Jump to content

Barnsley amongst clubs threatening to sue EFL if we arent relegated


Guest Grandad

Recommended Posts

Guest Grandad
16 minutes ago, Royal_D said:

 Or is it just reading this forum that’s depressing me 

Would a picture of my breakfast help?

20200521_101722.thumb.jpg.b4952118a72c3bc629c95ed899f0ea25.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rickygoo said:

 

They say - and it's been repeated on here umpteen times - that after the fact extra information became available.  

 

None of us know what that information is. None of us know whether the auditors were privy to it and how it changes the transaction based on EFL rules. I agree that it's hard to see how the transaction can be doubted - despite the circumstantial evidence when Chansiri stated at a fan forum that we'd be in bother if we didn't come up with a plan when the accounts suggest he'd already come with a plan that solved the bother he was talking about.

 

That's the only thing that puzzles me but I think we'll be OK - especially with a top lawyer and recent EFL failings in cases. 

Purely assumption on my part based on what I've read, but I think EFL were consulted about the ground sale and agreed, perhaps reluctantly in the absence of rules to the contrary.

 

The transaction itself is the additional information and the basis of their complaint. While compliant with HMRC and UK law, EFL wont like the transaction being 'backdated' in their opinion, to the previous years accounts or payment terms.

 

I suspect their authorisation assumed a clean transaction and neither side explicit regarding the details.

 

From our point of view, we obtained agreement and subsequently conducted the transaction in a legally compliant manner. 

 

The EFL equally negligent if so for not stipulating explicit terms, certainly more than us. The onus surely on the governing body to interpret rules and provide  clear guidance. If not grounds to acquit, certainly significant mitigating factors to reduce any potential punishment. 

 

It wasnt against EFL rules, even so we sought and obtained agreement and proceeded to complete the transaction to the satisfaction of Auditors and HMRC.

 

Nothing is ever certain with EFL, I have serious doubts about their 'independent' panels, but put this in court and I think we would win.

Edited by striker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Grandad
1 minute ago, striker said:

Purely assumption on my part based on what I've read, but I think EFL were consulted about the ground sale and agreed, perhaps reluctantly in the absence of rules to the contrary.

 

The transaction itself is the additional information and the basis of their complaint. While compliant with HMRC and UK law, EFL wont like the transaction being 'backdated' in their opinion, to the previous years accounts. 

 

I suspect their authorisation assumed a clean transaction and neither side explicit regarding the details.

 

From our point of view, we obtained agreement and subsequently conducted the transaction in a legally compliant manner. 

 

The EFL equally negligent if so for not stipulating explicit terms, certainly more than us. The onus surely on the governing body to interpret rules and provide  clear guidance. If not grounds to acquit, certainly significant mitigating factors to reduce any potential punishment. 

 

It wasnt against EFL rules, even so we sought and obtained agreement and proceeded to complete the transaction to the satisfaction of Auditors and HMRC.

 

Nothing is ever certain with EFL, I have serious doubts about their 'independent' panels, but put this in court and I think we would win.

The valuation of Hillsborough may well be an issue too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Grandad said:

The valuation of Hillsborough may well be an issue too

True  although maybe less so. That was independently valued?

 

To be honest I can understand why they'd be pissed off that the sale wasn't concluded until the year after and no money changed hands. It doesn't sit easy with me either, but it still doesn't make us guilty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, striker said:

True  although maybe less so. That was independently valued?

 

To be honest I can understand why they'd be pissed off that the sale wasn't concluded until the year after and no money changed hands. It doesn't sit easy with me either, but it still doesn't make us guilty. 

 

That's my take on it as well. It's all a bit unseemly and indicative of significant financial imprudence, but may not be technically outside the specifics of the regulations. Presumably, this is why we've employed the services of a man who has the reputation of 'Mr Loophole' who got a lot of business when celebrities were clocked speeding.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Grandad
1 hour ago, royalowlisback said:

Hell yeah, but I always put Chilli flakes in my eggs. 9/10.

 

Black pepper - and a spoon of english mustard powder for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grandad said:

The valuation of Hillsborough may well be an issue too

 

60 million does seem a bit cheeky but if verifed and approved by relevant people then not much EFL can do. Essentially this ground sale is a hail mary which the EFL wish was against their rules. If we get away with it then its a relief. However we are still left with no plans from Chansiri going forward. A poo situation and if we win the case its not a celebration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Belfast Owl 2 said:

 

60 million does seem a bit cheeky but if verifed and approved by relevant people then not much EFL can do. Essentially this ground sale is a hail mary which the EFL wish was against their rules. If we get away with it then its a relief. However we are still left with no plans from Chansiri going forward. A poo situation and if we win the case its not a celebration

 

We must wait for the Bombs to stop falling before we commence rebuilding !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Grandad
45 minutes ago, soldierboyblue said:

A Property is worth what someone will pay in the absence of a valuation and the banks not having to finance the purchase, which in the case of the sale of Hillsborough they were not.

 

 

 

So there wasn't a valuation?

 

if that was the case - why didn't Chansiri buy Hillsborough for £500million - fixing our FFP issues and providing every penny he needs to get us promoted?

Edited by Grandad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...