Amidst the emerging news of great trauma that is allegedly coming TRFC’s way in the near future, it would be prudent for us to keep our eye on the big picture – the one that captures the other clubs in the league playing the role of bystanders, powerless to influence events and unwilling to react .
For what it is worth, my information on the TRFC situation is that the stadium issues being talked about are not critical at this time (although talks have begun with Queens Park and the SFA to secure a lease of Hampden for two years), but that the creditor issues, including tax, national insurance and VAT, are of immediate, growing concern.
In the last few weeks, Celtic, Hibs, the SFA and referees have all been in the Ibrox firing line and subjected to Level 5 penned invective. Their response has been a dignified silence and a refusal to officially engage. Understandable perhaps, but the cowed nature of it is odd – especially given the opportunity it would have afforded for some proper PR retaliation on the part of any of those bodies.
Perhaps the real and most important question is ‘why does everyone stand idly by as this train-wreck heads for buffers’ ?
And the supplementaries;
- If Rangers (IL) did in fact cheat, why on earth would clubs let them away with it?
- Why would they allow the Continuity Myth to become embedded in the first place, emboldening others who might want to trigger an invisible liquidation to dump creditors?
- While we are at it why would those who suffered financially as a consequence go to great lengths themselves (as we have witnessed over Res 12) to ensure that the offenders would never be held to account?
Here’s why. RFC got away with, and TRFC get away with appalling behaviour for one very simple reason; football’s mortal fear of regulation.
A second insolvency event at Ibrox in five years of the first (irrespective of how many clubs you think took part) would draw unwelcome attention to the SFA and SPFL’s failure to run the game honestly and effectively – and would almost certainly attract attention from Holyrood. Therefore it needs to be avoided at all costs.
When TRFC were caterwauling over the cup final report recently, no-one weighed in with counter-arguments because prolonging the debate would have kept it current long enough to possibly colour public attitudes on fan behaviour. Of course this already carried a government threat of the imposition of strict liability on the clubs. Better that those papers should be wrapping fish suppers as soon as possible – not lighting a bonfire under the main stand at Hampden.
RFC get away with appalling behaviour (and so is TRFC), for one very simple reason;
football’s mortal fear of regulation.
It might be worth mentioning the ‘Oops, we misspoke’ moment in the aftermath of the publication of that cup final report and TRFC’s demands that Hibs should suffer sanctions for their fans’ post final whistle behaviour.
They (TRFC) were consequently challenged to put their votes where their mouths were and sign up for strict liability. Oops! – and radio silence broken out.
The fact that the catastrophic failure of Rangers came about as a result of the catastrophic failure the SFA’s self-regulatory processes surrounding player registration – has made it unthinkable that football should admit to those failures.
Football does not want government cattle strewn around the tracks of its gravy train. Goodies in the shape of interest on loans or preference shares, favourable director contracts, tax write-offs, agent kick-backs and bungs are too great, and government intervention is a threatens to divert the train away from its current path.
Unless you are a forensic accountant, perhaps even if you were, I’d be willing to bet you’d have to get very lucky to extract usable information on the cost of shareholder finance from club accounts, or the extent of contracts between clubs and companies associated with club officials.
The very fact that the catastrophic failure of Rangers came about as a result of another catastrophic failure – that of the SFA’s self-regulatory processes surrounding player registration – has made it unthinkable that football should admit to those failures.
Scottish football tolerates bad behaviour of corrupt individuals and organisations because football itself is endemically, culturally corrupt.
There is no question that there is great antipathy towards RFC and TRFC amongst other clubs. They are pariahs within the Scottish game, but not because of any principled stand against or moral outrage at their behaviour. In fact for the most part, football people at the majority of clubs no moral objections whatsoever to the tax avoidance strategies of the Murray era.
Scottish football is mightily pissed off at RFC and TRFC because they went too far, made it inevitable that they would be found out, and exposed everyone else to the possibility of regulation by government.
Of course Murray, Whyte, Green, King and the rest knew all of this, and that knowledge has allowed them to push the envelope as far as they have.
However clumsily and ineptly each of these individuals have gone about their business, they are NOT the real problem. Our major concern should be that for every crime we discover, there are at least a half dozen that we never got wind of, perpetrated by much smarter offenders. Not to mention the enablers at Hampden and boardrooms all over the country who still promote a culture that seeks to cover it all up.
Let me paint a picture for those people whose ideal scenario in this saga is to have Rangers airbrushed from Scottish football history. Even if you were to get your wish, do you really think the corruption in the game would disappear with them? Would sporting integrity finally climb to the top of the priority list?
Of course it would do no such thing. The Rangers implosion gave Scottish football a chance to demonstrate that malpractice was isolated and confined to one club, but their reaction to it was a light-touch approach to governance and regulation, demonstrating fairly conclusively that the cancer has spread way beyond Govan. In fact the authorities and the clubs would once again become bystanders – perhaps some of them may even take to cheer-leading – if the same thing happened again.
That is why those people who run ALL of our clubs are largely unfit to do so. That is why the sport needs to be properly regulated and accountable. And that is why the SFA/SPFL edifice needs to be demolished, the rot dug out, and new structures put in place which are heavily weighted in favour of sporting integrity and consumer interests.
I never thought I would find myself quoting Tony Blair, and I shall probably go straight to hell for doing so, but it is no good just being tough on the crime itself, we need to be even tougher on the causes of the crime.
HomunculusOctober 16, 2016 at 13:37
‘..John, I don’t think for a second that Celtic, or any other sensibly run business would lend money to such a basket case of an organisation. If anything I think Celtic and the other clubs will be preparing themselves for Armageddon II. ‘
_________
The voice of reason calms me down.
There are some quite incredible allegations now being made around the web about a large football club based in the Ibrox area of Glasgow. I won’t repeat them on here because I don’t know if they are true. Twitter is awash with them, so to speak, and the posters have form for being right.
upthehoopsOctober 16, 2016 at 19:07
‘… I won’t repeat them on here because I don’t know if they are true. ‘
________
Oh, go on, go on, go on…..’fictionalise’ a few examples for us!
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/celtic-v-motherwell-live-updates-9/comment-page-13/#comment-2944327
John ClarkOctober 16, 2016 at 20:51 4 Votes
upthehoopsOctober 16, 2016 at 19:07 ‘… I won’t repeat them on here because I don’t know if they are true. ‘ ________ Oh, go on, go on, go on…..’fictionalise’ a few examples for us!
=====
Just imagine that a renowned football club used a local church (exempt from water charges, allegedly) as the address for their own water supply? And avoided a very large sum in water rates as a result?
Whether true or false, you have to admire the ingenuity of whoever dreamt that scam up. I don’t believe it, personally. That would be just like bypassing your leccy meter, wouldn’t it? And folk do time for that.
I would imagine the post on CQN, kindly linked by StevieBC, is where the twitter fest came from that Neepheid is referring to. Perhaps someone might be able to give us an idea of the poster’s previous, ie is he a regular poster with no history of windups, but my own impression from what I’ve read on twitter is that it might be someone trying to discredit the bampots by putting out a ridiculous rumour that, once shown to be nonsense, makes a mockery of us all, or at least makes everyone more wary of things put out on (in particular) Celtic minded sites.
It does seem just too ridiculous, even for TRFC! Could you imagine the fallout if TRFC went bust over their water bill? No bear would ever touch the stuff again
ALLYJAMBOOCTOBER 16, 2016 at 22:05 2 Votes
It does seem just too ridiculous, even for TRFC! Could you imagine the fallout if TRFC went bust over their water bill? No bear would ever touch the stuff again21
———————
A boycot of the rain,even i would join in that march
AllyjamboOctober 16, 2016 at 22:05
It does seem just too ridiculous, even for TRFC! Could you imagine the fallout if TRFC went bust over their water bill? No bear would ever touch the stuff again
=================
It is a laugh, but I’m pretty sure it’s just a wind-up. No reputable company would be that stupid, surely? Even if the alleged scheme is technically possible, which I doubt.
They surely wouldn’t be trying anything on under ?
http://www.scottishwater.co.uk/business/our-services/charities-exemption-scheme/charities-exemption-scheme
JOHN CLARKOCTOBER 16, 2016 at 23:00
They surely wouldn’t be trying anything on under ? http://www.scottishwater.co.uk/business/our-services/charities-exemption-scheme/charities-exemption-scheme
=============================
Scottish Water is answerable to the Scottish Government. On the off chance this bizarre rumour is actually true, I am sure there would be an order from on high not to bother cutting of any supplies. The Emergency Services are also answerable to the Scottish Government and in 2012 they were told to continue providing services even though they were owed a huge amount in unpaid bills. As I said it is a bizarre rumour, but nonetheless the Scottish Government in 2012 were absolutely fine with taxpayers picking up bills for Rangers. Rangers are part of the fabric of society after all.
Maybe the water bill is what Phil was cryptically referring to last week??
I still think its a massive squirrel to put the bampots off the trail.
Didn’t Sevco once refer to themselves as a “parish” in one of their statement o’clocks?
, But having said that, I though Mr Custard was a wind-up when I first heard it. Funnier things HAVE happened.
Personally, I think it is too off the wall, and they will always be on the tap,
Good Morning
John James site has also commented on the fluid situation at Govan and he , like Phil, is usually on the money.
Time for the authorities to act if there is any substance to this story. If true it is not only cheating the tax payer once again as we all have to pay Water rates with out Council Tax, but it is criminal.
Even if there is nothing in it surely it is time for the SFA and SPFL to use the powers at their disposal and take a good look at the real financial situation at Ibrox.
Wouldn’t hold my breath, a better chance of water flowing uphill.
Hoopy 7
October 17, 2016 at 08:46
Good Morning John James site has also commented on the fluid situation at Govan and he , like Phil, is usually on the money. Time for the authorities to act if there is any substance to this story. If true it is not only cheating the tax payer once again as we all have to pay Water rates with out Council Tax, but it is criminal. Even if there is nothing in it surely it is time for the SFA and SPFL to use the powers at their disposal and take a good look at the real financial situation at Ibrox. Wouldn’t hold my breath, a better chance of water flowing uphill.
___________________
If JJ does appear to believe that this story ‘holds water’ (sorry, couldn’t resist) then he is risking his credibility should it turn out to be nonsense, not a good idea just before his appearance at the Blog Awards, so we may assume he has information other than that appearing online. I think, though, that if there is a story here, it’s no more than the much anticipated unpaid bills, rather than some water games (again, my appologies for a dodgy joke
) of an illegal hue, and nothing close to the £2m some are claiming, for surely bills of such a large amount would be noticed as missing from the accounts, at least by the auditors!
One thing; this ‘story’ shows just how much of a laughing stock TRFC is – I’d have said ‘has become’, but it’s been a provider of much mirth ever since the day of it’s inception!
Holy water at ibrox, …. Who woulda thought ??,
Meanwhile, Mr “done” barton’s not quite finished, he’s there for the long stay.!!
https://i.imgflip.com/1chjqy.jpg
“Leigh Griffiths in Twitter dig at Gordon Strachan after Scotland boss says he’s too short
“…
Strachan said:
“In the 51 games in the Euros the first 19 goals were scored from set-plays. That means you have to have a certain amount of height on the field to defend corners.
“The (Scotland) team was a lot smaller at 2-0 than it was at 0-0 (in Slovakia) and the first corner kick we get after that, they score with a header. Does that help you with the certain amount of height that you have to have in my team? There’s absolutely no doubt about it.
“People can argue that toss and debate it. But that is fact. You need to have a certain amount of height in international football teams to defend set plays. It’s not just Leigh Griffiths. You’ve got to try to get the balance. I could pick a huge team but there would be a problem passing the ball…”
======================
Above, [with my highlighting added], is the DR’s spin of Strachan’s quotes into a ridiculous headline, simply to create some outrage and/or distraction.
It’s even more ridiculous when you remember that as a relative ‘shorty’ himself, Strachan still succeeded in Scottish/English professional football – and at a time when many dinosaur-coaches would simply have dismissed Strachan as being too small for the rigours of the game at the top level – regardless of his ability.
When the DR becomes extinct, it won’t be missed by many.
The DR is too short…on quality journalists.
You need to be above this height to play international football, Leigh.
Aye OK Gordon, whatever you say.
Way too many short players in this team, they have no chance.
HOMUNCULUSOCTOBER 17, 2016 at 16:35 Way too many short players in this team, they have no chance.
=======================
Bunch of midgets !
When I were a lad, managers wanted players to be ‘big and fast’, first and foremost.
I wasn’t that big, and not blindingly fast.
…and I do remember team managers typically screamed at me “no fancies” when trying to do something different / creative.
Ronaldo, Messi, etc. probably would have struggled to get a game in Scottish football c.1980.
I’m sure it’s rather different now, Strachan’s generalisations aside ?
I’ve always thought that the best way to defend corners/set is to leave the wee guys up the park near the half-way line .The attacking team then has to bring back players,usually big defenders,including an extra player for cover .
Re the playing Strachan’s stature. I think you’ll find the correct technical term was “annoying wee nyaff!”
It seems that the Worthington Group (formerly linked to Craig Whyte, but still involved in litigation re Rangers assets) is seeking a CVA in order to enter the Pension Protection Fund which will look after the interests of participants in the Jerome Pension Fund.
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/WRN/13003730.html
The RNS notice confirms that the Jerome Pension Fund was successful in getting the full £3M of their funds held by Collyer Bristow, (originally intended to be used in the purchase of RFC), returned to them with interest. While it was known that this case had settled some time ago the full details of the settlement have not been published (both BDO and HMRC got some cash back too).
I had wondered why the Jerome Pension fund was no longer mentioned in the remaining Fraud charges against Whyte. The return of the funds in full may well be the reason why.
The RNS also confirms that the company is still pursuing the Law Financial claim re the Assets of the Oldco.
PADDY MALARKEYOCTOBER 17, 2016 at 18:43I’ve always thought that the best way to defend corners/set is to leave the wee guys up the park near the half-way line…
===================
Yes, and was it Shankly / Paisley [?] who said that the strikers are also the first line of defence ?
SMUGASOCTOBER 17, 2016 at 19:13Re the playing Strachan’s stature. I think you’ll find the correct technical term was “annoying wee nyaff!”
===================
Yes, those ‘wee players’, forever snapping at your ankles, but running their hearts out for lost causes, and never giving up. Very effective, and an inspiring player to have in your team – especially when you are losing.
Sutton challenging the length of Warbo’s leash
https://twitter.com/chris_sutton73/status/788012345444425728
“…Guardiola at Manchester City… He’s looked at coloured football boots in the same way Alf Garnett [sic] used to view hair on a fella which touched the shirt collar and he’s gone off on one. Now City’s academy players will only wear black…”
Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/aidan-smith-pep-guardiola-and-co-go-back-to-the-future-1-4259317
===========================
There is hope for the beautiful game yet…
lol wee griffiths
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37682475
good read about DR “celtic tax case ”
http://twohundredpercent.net/scottish-media-celtic-tax/
Evening.
I’ve not been on in a long time due to a new job, but I had to post regarding the liquid situation in Govan.
Scottish Water supply water through their Business Stream company and it either charges a business for water used by meter readings OR in the case of unmetered businesses the charge is based on the rateable value (Ibrox is currently valued at £1,916,000 (SAA.gov)).
Business Stream charge a fixed rate of £157.96 and then £0.03035 per £ of the rateable value per year, so that should be roughly £58,000 for the potable water per annum.
The rate for waste water is £178.38 and £0.05092 per £ of rateable value. This should be around £97,000 per annum.
In total the water and waste charges would be somewhere around £155,000, so there is the potential for £310k + being due if the story holds any water.
Anyway I’m back off to lurk for a bit.
Been a bad day site-wise. I will now read from a script prepared by BP;
|Begin script|
We suffered a script injection attack on Friday which we managed to stave off. We were adding some extra security this morning, since we were worried that the hackers were after the database. Whilst that was being implemented, another script injection attack took place, which whilst it failed to reach the database, destroyed a lot of the existing site code.
We are now back to normal, and you will all notice that a Secure Socket Layer has been added to the website (https instead of http). This will secure the communication channels between the user and the site, and make it more difficult for anyone to spoof communications from SFM to readers, posters and members.
|End script|
Now the bit I understand;
What you are now reading is effectively a new, more secure site, and as a consequence many of you will have lost auto-form settings with your username and password. That is unavoidable, but hopefully it is not too much of an inconvenience. The password reset facility is still in operation anyway for those who require it.
Since the whole site had to be pretty much built from scratch today, we may find some odd behaviour on pages over the next few days. Please let us know if anything odd is happening to you guys. BP will be dealing with any problems so you can contact him direct at bp@sfm.scot
EasyJambo,
Good Morning.
Worthington state
“It remains the view of the Directors that the Company has, through its ownership of Law Financial Limited, claims relating to the administration of Rangers Football Club, the sale of its assets and the liquidation of RFC 2012 Plc.”
Sorry if I have missed it but has anyone expressed a view on the merits of this claim?
Perhaps it is one of the many reasons why a Bank won’t touch them?
Cheers
HOOPY 7OCTOBER 18, 2016 at 06:57
“Sorry if I have missed it but has anyone expressed a view on the merits of this claim?”
————————————————————————————————————
He has been charged with fraudulently obtaining Rangers(I.L.), so I would assume that needs dealt with before any claim can be assessed
HOOPY 7
OCTOBER 18, 2016 at 06:57
============================================
Working from memory here but I think this goes way back to the situation regarding Sevco 5088 and Sevco (Scotland), two entirely different companies.
Duff and Phelps entered into an agreement with Sevco 5088 that if the CVA failed then all of the assets would be sold to them for a pre-arranged price. I remember people commenting at the time that this was a very strange move and it did not seem to be in the best interests of the creditors, which would be the only consideration if the CVA failed.
However when the CVA failed the assets were actually sold to Sevco Scotland, as stated an entirely different company. (However it is no coincidence the names are so similar). The discussion was then about how the right to buy those assets for the fixed price had moved from one company to another and who had agreed it, from each of the parties.
You will recall there was then a discussion with regards novation (from the legal dictionary – 1 in English law, an agreement between at least three parties allowing an original contracting party to be released and another party to be brought in as obligant. … 2 in the law of contract in Scotland, novation is the discharge of a contract by the substitution of a fresh obligation between the same parties.)
So basically (as I understand it) the argument is over who was entitled to buy such a large basket of assets for such a small price and whether or not the administrators acted in an appropriate manner.
My personal view is that Worthington / Law Financial / Whyte / Whoever are looking for some out of Court settlement as opposed to some form of reversal. It is however worth bearing in mind that the Rangers accounts have made note of this dispute as a matter of concern, albeit they have also stated that they do not believe it has any real merit. I tend to agree with your view with regards this having an adverse effect on the ability to get normal banking facilities, doubt over the ownership of their major assets certainly can’t be helping.
I’m sure someone with a better memory and understanding can clear things up a bit, and perhaps correct the bits that are entirely wrong.
TrisidiumOctober 18, 2016 at 00:52 9 Votes
Been a bad day site-wise. I will now read from a script prepared by BP;
|Begin script|
We suffered a script injection attack on Friday which we managed to stave off. We were adding some extra security this morning, since we were worried that the hackers were after the database. Whilst that was being implemented, another script injection attack took place, which whilst it failed to reach the database, destroyed a lot of the existing site code.
We are now back to normal, and you will all notice that a Secure Socket Layer has been added to the website (https instead of http). This will secure the communication channels between the user and the site, and make it more difficult for anyone to spoof communications from SFM to readers, posters and members.
|End script|
Now the bit I understand;
What you are now reading is effectively a new, more secure site, and as a consequence many of you will have lost auto-form settings with your username and password. That is unavoidable, but hopefully it is not too much of an inconvenience. The password reset facility is still in operation anyway for those who require it.
Since the whole site had to be pretty much built from scratch today, we may find some odd behaviour on pages over the next few days. Please let us know if anything odd is happening to you guys. BP will be dealing with any problems so you can contact him direct at bp@sfm.scot
=====================
Tris,
I have noticed something that may (or may not) be a security concern – I’ve PM’d BP just a few minutes a go with a suggestion.
TrisidiumOctober 18, 2016 at 00:52
‘…Please let us know if anything odd is happening to you guys. BP will be dealing with any problems so you can contact him direct at..’
_______
Just for whatever relevance it may have at this point, I tried several times this morning to access the blog in my usual way i.e tying in sfm.scot and then clicking on the ‘SFM monitor-still asking questions’ thingy, and kept getting that ‘IIS7’ page.
I went then to check my blog-name emails account, to an email which indicated I had had a PM a day or so before, accessed that PM successfully, and from that page clicked on ‘blogs’ and , hey presto! found that the blog had been up and running for hours!
In the words of one of ‘Jack Parlybane’s’ interlocutors, “Phew, Ah tell ye, man,” I was relieved and delighted!
Gott Strafe den ‘hacking’ bast.rd!
John Clark October18
Snap !
I’ve just renewed my password, since I couldn’t remember the existing one.
HomunculusOctober 18, 2016 at 09:05
‘… the argument is over who was entitled to buy such a large basket of assets for such a small price and whether or not the administrators acted in an appropriate manner. .
________
That, Homunculus, was a very welcome reminder of puzzle which was largely ignored by the SMSM.
(It is only fair to say, for safety’s sake and in parentheses) that the Administrators satisfied Lord H that there had been no illegal hanky-panky)
I gave up trying to find a reported case in which the sale of assets by duped ( or indeed, complicit) Administrators had been reversed on the grounds that name of the company to which they were to be sold had been changed to that of another company without the knowledge of a director of the first company.
It would be fascinating if our Craig were to establish that he is,after all, the legal owner of the assets. It would be fascinating in the case of any business, of course.
But as a lovely GIRUP to the charlatans of all types who have been involved, how sweet!
Sevco 5088 became a subsidiary of Law Financial, which was subsequently bought by Worthington Group, from Whyte, along with its claim re the assets of the club.
Re the court case – the remaining charges only relate to events surrounding the purchase of the club. There are no charges relating to any period after May 2011, i.e. nothing about the non payment of taxes, administration, liquidation, transfer of assets etc. As a result, Sevco 5088 no longer has any part to play in the court case.
In completely unrelated news, Scotstoun pool is closed: http://www.glasgowlife.org.uk/sport/our-facilities/swimming-pools/scotstoun/pages/home.aspx
“unforeseen technical issue” = all the water’s been stolen
easyJamboOctober 18, 2016 at 11:02
‘…Sevco 5088 became a subsidiary of Law Financial, which was subsequently bought by Worthington Group, from Whyte, along with its claim re the assets of the club.’
_______
Point of fact taken, eJ. But I would still love it if Worthington Group won out, and King and accomplices were done in the eye and bang to rights, and there was a consequent knock-on effect on the original mountebank.
Stevo,Cool clear water from the church, … ehh errr, …. ah mean Frankie Laine !!
https://youtu.be/2jj7qab6KC4
Reading about the status of the ownership of the ‘basket of assets ‘ I had a wee jog of my 67 year old memory. There is a memory false or otherwise whereby Craig White had moved Ibrox and MP to a second subsidiary of Wavetower who’s sole director was Tom White. I understood that these assets were therefore not contained in the ‘basket’. Any of you clever guys remember this or has my old memory let me down again?
Stevo,
Cool clear water from the church ….
ehh, … errr .. ah mean Frankie Laine !!
https://youtu.be/2jj7qab6KC4
I think he moved the floating charge over ALL the assets (but no specific asset) to the other company. Had he been clever it would have been a fixed charge over particular assets but that would have limited his maximum take.
On the 12th of December 2012 there was a “letter before claim” from Sevco 5088 Ltd, Aidan Early and Craig Whyte, stating that they would initiate court proceedings for inter alia breach of contract,deception and unjust ernrichment.
On the 23rd of March 2012 another missive this time from Merchant Legal LLP to Aidan Earley; and Worthington Group PLC with preliminary views on a number of potential claims.
This 9 page document ends:-
Our preliminary view (a view shared by counsel) is that Schedule 4 may enable many of the actions addressed in this note to be brought in the English Courts as opposed to those of Scotland.
To date no indication of any court action.
WOODSTEINOCTOBER 18, 2016 at 13:16
I wonder if the criminal investigation and charges have delayed the progress of the ‘Letter Before’ action, and we might see it coming into the spotlight, but not by the SMSM, once the case is concluded, one way or the other!
AllyjamboOctober 18, 2016 at 13:28
‘..I wonder if the criminal investigation and charges have delayed the progress of the ‘Letter Before’ action,.’
______
I don’t know to what extent, if at all, the COPFS checks whether there may or may not be concurrent civil actions against a person who is being prosecuted under criminal law.
I suppose some kind of effort has to be made to ensure that the ‘accused’ isn’t scheduled for trial on the say day that he is supposed to appear in another court, especially, perhaps, a court in another jurisdiction.
Whether judges are told the details of other live cases? Or talk to each other about live cases? I think probably not. I’d go further, and say, I hope not.It wouldn’t do at all, would it?
JOHN CLARKOCTOBER 18, 2016 at 13:50
I’d imagine, John, that criminal cases take priority over civil cases especially when one, or both, may be affected by evidence presented in the other. It may well be in the litigant’s best interest in the civil case, too, to delay proceeding while Whyte is under criminal charges. If Whyte walks free from the criminal trial he may well be in a stronger position with ‘evidence’ already ruled on to present to the court. It may well be, of course, that the case has been abandoned, even if not formally notified to the court.
Would be a pity not to hear the case put forward, though, as we might expect some juicy titbits from it ☺
In March 2016, a claim by the old Wavetower (TRFCG) for £18M against BDO was “sisted” by the judge until the criminal case was concluded. BDO subsequently reported that the claim had been withdrawn in April 2016, but were expecting a new claim for £3M to be forthcoming. As at 7 June, no claim had been received.
It is not clear if the Worthington / Law Financial / Sevco 5088 claim in respect of the oldco assets is the same one or a new one. I would guess that this one was related to the letter of claim that the Newco received two or three years ago.
Here is an extract from the last BDO Report to Creditors from June.
Thanks Scott. Don’t understand the jargon nor why these assets form part of what Sevco Scotland bought.
I would have thought they were different claims, EJ. The £18m claim was related to the floating charge that was transferred to Wavetower on the original Whyte purchase. The Law Financial claim is surely related to the sale to SS rather than S5088?
scottc October 18, 2016 at 14:49I would have thought they were different claims, EJ. The £18m claim was related to the floating charge that was transferred to Wavetower on the original Whyte purchase. The Law Financial claim is surely related to the sale to SS rather than S5088?
============================
I don’t think we can be certain that they are different. Even BDO seem confused.
WEEJOE
OCTOBER 18, 2016 at 12:10
Reading about the status of the ownership of the ‘basket of assets ‘ I had a wee jog of my 67 year old memory. There is a memory false or otherwise whereby Craig White had moved Ibrox and MP to a second subsidiary of Wavetower who’s sole director was Tom White. I understood that these assets were therefore not contained in the ‘basket’. Any of you clever guys remember this or has my old memory let me down again?
——————————————————————-
@ WeeJoe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4VVfU_2tdU
I think the claims relate to the same assets but for different reasons.
The floating charge claim is basically that there was a preferred creditor who should be paid in spite of the result of any CVA / liquidation. Their debt (the £18m) should be satisfied before any consideration to make a pay-out to any normal creditor. A perfectly reasonable thing to say if you ignore the surrounding circumstances.
The other part relates to who was entitled to purchase the assets from the administrator / liquidator, either Sevco 5088 or Sevco Scotland. It definitely started as 5088 (the administrator announced that binding agreement) but it definitely became Sevco Scotland. The “how” is still being argued. In this scenario they were effectively buying from the administrator whatever happened as the deal was set up in such a way that the assets were sold before they ever got into the hands of the liquidator.
Basically as I understand it one claim deals with who should have bought the assets and the other relates to who should have got the proceeds of that sale.
Think about that for a second. If we assume the floating charge is good (just for the purposes of the argument), and Whyte was behind 5088. With the purchase being made by Green fronting for him. (Remember the alleged conversations “You are Sevco, Craig”)Then 5088 would buy the basket of assets for a seriously low amount, Whyte would get the money paid for them (via his floating charge), minus any administration costs. So he would then have a “debt free club”, and most of the money back he paid for it*. If the SFA SPL had their way it would have been playing in the Premier League (as was).
Thankfully HMRC didn’t play ball, the charlatans turned against each other and the fans would not let the football authorities go through with such an outrage.
*You may also recall it was to be done quickly and the administrators costs limited to £500,000.
“Selling BHS for £1 to a serial bankrupt businessman who let the chain go bust and left pensioners high-and-dry was an ‘honest mistake’ says Sir Philip Green”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3847036/Selling-BHS-1-serial-bankrupt-businessman-let-chain-bust-left-pensioners-high-dry-honest-mistake-says-Sir-Philip-Green.html#ixzz4NS3YPKOj ====================================
Another Knight of the Realm making familiar sounding headlines in the media ?
At least Green admitted he made a mistake…rather than being ‘duped’…
Phil’s latest.
something about mega-repayment rates and faux-admin. 🙂
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/a-distressing-mission/#more-8116
FISHNISH
OCTOBER 18, 2016 at 16:47
Phil’s latest.something about mega-repayment rates and faux-admin.
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/a-distressing-mission/#more-8116
=======================
Phil being explicit that RIFC/TRFC dignified chaps have been passing the begging bowl around The City, without much luck.
If this had been splashed all over the DR, [I know], then would the SFA / SPFL wake up and be seen to be taking an active interest in the Ibrox club’s ability to see out the season ?
The SFA & SPFL are allowing the reputation of Scottish football to be trashed yet again, and by the ‘same club’ !
How will the media outside Scotland view the goings on at Ibrox if/when TRFC finally hits the wall ?
They might regard the Scottish top league as a joke of a set up.
And would they be wrong ? All because of one ‘bad apple’.
“John James” has posted an extract of a Queens Bench Division judgement regarding a claim about Legal Professional Privilege by Duff and Phelps which is related to the current Fraudco case. I don’t know if he has found the judgement himself or been supplied with it.
https://johnjamessite.com/2016/10/18/police-scotlands-500000-abuse-of-the-public-purse/
I have tried searching for the full judgement but I can’t find it. Maybe I’m searching in the wrong place or using the wrong criteria. Can anyone help?
It will probably be of most interest to John Clark who will be more familiar with what was discussed in court, although I’m sure that we will all want to share, at the appropriate time, the reasons why only Whyte remains on the indictment.
Jingo.Jimsie ???????? Isn’t Craig’s papa called Tom or should I get myself along to that well known Glasgow Memory clinic? ?
BTW I lol at your choice of music.
“1. This case is out of the norm. The Third and Forth defendants …”
Really, the Third and Forth defendants, one would have thought that a ruling from the High Court of Justice would have been proof read betterer.
Not sure if it will have been included on the news broadcast in Scotland, but part of the roof of Victoria Station in Manchester has collapsed due to the torrential rain we have had here gathering on the new roof. Two people have been injured, but, thankfully, neither appear to be serious. This is a new roof, installed last year, so even new roofs can have faults. No need to tell you what my first thoughts were on hearing this.
WEEJOE
OCTOBER 18, 2016 at 18:33
=============================
No you got that one Joe.
I believe he is Thomas Whyte (Born December 1946)
Former Director of Liberty Corporate Ltd and various other companies.
just seen this on twitter
Andy Muirhead@andymuirhdLooks like @Joey7Barton has removed all traces of Rangers on his twitter account. Preluding something?
8:07pm · 18 Oct 2
i checked the last 5 days and it seems it’s true,is he getting ready for the off
tonyOctober 18, 2016 at 20:14
just seen this on twitter Andy Muirhead@andymuirhdLooks like @Joey7Barton has removed all traces of Rangers on his twitter account. Preluding something? 8:07pm · 18 Oct 2 i checked the last 5 days and it seems it’s true,is he getting ready for the off
______________________
Or perhaps his lawyer has warned him about saying anything, or having reference to, TRFC on his twitter account! Footballers do tend to say daft things on twitter, and someone like Barton might be well advised to steer clear of it!
With that in mind, it may well be just as likely that this is a sign of him digging in for a long battle as it is of him preparing to leave Dodge!
A poster on Rangers Media reported the change to Barton’s twitter yesterday.
TONYOCTOBER 18, 2016 at 20:14 4 Votes
just seen this on twitter Andy Muirhead@andymuirhdLooks like @Joey7Barton has removed all traces of Rangers on his twitter account. Preluding something? 8:07pm · 18 Oct 2i checked the last 5 days and it seems it’s true,is he getting ready for the off
—————————
Next week the traces could return as The Rangers on his twitter account.
ok i will get my coat
easyJamboOctober 18, 2016 at 17:24
‘..It will probably be of most interest to John Clark who will be more familiar with what was discussed in court, .’
______
As if I could possibly reveal what was discussed in court!
Seriously, I’ve tried to track down that Queen’s Bench Divion Divisional Court judgment, using all the ‘help’ butons I can find: but so far, to no avail. I’ll give it another birl later,unless someone else finds it.
As we head towards the end of the calender year we once again hear rumours of T’Rangers running out of cash.
This time the rumours are related to water rates.
This is just the latest in a long line of cab driver type talk that we have seen over the years but little has come to pass.
However regardless of what financial ghouls come knocking on the Blue Room door history tells us that come January T’Rangers have needed additional finance be it from the likes of Ashley or RRM.
As discussed with Easyjambo the other day the finances may actually be better this term than they have been for a few years.
However if sustainability has not been achieved and additional investment is still required then there is no-one left to blame.
If an AGM is held in December, as has been the case, King will have been at the helm for a year and a half.
He has got nowhere with Ashley. He seems to have pissed of Puma and now BT are in the Ibrox Big Book of B’stards. I doubt even the SFA are all that happy re the various cup final statements.
Despite Joey always having been a problem character my guess is that given the circus, many an English club and players agents will be a bit more careful really the possibility of loan deals and the likes come January.
They are running out of friends.
The income for this season is as good as it is going to get down Govan way for a while.
If the rumours are true and they can’t manage on that then the whole operation is a busted flush.
The Sevco Shuffle, it’s all rather a kerfuffle!
https://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/on-possible-gratuitous-alienations-good-faith-and-sevco-shuffling/
God Bless!
WOTTPIOCTOBER 18, 2016 at 22:04
—————————————————
If an AGM is to be held then signed off accounts would have to be issued? Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Just getting signed off accounts is all they will need. It won’t matter how many going concern warnings or qualifications are in them because the mainstream media won’t mention it. The AGM would no doubt be held in a fancy venue like last year with King almost presidential in status. I then imagine Hibs, Hibs fans, Celtic, Celtic fans, the SFA, the BBC, BT Sport etc will receive a kicking to the delight of the assembled shareholders. Any financial questions will be soothed by King assuring them millions are only ever one phone call away from wealthy benefactors, as he did last year when bragging about paying off Ashley. Winning the league and qualifying for the Champions League will be spoken about, as will saying they will do better than Celtic by actually being competitive.
The above is not a fanciful view by me, because in various ways all of this has happened already. I don’t believe all Rangers fans are taken in by it, in fact I know they’re not. However the ones they need are clearly on board.
John ClarkOctober 18, 2016 at 21:16 10 Votes
easyJamboOctober 18, 2016 at 17:24 ‘..It will probably be of most interest to John Clark who will be more familiar with what was discussed in court, .’ ______ As if I could possibly reveal what was discussed in court! Seriously, I’ve tried to track down that Queen’s Bench Divion Divisional Court judgment, using all the ‘help’ butons I can find: but so far, to no avail. I’ll give it another birl later,unless someone else finds it.
+++++++++++++++++++++
There is a major piece on this in the Scottish Sun (online version) today. I won’t provide a link to anything Murdoch related- sorry. I’m sure those who are interested can easily find it.
MercDocOctober 19, 2016 at 00:47
‘…The Sevco Shuffle, it’s all rather a kerfuffle!’
________
Thanks for that link, Mercdoc, to Paul McConville’s well-remembered piece.
The response to his observation that ” The answers to the questions I posed would help clear up the matter once and for all” has to be
“Answers were there none”.
But I think I’m quite entitled on the evidence before me (that is, such evidence as is in the public domain) to go on believing that CG may have worked a flanker in cahoots with people only just skiful enough to cover their backs .
There appear to be, in the world of money, many such moral degenerates who laugh all the way to the bank, whose laughter becomes increasingly louder as the need to mask the rotten hollowness at the core of their being increases.
neepheidOctober 19, 2016 at 08:59
‘.there is a major piece on this in the Scottish Sun (online version) today. I won’t provide a link to anything Murdoch related- sorry. I’m sure those who are interested can easily find it…’
_______
Thanks for that lin, neepheid. I put a clothes-peg on my nose, and had a look at it to see if it might have included a case citation reference. Too much to expect.
But as far as I am concerned , that judgment confirms me in my view that the whole prosecution of the alleged crimininal actions is nothing but a complete and utter ba.ls-up.
Hark! Do I hear the music of Ennio Morricone?
neepheid October 19, 2016 at 08:59
======================
As much as I am reluctant to support the Murdoch publications, I do welcome anyone who seeks to publish information that would otherwise be concealed by the establishment or others.
I note Hibs are reporting a modest profit in their latest accounts as opposed to posting losses the last few years.
Cup success and the good run in the League cup has assisted with income and I understand the future looks good with season ticket sales up this year.
Wages to turnover is down to 51%
Fans now have 32% ownership through the share issue that brought in additional cash.
I recall Easyjambo provided some commentary in the past with regard to the Hibees ‘internal debt’ situation but on the face of it it looks like the Armageddon myth has received another kick in the baws.
A wee look back to where Jerome first came up in court.
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2014/02/17/charlotte-fakes-material-ruled-admissible-28m-oldco-rangers-trial
It was also the last time. Settled out of court.
Remember Wavetower spent a substantial time unable to trade but have kept this claim simmering since.