legal dispute hearing not a "they'll be toast tomorrow" one, but it could lead to one and the same.

 

Meanwhile must be getting time for a statement from SBT

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NickG

NickG

Posted
Posted
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.

 

my take

 

1) to test validity of secured creditor status at time of winding order

2) more general ongoing challenge to the footballing debts rule (which maybe one more for future clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

Ouch

 

What would happen IF the Court Case was cancelled due to a dodgy Admin process?

 

Talk about Contempt of Court.

 

Farewell Mr Andriod as well.

 

Now, if only I knew someone who was the World's best Computer Hacker and I could find a disgruntled maybe not sure yet possibly a former employee. (Saw that one on Burn Notice)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted

There are a couple of references in those articles (Grauniad 4 Feb. & BVI) that Portpin made the loan(s) to Al-Mirage (i.e. not to PCFC), although they refer to the stadium (which PCFC owned, not Al-Mirage) as security.

 

Probably just untidy journalism. If not, then maybe Baloo is not a creditor of PCFC, secured or unsecured, at all, but needs to find the absent Sheikh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted
my take

 

1) to test validity of secured creditor status at time of winding order

2) more general ongoing challenge to the footballing debts rule (which maybe one more for future clubs.

 

Now that is more likely.

 

HMRC lost the right to preferred creditor status. BUT as the court case WAS adjourned for their WUO they may feel they have a case to push for the Status Quo Ante - they applied for the WUO first.

 

That could be a different point of law from the usual one.

 

Which makes it annoying as it means the chance of PCFC2010 NOT getting a CVA diminishes and they may NOT get apoints deduction next year.

 

BUT it adds 18 or more mil to the cost of the club for that poor lad to find from his pocket money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...