The Existence of Laws

A Blog by James Forrest for TSFM

I am a socialist, and as a socialist I believe in the fundamental goodness of people. Some people find that hard to believe when they read the stuff I write.

I published my first novel recently, on politics and the corrupting nature of it, and it is a deeply cynical book, a book where no-one has clean hands come the end. What has surprised some of those who’ve read it is that I didn’t focus on the lies and smears of the right, but the hypocrisy and deceit of those who claim to be of the left.

Corruption, you see, doesn’t respect political boundaries or points of view. It’s like rainwater. It finds every crack, and gets in there.

My political beliefs revolve around two apparently paradoxical elements; the belief in the inherent decency of people and the need for a strong, and powerful, state. I believe the second underpins the first, and this brings me into conflict with a lot of people, some on the left and some on the right. Too many people see the state as inherently evil, as something that interferes too much in the lives of ordinary people. As something suffocating.

Yet the state exists to protect us. It exists to provide a safety net. It exists to regulate and to oversee. If the state is made up of bad people, if the gears of society are captured by those with malicious or selfish intent, the results are obvious; war, corruption, chaos.

The vast majority of our problems in the modern age can be neatly summed up in two lines from Yeats’ poem “The Second Coming”, which I used to open my novel. “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

We live in a time when those who are protecting their own interests have assumed such power that they’ve cowed the rest of us. They have become a law unto themselves. They have changed the nature of the game, because they have sapped our will to the extent some barely put up a fight anymore. The weak get weaker, and the strong use their strength to crush the rest even more. It is a vicious struggle, a downward spiral.

Society is held together not only by the endeavour and common interests of its citizens but by a collection of laws. We elect the people who make those laws. They do so in our name, and we can remove that right every four years. That is a powerful thing, and we do not appreciate it enough. The present corruption exists because we allow it to exist.

The people around me continue to puzzle over my uncommon interest in the affairs of a football club on the west of Glasgow. My own club plays in the east end. I tell those who ask that my primary interest in the goings-on at the club calling itself Rangers is no longer about football; how could it be, after all? With promotion this year they are still a full two divisions below us, emasculated, skint, weak and unstable. If we were fortunate enough to draw them in cup competition the match would be over, as a tie, by the halfway point … in the first half.

In footballing terms they are an utter irrelevance.

Rangers is more than a football club to me. They are a symbol. Their unfolding calamity is an on-going outrage. What is happening there, what is being allowed to happen, is an offense to decency. It is a stain on the face of our country.

In short, it is a scandal. It is a scandal without parallel in sport.

Yet it’s not just a sports story either. If it was, I might not be so focussed on it. What is happening at Rangers is a colossal failure of governance. It is a damning indictment against the very people who are supposed to oversee our game. It is a disgraceful abrogation of responsibility from those at the top, those who claim to be “running things.”

If this is not a failure of governance it is a result of corruption at the heart of our national sport. It says they are bought and paid for, and I will say no such thing here.

So let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. We’ll say instead that what they are is weak, indecisive, inept and disconnected from reality.

It reminds me of our political class, which has become insular and ignorant about what the public wants, and what it needs. It’s not a wonder parties like UKIP can achieve national vote shares of 25% at local elections. Nigel Farage strikes me as a dog-whistle politician, the kind who knows how to appeal to a select group of voters. He is little different to Charles Green, the man who beguiled Rangers fans into handing over large amounts of money, because he was “standing up for the club.” It is easy to do what he did, easy to do what Farage is doing.

Real leadership requires toughness. Say what you like about the Tories, but they have that in spades. Yeats was right about the worst being full of passionate intensity. Green was. Farage is. Cameron and Osborne personify it in their political outlook.

It is easy to be cowed by blunt force politics, and by “tough talking Yorkshire men” and venomous speeches about “strivers and skivers.” The politics of divide and conquer is the oldest form of politics there is, and it’s no surprise to see it practiced by some of the vested interests in the game here in Scotland. Yet, lest we forget … something significant happened last year. The maligned and the ignored, the weak and the voiceless found something they never realised they had. They discovered that, in a very real sense, the power was in their hands.

Last year, the fans rose up when the governing bodies and the media went all-out to save Rangers from the self-inflicted wounds caused by a decade of cheating, malpractice and ineptitude. I have no problem calling that what it was.

What happened at Rangers seemed incredible, but it was all too predictable, and some of us had been talking about it for years before it hit. The Association seemed caught in the headlights but it would amaze me if they really were as insular and ignorant as they appeared. They must have known how bad the outlook was for Rangers. They just chose to ignore it.

They were aided and abetted by a thoroughly disreputable media, a collection of cowards and compromisers, charlatans and frauds, masquerading as journalists, but who long ago laid aside any claim to be bold investigators and settled for commenting on events as they unfolded. More often than not, with their ill-informed opinions, sometimes due to weaknesses in intellect and others wilfully ignorant, they failed even in that.

Entire newspapers became PR machines for crooks and swindlers. They aided in the scam because they didn’t do their jobs, some because they were lazy, some because they were incompetent and others because they wanted a seat at the table and were willing to sacrifice whatever integrity they once had in exchange for one.

That all of this was embraced by the Rangers fans is amazing to me. They trusted when they should have been asking questions. They closed their eyes, covered their ears and sang their battle tunes at the top of their voices so they wouldn’t have to hear anything they didn’t like. As incredible as I found it then, and still find it now – and now, even more so, when they have already seen the results of it once – I find it pathetic too, and I do feel pity for some of them.

A lot of these people are genuine football fans, and nothing more. They have no interest in the phony narrow nationalism, or the over-blown religion, or the notion of supremacy which manifested itself in a ludicrous statement from McCoist when interviewed recently on Sky.

Some of the Rangers fans look at their team of duds, kids and journeymen, they look at a boardroom of cowards and crooks, they look at a failing manager in his first (and last) job in the game and at a dark future and are not in the least bit impressed by, or interested in, the chest-out arrogance espoused in those ridiculous words “we are the people.” They know full well that their present crisis was made by men like McCoist, and they understand that pretentious posturing is not an act born of strength, but a scrambling around in the gutter, and a symptom of weakness.

They understand their position, and they hate it. And because they care about Rangers, because they value the club, because they cherish those things that made it a great Scottish institution, they want that back. They understand that before the Union Jack waving, Sash singing, poppy wearing, Nazi saluting, Orange element became the public face of their support Rangers meant something else, and that, above all things, is what pains them the most.

People do not hate Rangers. When the country appeared to turn its back last year, they were turning the back on favouritism and the bending of rules. Yet it would be a lie to say that there is not an element of dislike in the gleeful mockery of many rival fans.

But they don’t hate Rangers either. They hate the version of it around which a certain section of the support continues to dance. They hate the version which hates, and so too do many, many, many Rangers supporters, and they definitely deserve better.

David Murray chose not to openly challenge that version. Indeed, he encouraged certain strands of it to flourish and grow, with his “Britishness Days” and his effort to turn the club into the “team that supports the troops.” Other clubs have done as much, if not more, for the British Army than the one that plays out of Ibrox. Other clubs have given more money. Other clubs have lent their support to those on the front lines. They just chose to do it with respect, and with class, and with dignity. They chose to do it in private, understanding that there eventually comes a tipping point between looking after the ends of the soldiers and using them to promote your own.

The army has not battened on to Rangers. Rangers has battened on to them, and although it is unclear when an altruistic motive became darker, what started out as a gesture of solidarity is now used to entrench division and promote a notion of superiority.

Craig Whyte took over from Murray and immediately understood the lure of the “dog whistle.” He knew too that the media would accept whatever he told them, without question, and as he spoke up for “Rangers traditions” he made sure the lunatic fringe was well onside. He met face to face with the hard-core extremists in the support first and made them his praetorian guard. They spoke up for him until the day the club entered administration.

So, whereas Murray pandered to them and Whyte used them to further his own ends, it was only a matter of time before someone suggested to Charles Green that he could use the same tactics to win over the support. He went even further and blatantly promoted and encouraged this mind-set, and stoked the hate and nonsense to frightening new heights. The same people who cheered Whyte to the rafters jumped on board the Big Blue Bus and the results are clear.

Through all of it, the ordinary Rangers fan has seen his club buffered against the rocks, battered, broken, smashed to smithereens and sunk. Now there’s a big hole in the side of the lifeboat, and they are terrified that further tragedies await.

They are right to be concerned. Much of the media is still not telling them what they need to know. The people in charge of their club – the owners who have lied, the former hack who covered up the truth about Whyte and now acts as a mouthpiece for Green, the “club legends” who are content to sup with the devil and take his greasy coin when they should be standing toe-to-toe with the fans – are trying to silence those members of the press who do have facts to present.

How many times now have media outlets been banned from Ibrox for daring to report the truth? The manager who demanded the names of a committee last year defends those inside the walls who are desperate to keep secret the things that are going on. He is either an unprincipled coward, or he is, himself, bought and paid for. The fans suffer for it.

The “inconvenient truth” is still being kept from them, and this denies them any chance to play an active role in their club. Indeed, it is all too possible that they’ve passed a point of no return, and that their club is heading for a new liquidation event and it can no longer be stopped.

In either case, their power has been eroded to the point at which they must feel they have nothing left to do but stand back and watch what happens next.

They are wrong. I am a socialist. I believe in the inherent good of people. I think the ordinary decent Rangers fans are the only people left who can save their club … and the means by which they will do it is as simple as it could be.

They must stand up for “big government.” They must embrace the need for a “strong state.” They must lobby the SFA, and they must trust the SFA and they must get the SFA to follow its own rules and thereby save them from any further harm.

There is a tendency amongst some Celtic fans to see our governing bodies as pro-Rangers. If it is true then those running our game are ruining Scottish football without benefiting the thing they love more. The incalculable harm that has been done to Rangers in the last 20 some months is a direct result of the subservient media and the willingness of the football authorities to be “deaf, dumb and blind.” Those who believe this has actually helped the Ibrox club have not been paying attention in class. It has irrevocably scarred them, and it may yet have played a hand in destroying them once and for all, as a force if not as a club entirely.

For years, the SFA sat and did nothing as a club in their association operated a sectarian signing policy. They did nothing whilst the fans sang sectarian songs. In their failure to act they strengthened those elements of the Rangers support, instead of isolating, alienating and eventually helping to eliminate those who saw that club as a totem pole of division and hate. Their failure over EBT’s, and their lack of scrutiny, led to one of the greatest scandals in the history of sport, and I say that with no equivocation at all. The testimony of their registrations officer in the Lord Nimmo Smith investigation was a disgrace and in years to come it will rank as one of the most disreputable and damaging moments in the association’s history.

The most egregious failures of all were the failures in the so-called “fit and proper person” tests, which allowed first Whyte and then Charles Green to assume controlling positions at Ibrox. They will pass the buck and say the responsibility lies with the club itself, in much the same way as they are content to let the club investigate itself at the present time, but any neutral who looks at this stance knows it is unprincipled and spineless. It’s like letting the defence set the terms at a trial. It is foxes investigating the chicken coop.

It is a blueprint for corruption, and a recipe for disaster.

It is now too late for the SFA to declare Green “unfit”, as it was too late when they finally slapped that title on Craig Whyte. He and his allies own Rangers, and they control its destiny. They can push the club to the wall if they choose, in the final extremity, if that gets them what they want. The time for changing that is past. The damage has already been done. The barbarians are not at the gates. They are inside the walls, and sacking the city.

The SFA will be forced to punish Rangers for the sins of the owners, for the second time in as many years, and whilst it is right that the club face up to that, all the better to send a message to other clubs and other owners, the SFA cannot be allowed to slither off the hook here as though this was none of their doing. Green will skip off into the sunset. Craig Whyte has yet to pay his fine. These people never cared about Scottish football and they don’t care now.

The SFA are supposed to. Our governing body is supposed to govern, for the good of the whole game, and not as a support system for a single club. What they have allowed to happen on their watch is absolutely shameful and if the people responsible were men at all, with any sense of accountability, they would resign en masse.

They can pretend ignorance, but only the truly ignorant would accept that. Craig Whyte was not inside Ibrox a week before RTC and other sites were dismantling his entire business history, with some of the people here doing the work the SFA would not. Whyte himself claims to have made the governing bodies aware of the scale of what was facing the club, and they did nothing at all. Heads should have rolled a year ago.

In October of last year, on this very site, I posted an article in which I wrote:

“Which isn’t to say the due diligence matter isn’t worrying, because, of course, it is. Again, no-one is going to convince me that the SFA has conducted proper due diligence on Charles Green and his backers. No-one will convince me they are satisfied that this club is in safe hands, and that the game in this country will not be rocked by a further implosion at Ibrox. They failed to properly investigate Craig Whyte, because of lax regulations requiring disclosure from the club itself, regulations which are just a joke, but they can be forgiven for that as the press was talking sheer nonsense about him having billions at his disposal, and a lot of people (but not everyone!) were either convinced or wanted to be convinced by him.

To have witnessed what Whyte did, to have witnessed the Duff & Phelps “process” of finding a buyer, and having Green essentially emerge from nowhere, with a hundred unanswered questions as to his background and financing, for the SFA to have given this guy the go ahead, only for it to blow up in their faces later, would annihilate the credibility of the governing body and necessitate resignations at every level. There would be no hiding place.”

There are times when it is fun to be right, but this is not one of them. It is dispiriting and disquieting to have been so on the nose. It scares the Hell out of me, as someone who loves football in this country, to have seen this matter clearly when the people running our game apparently either did not or chose to ignore very real, very obvious, concerns. The Internet Bampots had no special insight or access to information that was denied those at the SFA. We just weren’t prepared to ignore it and pretend that it wasn’t there. There was too much at stake.

I have become convinced that things will never change until the Rangers supporters join us in demanding the full and unabridged truth here. They need to come out from under the bed, and confront their fears. They need to be willing to take the consequences, so that their club can emerge clean from this, and start again, with all this behind them.

And it can all happen with one simple thing. The application of the rules.

The existence of laws comes down to a simple principle; they protect society from those elements within it who are interested only in their own selfish ends. We may cry out at those rules and regulations we see as “restrictive”, but the law was not made to restrict our freedoms but to protect them. Had the SFA years ago acted against Rangers sectarian signing policy, and the songs from the stands, the club would not have mutated to the point where there was no help on hand when they needed it the most. Let’s not kid ourselves about this; Whyte and Green were only able to grab control because the club itself has a dreadful image which put off respectable and responsible buyers. The SFA could have helped change that perception years ago and did nothing.

The SFA could have conducted its own investigation into who Craig Whyte was. They could have asked David Murray for full disclosure when he was running up £80 million of debt, a sum of money that is beyond belief for a single club in a small provincial backwater league. Had they had the guts to do that the club would never have spent itself into oblivion and forced the hand of Lloyds, which led indirectly to their ignominious end.

The SFA could have fully investigated Charles Green and the means by which he took control, instead of rushing through a license. His emergence at the last minute was transparently suspicious and designed to force them into a quick decision, but they did not have to bow to that pressure by making one, without being in possession of the facts, as it is now 100% clear they were not.

Had they asked for every document, had they insisted on legal affidavits and personal securities from investors (and this would have been perfectly legitimate and is common place in other licensing areas) none of this would have come to pass. After Craig Whyte they had a moral responsibility to the rest of the game to get this one right and their failure is without parallel in the history of Scottish football.

As the club hurtles towards a new abyss, names are cropping up which should send a shudder down the spines of every honest, genuine supporter of not only Rangers but every team in the land. The SFA claims that a strong Rangers is essential for the sake of Scottish football, but they have been extraordinarily lax in protecting that club, and therefore the game, from destructive elements. Craig Whyte and Charles Green had dubious personal histories, and the acquisition of the club itself was mired in controversy and scandal. Yet it was allowed.

Neither Green nor Whyte were known to have operated outside the law, yet neither was worthy of trust or stood up to scrutiny. Neither man should ever have been granted the status as fit and proper persons to assume a role in our national sport, and if it is true of them what can we say about the three men who are, presently, being touted as the Great White Hopes for a bright, new Rangers future; Dave King and the Easdale brothers?

King recently cut a deal with the South African government over an on-going dispute over taxes. In other words, he pled guilty and accepted the central plank of their argument; that for years he was engaged in wilfully with-holding vast revenues from their Treasury. The media does not like to put it like that, and the SFA seems willing to ignore it utterly, and this would be scandalous enough. But it does not stop there. HRMC rules – as well as the SFA’s own governance documents – actually bar him from serving on the board of the new club.

Last but not least, aside from being an admitted tax cheat, King is also awaiting trial in South Africa, having been indicted for corruption, forgery and fraud – 300 charges in total. Yet as recently as last week, we were told that the Association was willing to look at him and consider representations from his lawyers. This is almost beyond belief.

If Dave King’s position is untenable, and he is yet to be convicted of a crime, what can we say about the position of the Easdale’s? One of the two brothers, Sandy, has already served jail time. He is a convicted criminal, a fraudster nonetheless, who’s “victim” was the same Treasury who are appealing one case involving the old club and liquidated it entirely over another. This is precisely the kind of “businessman” the fit and proper person test was supposed to weed out, and if the SFA holds its nose here the reek will stink out the halls at Hampden for decades. If King or the Easdale’s are judged fit and proper, then who exactly is the test for? What exactly do you have to do to fail it? How do we explain the existence of laws, when these are not applied?

Pascal says “Law without force is impotent.” The SFA’s weakness has allowed one version of Rangers to destroy itself, and has allowed an existential risk to another. If the next power at Rangers resides in South Africa or Greenock I can say with some certainty that the Association is engaged in an even more dangerous roll of the dice, because the surfacing of fresh scandal will be an ever present risk, and will be of the sort no-one will survive.

The damage to Scottish football will take years to heal. The Scottish game has been through enough trauma. It does not need more. It barely survived the last calamity to hit Rangers. The rest of us should not be forced to pay the price of the next one.

The greater damage will be done to Rangers itself. If the Green crisis ends in another collapse – as it well might; another administration event is a certainty, and another liquidation is a much more likely prospect than it was before 14 February 2012 – the club will once again have to start from the bottom, and this time the reputational damage will be impossible to repair. The club faces internal strife, sporting sanctions, and criminal investigations. The last takeover might be declared a fraud. the Whyte takeover will almost certainly be. The share issue might be invalid, as well as criminal, and the people involved may well end up in jail. Lawsuits could follow from investors, there could be as yet unknown consequences from the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal (thank you Brogan Rogan for pointing out what those might be) and a host of other issues.

Rangers fans must be the loudest voices here. How do you want the world to view your club in years to come? Do you want one to be proud of, or one forever associated with the shame and disgrace of these days gone by? The one which bailed out on its tax obligations. The one with supporters who disgrace your very name. The one which allowed Whyte and Green to take you to the cleaners and send you to the wall. The one which handed over control to one convicted criminal and another awaiting trial. Do you want to be reborn clean, or mired in the muck?

David Murray destroyed your financial stability. He made it so no bank would issue you a line of credit and no investor of note wanted to buy. Craig Whyte liquidated you. Charles Green has cast the future of the Newco into doubt and acted in a manner which has annihilated your credibility with the financial markets for decades to come.

Between these three men, they have taken everything from you, and the press and the people who run the game here, as well as some of your own blindly ignorant fans, have allowed them to do all this and more. Now they conspire to hand the keys to Ibrox to other men of questionable character, who will wreck further havoc on the reputation of the club.

The Scottish Football Association has damaged the game it was supposed to protect, but above all else their greatest failure of governance was a failure to protect one of its biggest clubs from its own excesses and those of its owners.

Rangers fans, the SFA have betrayed your trust, more than the trust of any other club. What you must insist on now is full disclosure and transparency from the powers that be in Hampden. The SFA has to end the charade of allowing your club to handle this in-house. They must hand everything over to an outside agency – whether a legal one, or a footballing body like UEFA – and they must demand co-operation and answers, and threaten to withhold the license if they don’t get them.

You must not be afraid of that. You must embrace it. The men with their hands on the gears at Ibrox are motivated by money, and nothing more. If the license is withdrawn their “investments” are worthless. They cannot risk that.

You must demand that the rules on fit and proper persons are applied, and where necessary even made stronger, to prevent your club falling into unclean hands. You must demand that they protect your reputation from further damage, by getting this all out there and acting accordingly, even if that means your club does not play football for at least a year.

You must be willing to suck it all up, knowing that what will emerge is a Rangers which has been cleansed and moves forward with honour, and dignity, led by custodians who treasure it rather than those who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

The Rangers Standard has recently emerged as a genuine voice for those in your support who are sick and tired of what Rangers has become, and want it restored to something that is worthy of the love and respect in which you hold it. On that website, there are discussions about the kind of club you seek to be and about whether the institution of Rangers is about more than just football.

If that’s how you feel about it then you know it is about more than how many titles the club can claim, about more than just results on the park, about more than just the game. Rangers, like Celtic, is an idea. It has to be something you are proud of.

I am a socialist, but one with a fevered imagination and a tendency to write very dark things. This piece won’t have been good reading for some of you (perhaps all of you haha!) but I think there’s more hope in here than in other things I’ve written.

In spite of everything that’s come to pass, I still believe. I believe in Scottish football. I believe in our system of football governance, even if those who are working in it are failing on some level.

In society, as much as we strain against them, laws exist for our protection. To fail to enforce them is to leave us at the mercy of those elements who would do us harm. The rules of football ensure the protection of all clubs, not just a few.

The failure to enforce the rules has never had graver consequences than here in Scotland.  The irony is that bending and breaking them has hurt the one club those violations were designed to help. It cannot be allowed to happen again.

The rules must be applied without fear or favour.

The best must find their conviction, and their passionate intensity once more.

James is a co-editor of the On Fields of Green Blog http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.
Tom Byrne

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

5,802 thoughts on “The Existence of Laws


  1. Captain Haddock says:
    Wednesday, May 29, 2013 at 15:39
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    bogsdollox says:
    Wednesday, May 29, 2013 at 15:58

    I agree it’s not in the spirit of the rules. To my mind it is designed to allow unregistered players from the juniors to have a go at stepping up by turning out for a lower league club.

    The Rangers are exploiting a badly drafted rule (no surprises there) and as for the players they intend to play as trialists they cannot complete the paperwork as instructed. As to put “not registered” would be incorrect as the players are registered but out of contract with their previous clubs.

    Beats me why the rule was not changed after Dundee used it in the second admin
    _______________

    bogsdollox,

    You may (or may not) be surprised to hear that there are separate SFL Rules numbered 134-137 governing transfers of players between” clubs” in the Scottish Junior Leagues and the SFL. There’s also separate Rules for Amateur Players.

    Believe it or not it’s actually the other way around as explained in more detail in my post at 21:48 on 29 May 2013.

    Rule 133 specifies that the players’ contracts expire on 30 June 2013.

    Rule 115 details the administrative arranges that clubs must follow within 14 days

    115.6 Clubs must submit Registration Documents, Contracts of Service and amendments to Contracts of Service to the League within fourteen days of their being made.

    115.6.1 All Registration Documents which require to be signed on behalf of a club must be signed by an Official whose specimen signature has been submitted to and acknowledged by the League.

    115.6.2 Any such Registration document which does not bear an authorised signature will not be accepted.

    However in the case of Spivco FC because of the LNS Commission’s registration embargo sanction the SFL and SFA are unable to register their new contract until 1 September 2013.

    Such players are therefore considered by the SFL and SFA to be “unregistered” during the period from 1 July to 31 August 2013, and bizarrely “qualify” under Rule 122 as “trialists”!

    So it’s all the fault of the LNS Commission. 🙂


  2. Lord Wobbly says:
    Wednesday, May 29, 2013 at 22:47

    I agree that it’s not at all funny that they think they can get away with their scandalous behaviour. I was and still am very angry about the cynical approach of SFA Officers and the majority of the SMSM.
    ______________________________

    barcabhoy says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 00:34

    It would not surprise me if the scenario that you describe is actually what happened, but we can only get evidence to prove it if a whistle-blower has the bravery to expose the connivance and corruption.

    As I conclude in my post at 01:03 on Thursday, May 30, 2013 ………

    However in the case of Spivco FC, because of the LNS Commission’s registration embargo sanction the SFL and SFA are unable to register their new contract until 1 September 2013.

    Such players are therefore considered by the SFL and SFA to be “unregistered” during the period from 1 July to 31 August 2013, and bizarrely “qualify” under Rule 122 as “trialists”!

    Officers of the SFA are taking us all for fools and it makes my blood boil that they appear to have so far got away with it.

    So let’s get angry and get even!


  3. oh my god…it would seem to be true!!

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/walter-smith-to-become-rangers-chairman.21218281

    Walter Smith to become Rangers chairman

    Richard Wilson Sports writer.

    Thursday 30 May 2013

    WALTER SMITH is set to be appointed chairman of Rangers, with Malcolm Murray stepping down from his position.

    The changes were approved at a board meeting in London yesterday as the directors attempted to find stability after a period of dissent and strife.

    An announcement to the Stock Exchange was expected this morning.

    Murray had been expected to either stand down or be removed from his role. He was the subject of a unanimous vote of no confidence among the seven other directors this month and had a board meeting last Friday taken place as planned he would have been voted off.

    Leaving the Rangers International Football Club plc board without a chairman would have led to uncertainty among shareholders, although Smith’s appointment was unexpected. He has previously expressed a reluctance to take on the role, and has twice come close to stepping down as a non-executive director during boardroom difficulties.

    Smith had been critical of Charles Green, the former chief executive who resigned and will, come midnight on Friday, no longer be a director.

    Much of Murray’s time as chairman was spent clashing with Green and Imran Ahmad, the commercial director who left last month. It was also Murray who instigated the independent examination – by Deloitte and Pinsent Masons – into alleged collusion last summer between Green and Craig Whyte, the ex-owner.

    Although Smith was an ally of Murray’s during much of his time on the board, the ex-manager reluctantly came to the same conclusion as other directors a change was required. There is also the prospect of an extraordinary general meeting, called by the shareholders Blue Pitch Holdings, to contend with.

    There are four resolutions to be heard at the meeting. The others were for Philip Cartmell, the non-executive director, to be voted off the board, James Easdale, the owner of McGill’s Buses, to be voted on, and for Chris Morgan, said to represent the family trusts behind Blue Pitch Holdings, to also be voted on.


  4. So, TRFC would have a plc chairman with no previous experience – and an Interim CEO who is a football agent?

    Yes, that should be the optimal solution for stability, reassurance and improved corporate governance… 🙄

    No idea what’s going on now…but quite sure it’s just going to get even messier !


  5. Is that now twice that Sir Cardigan Brogues-Dignity has allowed himself to be the reassuring posterboy of the bear fleecers?


  6. sanoffymessssoitizzhizzemdyfonedrapolis says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 01:03

    Such players are therefore considered by the SFL and SFA to be “unregistered” during the period from 1 July to 31 August 2013, and bizarrely “qualify” under Rule 122 as “trialists”!

    So it’s all the fault of the LNS Commission. 🙂

    —-

    Quite a nice summary.

    But surely if the players are considered unregistered during this period, and contracts cannot be lodged until 1 Sep, then any payment made to them during the period July 1 to Aug 31 would be considered a payment not covered by the players contract, and therefore they would become illegible to play??

    TRFC also have to lodge said contracts within 14 days… so no contract can even be signed until Aug 17.

    So, they can play as trialists if they are not paid from 1 june (when they leave their current club) until 1 sep when they become Rangers players. If however they are paid anything by Rangers during that period surely that would be a payment made not specified in their contracts??

    What rule will Bryson come up with to dodge this one?


  7. Back page of today’s Daily Record claiming Walter Smith will be the new Chairman of the Ibrox club. Season ticket sale drive well and truly on. They’re not daft though, as this gives them the perfect smokescreen to do just about anything they like, because ‘Walter’ can do or say anything without question.

    Right now I can just imagine a wee man called Chris standing outside Ibrox thinking there’s not a single cloud in the sky, even though the rain is bouncing off the pavement all around him.


  8. If the DR story is true (stop laughing at the back ) then who would have thought that Wattie (who we were constantly told would march away if MM was ditched ) instead jumps right into MM brogues ,add to that the rest of the story and that is a board that the truly dignified bears must be very proud of .
    Smith’s initial appointment was a strange one IMO ,maybe soon we will see exactly why he was brought in ,in the first place .


  9. jonnyod says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 06:46

    Smith’s initial appointment was a strange one IMO ,maybe soon we will see exactly why he was brought in ,in the first place .
    =============================================

    Well first of all 99% of the MSM writers who’ve dared to venture into critical mode recently will effectively be silenced. Guys like Easdale will gain new credibility as it will be viewed they have the blessing of ‘Walter’. Meanwhile ‘Alastair’ will become even more bombproof. The bottom line is though, the spivs who are out to make a few bob will continue working away towards their target, and unlike Malcolm Murray, Walter won’t have a clue what’s going on, and neither will their 30K+ season ticket holders

    In summary:

    – Appoint a Chairman the fans and media think walks on water and is infallible
    – Get loads of positive publicity and sell loads of season tickets because of Chairman
    – Beaver away in the background clearing up the money, because no-one will notice


  10. Sir Walter must have a fairly high regard for his own abilities to accept the Chairmen’s job. I suspect the likely pay rise will have helped his decision making … these spiv gentlemen are taking Sir Walter and Alastair to the cleaners … still season books will move now they will be talking about an assault on the Scottish Cup next season now … oh it’s started … seeds of self destruction well and truely sown


  11. I can’t believe it! Walter was out of his depth as a Non-Executive Director but as Chairman he’ll be at the bottom of the Marianas Trench. It’ll be interesting to see if anyone in the MSM has the sphericals to point this out. The Spivs have a human shield.


  12. mullach says:
    Wednesday, May 29, 2013 at 23:08
    4 0 Rate This

    … Still trying to make head or tail of Charlotte’s latest …
    ———–

    Ditto @mullach. Although I noticed Phil Mac & TBK engaging in the tweet chat. Not sure where this one came from though:

    @CharlotteFakes
    @rob_goldie @Gri64 @Pmacgiollabhain Rude,concentrate on your question.Beresford sister well connected, she’s a double bafta and emmy winner.
    1:36am – 30 May 13

    Whit?

    You do wonder if some of the more aggressve twitter aliases engaging with Charlotte have a vested interest in the outcome of the legal contretemps. Or maybe they’re just speaking bollocks?


  13. typos are theirs
    _

    30 May 2013
    Rangers International Football Club plc (the “Company”)

    On behalf of Rangers International Football Club plc, the non-executive directors of the Company (the “Investigation Committee”) engaged the law firm Pinsent Masons LLP to investigate the connections between Craig Whyte and former and current personnel of the Company and itssubsidiaries (the “Investigation”).
    The Investigation was overseen by Roy Martin QC.

    The Investigation concluded on 17 May 2013 and Pinsent Masons and Roy Martin QC have reported to the Investigation Committee.The Investigation Committee is satisfied that a thorough investigation was conducted despite the inherent limitations of a private inquiry.

    Based on the assessment of the available evidence, the Company considers that the Investigationfound no evidencethat Craig Whyte had any involvement with Sevco Scotland Limited (now called The Rangers Football Club Limited), the company which ultimately acquired the business and assets of The Rangers Football ClubP.L.C. from its administrators; norwhich would suggest that Craig Whyte invested in The Rangers Football Club Limited or Rangers International Football Club plc, either directly or indirectly through any third party companies or vehicles.

    On 28 May 2013,a letter before claimwas sent to(inter alia) The Rangers Football Club Limited and Rangers International Football Club plcon behalf ofCraig Whyte,Aidan Earley and(purportedly)Sevco 5088 Limited. The Rangers Football Club Limited and Rangers International Football Club plc will be preparing a robust response to the letter before claim.However, given that legal proceedings are threatened in the letter before claim, it would not be appropriate tomake public any further content from the report or tocomment furtherabout the contents.Pinsent Masons’ and Roy Martin’s reports to the Company are confidential and legally privileged.This announcement is not intended to and does not serve to waive privilege in the contents of the reports which remain confidential and legally privileged.

    For further information please contact:


  14. john clarke says:

    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 00:47

    Thank you. I missed that.

    I have become so cynical that I am not at all surprised that BDO’s first concern is their own fees and whether they will be paid!

    I very nearly despair.
    ==========================================================================

    JC.. your despair is natural and understandable, but if I may refer back some time to when BDO were appointed, I did post on at least one occasion, that we should not expect too much in respect of either “finding” much cash for the genuine smaller creditors, or that any any substantial wrongdoings be unearthed by them.

    The main job of the liquidators, who were appointed by HMRC and whose fees are guaranteed by the court, is to ensure an orderly process in the winding up and account accordingly.

    I thing our disappointment is a result of high expectations when BDO were appointed…it is not going to happen!


  15. If the new of Sir W’s promotion is true then it all starts to fit.

    Sir Walter’s EBT all those years ago (when employed by a different and semi competitive club) must have been a retainer in case the blue club needed a chairman at some unspecified time in the future.

    It makes me wonder what favour(s) Mr Souness’s payments were for.
    Maybe he’ll become the new physio or head groundsman and it was nothing to do with player movements.

    If I was advising someone like Sir W who had accepted allegedly dodgy payments from an equally allegedly dodgy administration I’d be mandating a low profile.

    Not replacing the only decent guy on the board in a media goldfish bowl.

    And why have none of the MSM or BBC Radio Scotland picked up on the LBC stuff as published on Alex Thompsons site as recently as yesterday?

    They all know about it.

    I’d say it was a big story.

    But it is obviously still their special wee “secret”.


  16. jonnyod says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 06:46
    ————————————————

    I’m with you on this one, we were talking about it a few days ago when the media were claiming that Walter was ready to go and was backing MM, we all agreed that this was not true as that was not part of WS’s remit. We also concluded that it would be no surprise if WS actually became the next chairman.

    MM was only brought in to ensure the flotation had some credibility; he has now served his purpose.

    “Season Tickets, get yir Season Tickets here…. 2 fur a poun…2 fur a poun…”


  17. “the Investigationfound no evidencethat Craig Whyte had any involvement with Sevco Scotland Limited (now called The Rangers Football Club Limited),”

    Presumably because his connection was with Sevco 5088 who were then by-passed in the transfer of the Ibrox scrap.

    There’s no doubt in my mind that we have now entered end game. While the focus is on Walter struggling to cope with his new role, the spivs will be nipping out the back door with what’s left of the loot.


  18. The statement to the stock exchange describes Pinhead Masons’ remit as being “to investigate the connections between Craig Whyte and former and current personnel of the Company and its subsidiaries”. Yet their conclusion seems only to refer to Sevco Scotland, whereas the assumption of most people might be that the remit directly referred to links between Whyte / Green / Ahmad etc, which are not mentioned.

    Might the fact that Whyte himself claims that he was effectively swindled out of his Rangers stake specifically because the assets were switched to Sevco Scotland without his knowledge make the release to the stock exchange more a statement of the obvious rather than something that would have taxed the investigators’ deductive powers?

    How much were they paid for this?


  19. finloch says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 08:03
    1 0 Rate This

    And why have none of the MSM or BBC Radio Scotland picked up on the LBC stuff as published on Alex Thompsons site as recently as yesterday?

    They all know about it.

    I’d say it was a big story.

    But it is obviously still their special wee “secret”.
    ————-

    @Finloch
    Looks like Mr Whyte has lost all credibility and this loss has now spread to anything he touches. I reckon that it will take a new audio revelation to arouse the media hounds from their slumber.


  20. Any `official` announcement re Lord Cardigan? – Or a replacement non-exec director named 😉

    Has CG been `Cleared` as touted?

    MSM games afoot


  21. twopanda says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 08:01

    2

    0

    Rate This

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    So a whitewash then, with no comments on the substantive issues….

    a couple of bit’s of ambiguous language….

    “The Investigation Committee is satisfied that a thorough investigation was conducted despite the inherent limitations of a private inquiry” and ” the assessment of the available evidence”

    Satisfied as to a thorough investigation in limited circumstances despite rumours that neither, whyte, green, nor ahmad fully cooperated?????

    And the big one.
    “the Company considers that the Investigationfound no evidencethat Craig Whyte had any involvement with Sevco Scotland Limited”

    Whyte never claimed a connection with Sevco Scotland, but with Sevco 5088, the holder of the purchasing agreement….

    the language of the next statement is ambiguous…..

    ” ….the company which ultimately acquired the….”

    … and would lead me to conclude that this is an affirmation of the theory that the assets passed to sevco scotland via another vehicle.

    and lastly…
    “However, given that legal proceedings are threatened in the letter before claim, it would not be appropriate tomake public any further content from the report or tocomment furtherabout the contents.Pinsent Masons’ and Roy Martin’s reports to the Company are confidential and legally privileged.”

    This will fuel all conspiracy theorists that the report contains information which is too dangerous for public consumption.

    THe question now is will the SFA take all of this on faith? or conduct their own investigation?


  22. So the non execs (Including Walter) demand an inquiry into whether Whyte was involved. However, they give them only a remit to investigate Sevco Scotland, which we all know is only half of the story. End result is a statement that whyte wasn’t involved (cause he was involved in the other sevco).

    This is used to manufacture the removal of M.Murray (the only one smart enough to bring down the house of cards) for failing to support the Spivs. Now Walter is in charge everything will be proclaimed ok and season tickets will sell, while the Spivs will walk away with all their loot.

    Of course, when the money runs out in Jan/Feb they’ll be long gone and Walter will claim he was duped


  23. Given that all is now deemed rosy in the garden of Ibrox, we will now see whether or not the LBC approaches have any rigour.


  24. The PM report is exactly as predicted.

    easyJambo says: Saturday, May 25, 2013 at 10:33

    I don’t know why so many people are so exercised by the information leaked re the outcome of the PM inquiry.

    As far as TRFC is concerned, at the moment, Whyte has no involvement. That has been stated openly by Green (he shafted Whyte) and Whyte (he is claiming that he was excluded illegally and wants a share of the action).

    What happened prior to 14th Jun 2012 when the assets passed to Sevco Scotland is of no longer of interest to the SFA. RFC 2012 will be liquidated. All the negotiations on membership and licences were carried out on behalf of Sevco Scotland (TRFC) with no involvement from Whyte even as a backer for Sevco Scotland. That will be the substance of PM’s findings.

    That will also satisfy the SFA insofar as Whyte having no involvement in the ownership or operation of TRFC. Their view of the issues prior to 14th June 2012 will be that it is a external dispute between two companies or other individuals. It will only become an issue for the SFA if Whyte is successful in his claims against TRFC.

    I’ve stated before, you don’t commission an internal inquiry (it shouldn’t be called independent), without briefing the chairman of the desired or acceptable outcomes. That is exactly what has happened here. PM will gladly take their fee and produce a report that meets the requirements of TRFC while covering their own backsides.


  25. stevensanph says:

    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 08:39
    So the non execs (Including Walter) demand an inquiry into whether Whyte was involved. However, they give them only a remit to investigate Sevco Scotland, which we all know is only half of the story. End result is a statement that whyte wasn’t involved (cause he was involved in the other sevco).

    This is used to manufacture the removal of M.Murray (the only one smart enough to bring down the house of cards) for failing to support the Spivs. Now Walter is in charge everything will be proclaimed ok and season tickets will sell, while the Spivs will walk away with all their loot.

    Of course, when the money runs out in Jan/Feb they’ll be long gone and Walter will claim he was duped

    ******

    His excuse will be Ally and he realized how bad things were and he was only doing his best to save the greatest club ever that he loves etc…………

    Ally has already said to respond to John Brown’s revelations that WS and AM were told the same things he found out, that sometimes its better to remain on the inside

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/leaguedivision3/4906203/Boss-Ally-was-planning-for-an-inside-job.html

    ALLY McCOIST has told John Brown: It’s easier fighting the Rangers cause from the inside.

    This will be their ready made excuse for getting paid a lot of money while watching the robbers at work……………

    And they will be heroes for it! Where’s the popcorn?


  26. Timtim at 23.04

    His pay rise was obviously for avoiding the social unrest he talked of last year summer.


  27. Based on the assessment of the available evidence, the Company considers that the Investigation found no evidence that Craig Whyte had any involvement with Hilda Ogden, the sinking of the Bismark nor the destruction of the bus shelter in Possilpark that happened last Xmas Day…………

    Makes as much sense to me as the cr@p put out above – and my fee is much less than 500K 🙂


  28. Was there ever a chance of a substantial punishment for the establishment club from the authorities? I think not! The only real punishment i.e. bottom league came as a result of the Scottish football fan. Disappointed and disgusted!


  29. You will recall the story of the Christian Knight,Don Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar,known as ‘El Cid’ riding out to face the North African forces of Islam. Although fatally wounded his soldiers mounted him on his valiant steed to ride out and plough through the infidel traumatised by the sight of the White Knight

    The appointment of Sir Walter would seem to me very predictable.Rally the troops,unify the forces against the Dark One of Monaco,or anyone else currently threatening the Red Brick tower.


  30. easyJambo says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 01:03

    http://i.imgur.com/ClHVxpr.png
    —————————————————-
    Page 2 Book Debts,

    Have BDO agreed to split the jelevic money and any future monies from sell on clauses with the new club?

    That’s how it is reading to me and i’m thinking that can’t be right,the old club having shafted creditors for millions are now to hand over money that should be kept for creditors or BDO fees.

    Does’nt this create a financial link between old club and new club,If the liquidators are so keen to come to arrangements with the new club perhaps they could send the tax bill over to them as well and make them cough up.


  31. Walters suitability as Chairman of a plc

    CHAIRMAN

    The Chairman is responsible for leadership of the Board, ensuring its effectiveness on all aspects of its role and setting its agenda taking full account of the issues and concerns of Board Members. What previous experience has he in this role

    In fulfilling that responsibility, he should:-

    ensure that Board members receive accurate, timely and clear information so that the Board can take sound decisions, monitor effectively and provide advice in order to promote the Company’s success; Ok , thats easy enough. except who provides the information ?

    ensure that the Board meets sufficiently regularly to discharge its duties; no problem with that

    ensure that adequate time is available for discussion of all agenda items, in particular strategic issues as long as you understand the strategic issues, that should be straightforward

    in conjunction with the Chief Executive, ensure that there is effective communication with shareholders, and ensure that Board members understand the views of major investors; with no experience of dealing with institutional investors , will Walter be able to understand the views of major investors

    ensure that all new directors participate in a full, formal, tailored induction programme; will Walter structure the programme to face up to the challenge of having an Easdale as a director for example

    take the lead in identifying and meeting the development needs of individual directors, and of the Board as a whole; Houston we have a problem

    ensure that the performance of the Board, its committees and individual directors is evaluated at least once per year; evaluated by who ? Not Walter surely

    promote effective relationships and open communication, inside and outside Board meetings, between Non-executive and Executive Directors; Relying on ? Jim Traynor ?

    build an effective and complementary Board, initiating change and succession planning;
    promote the highest standards of integrity and corporate governance; <Houston we have another problem

    in conjunction with the Chief Executive, ensure effective implementation of Board decisions;
    establish a close relationship of trust with the Chief Executive, providing support and advice but respecting executive responsibility;
    what if the CEO wants advice on the acceptability to the AIM market of a particular course of action .

    ensure that the Board determines the nature and extent of significant risk that the company is willing to embrace in the implementation of its strategy. Houston…….Houston……are you there Houston ??


  32. TW (@tartanwulver) says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 08:21

    The statement to the stock exchange describes Pinhead Masons’ remit as being “to investigate the connections between Craig Whyte and former and current personnel of the Company and its subsidiaries”. Yet their conclusion seems only to refer to Sevco Scotland, whereas the assumption of most people might be that the remit directly referred to links between Whyte / Green / Ahmad etc, which are not mentioned.
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    TW
    The statement to the Stock Exchange is a carfully worded RIFC interpretation of the PN report
    The PN report will have been submitted to RIFC in draft form for comment and amendment before it was finalised.
    That’s how whitewashes are done


  33. Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 09:05

    9

    0

    Rate This

    Based on the assessment of the available evidence, the Company considers that the Investigation found no evidence that Craig Whyte had any involvement with Hilda Ogden, the sinking of the Bismark nor the destruction of the bus shelter in Possilpark that happened last Xmas Day…………

    Makes as much sense to me as the cr@p put out above – and my fee is much less than 500K 🙂

    Sam says:
    Not correct.
    The Hilda Ogden issue is & remains ‘Not Proven’.
    I have reliably been informed that CW was in Dallas circa 1963.


  34. Hilda Ogden apparently declined to provide a response to PM. It is understood that whilst she does fiction she draws the line at farce.

    Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.


  35. Aye,Red Lichtie,there’s certainly been plenty Smokies over the last year!


  36. The Firm Stephenson Harwood are busy, seem to have 2 Clients; CW & BDO………..

    The liquidators of Rangers have pledged to proceed with conspiracy charges against the old club’s former law firm, Collyer Bristow.

    Litigation, which was due to culminate in a High Court trial in the new year, had been on hold while liquidators at BDO assessed the merits of proceeding with the claim.

    The action was initially brought by the administrators of of RFC 2012 (the old company), Duff & Phelps partners Paul Clark and David Whitehouse, who alleged that the firm was involved in a “deliberate deception” in relation to former partner Gary Withey’s role in businessman Craig Whyte’s 2011 takeover of the club.

    The administrators instructed Taylor Wessing restructuring partners Nick Moser and Neil Smyth to pursue the £25m damages claim. However, BDO will not be using Taylor Wessing for the litigation and has instead instructed Stephenson Harwood for English law and Brodies for Scottish law matters.

    In a statement released today, BDO contentious insolvency partners Malcolm Cohen and James Stephen confirmed that they will continue any legal proceedings already initiated by the administrators.

    Cohen said: “As joint interim liquidators, our prime objective is to maximise returns to creditors. By investigating the reasons for the company’s failure, we’ll better understand the avenues available to enable the recovery of all possible monies for creditors.

    “This is a complex case with many potential areas for us to investigate, which we’ll do thoroughly in accordance with our duties and powers. Our investigations will, of course, include the conduct of those responsible for the financial affairs of the company in previous years.”

    Collyer Bristow, which has pledged to “vigorously defend” the accusations, has instructed Clyde & Co partner Richard Harrison and senior associate Nicole McKinnon to defend the claim, with 3VB’s Cyril Kinsky QC and Matthew Hardwick and Wilberforce Chambers’ Ian Croxford QC as counsel.

    Withey has labelled the allegations “groundless” and an “outrage” while Collyer Bristow business development director Paul Newhall said the proceedings were paused as the firm is waiting for a response from BDO on security of costs. He said: “Our position remains unchanged and we’ll defend vigorously the claims brought by Duff & Phelps.”

    Rangers has since been reformed as a ‘newco’ and announced its intentions to float with a £20m IPO. Field Fisher Waterhouse and Travers Smith are instructed (11 October 2012).


  37. @Barca

    I’m changing Mr Smith’s moniker from Sir Walter d’EBT to Incitatus, as elevating him to the Chairman’s role displays a level of cynicism that would have staggered even Caligula.

    Oh my aching sides.


  38. I find it very interesting that Polonia Warsaw, one of Poland’s oldest teams has been left this week without a football licence this week, and is likely to start next season in Poland’s 4th division. Their recent financial history has the faint whiff of spiv about it, and the PZN has been quite strong in their condemnation of their current situation, stating that the Warsaw club “has overdue obligations to Social Security, the IRS, players, etc. In addition, Polonia did not provide a reliable instrument of Future Financial Information.”
    http://www.polishsoca.com/newswire/ekstraklasa/3017-official-polonia-warszawa-without-a-license
    The SFA doesn’t condemn companies (clubs) for failing to pay social taxes, it merely makes note of it and lets the press suggest that they are effectively charities and should be saved. I refer not only to Rangers, but a raft of other failed companies over the years that couldn’t meet their societal obligations, but merited our unreserved sympathy.
    The fans of these clubs do deserve sympathy, and they deserve the chance to put together a new club, but in the end, if those fans will defend to the hilt the questionable stewardship of their club, just so long as that club exists, then they are destined to lose over and over again.


  39. goosygoosy says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 09:45

    TW
    The statement to the Stock Exchange is a carfully worded RIFC interpretation of the PN report
    The PN report will have been submitted to RIFC in draft form for comment and amendment before it was finalised.
    That’s how whitewashes are done
    ———————————————-
    I wonder if Pinsent Masons consider Rangers International’s summary of their findings to be a full and accurate precis of their investigations and conclusions. Then again, unless they tell us (presumably client confidentiality precludes this) or RIFC decide to issue the report (or Charlotte’s web extends further than expected) we’re unlikely to ever know.

    Maybe the SFA will insist on the details being brought to light. And maybe pigs will fly.


  40. Aww c’mon FFS it’s only 50 mil, these things happen……….

    Firm in bitter litigation with insurance broker Lockton

    Collyer Bristow is heading into mediation today (3 October) in a bid to stave off the financial meltdown it claims would ensue if it loses a courtroom battle with its insurance broker.

    The firm and two ex-partners are joint defendants in a separate case being brought by 500 investors in a complex investment scheme known as Innovator One, which Collyer Bristow is said to have promoted. However, the firm alleges that Lockton Companies International was negligent when it arranged the firm’s insurance cover for the year the Innovator One claim affects.

    As a result, the firm says, it would be left short of up to £50m to pay claimants should it lose, putting the firm’s future in jeopardy. It has therefore launched an action against the broker, with the firm, six partners and two former partners named as claimants.

    The firm said its situation has been made more precarious because earlier in the summer Mr Justice Blair refused to expedite the Lockton dispute, meaning that when the firm faces the Innovator One claim on 17 October its dispute with the broker will not be resolved. The terms of this week’s mediation are confidential.

    The firm’s counsel, David Edwards QC of 7KBW, told Blair J at the July hearing: “Without Lockton’s liability being established in advance [of Innovator One] the likely consequence of an adverse judgment against my clients, either immediately or shortly thereafter, may well be the bankruptcy of the individual claimants […], the withdrawal of their practising certificates and the collapse of the LLP.” The firm saw the risk of bankruptcy and the LLP’s collapse as “very real” and “a cause of discomfort and concern”, he added.

    Crown Office Chambers’ Michael Harvey QC, appearing as counsel for the broker, told the court that fears over the financial future of the firm were ill-founded.
    “If there was a fear the guillotine was going to come down and [Collyer Bristow] was going to be made bankrupt overnight, there might be some justification for taking that unusual course [of expediting the trial],” he said.

    Following the Innovator One judgment, which is expected to be appealed by the losing side, the firm will be back in court to try to force its brokers and insurers to indemnify the claims.


  41. alex thomson ‏@alextomo 1m
    Craig Whyte camp pointing out he never claimed any Sevco Scotland involvement and that’s the whole point


  42. alex thomson ‏@alextomo 4m

    Craig Whyte camp pointing out he never claimed any Sevco Scotland involvement and that’s the whole point


  43. alex thomson ‏@alextomo 2m

    Craig Whyte team expects a “robust response” from RFC, Green and Ahmad but says a timetable has now been set in motion.


  44. Looks like today will be a day of strike and counter strike. Oh the dignity.

    Brenda – do you want to start a clock on how long the SFA will stay silent on the PM report?


  45. The full allegations against Collyer Bristow and former partner Gary Withey relating to the firm’s advice on the takeover of Rangers FC were revealed at the High Court.

    In a explosive skeleton argument put before Mr Justice Arnold by South Square Chambers’ Mark Phillips QC, acting for the club’s administrators, Duff & Phelps, a series of damning accusations were revealed in full for the first time. Collyer Bristow stands accused of “deliberate deception” over client Craig Whyte’s doomed bid for the football club.

    The administrators are suing Collyer Bristow and Whyte’s takeover vehicle the Rangers FC Group for at least £25m in damages. The firm is accused of conspiracy, breach of undertaking, negligence and breach of trust, with Withey – who acted as the club’s company secretary – complicit in the allegations.

    Phillips told the court that there was no evidence anyone else at Collyer Bristow was involved, but that as Withey had authority to act for the firm, it was liable for the losses flowing from his “conspiracy”.

    The court heard that Whyte’s majority-stake takeover offer in May 2011 pledged to pay off the cash-strapped club’s £18m debt to Lloyds Banking Group and invest £9.5m of “new money” into the club – £5m for players, £2.8m to HM Revenue & Customs and £1.7m for capital expenditure.

    That offer persuaded then-director Paul Murray and the board not to launch an alternative £25m share issue to generate the money needed to stabilise Rangers. Instead, the court was told, they agreed to Whyte’s takeover, with Collyer Bristow acting for the group.

    Administrators were called in in February 2012 and various parties – including HMRC, private equity firm Merchant Turnaround and the trustees of the Jerome Pension Fund – lobbied to reclaim their stake in Rangers.

    As paperwork began to be exchanged between Collyer Bristow and the administrators, further questions were asked.

    Documents provided to the court said: “Initially Mr Withey responded by stating that Collyer Bristow did not hold any money for the club. Then he changed his story and said that Collyer Bristow was holding only £260,544.14 for the club. On 22 February 2012, however, Biggart Bailie [representing the administrators in Scotland] received an email from Jeff Roberts of Collyer Bristow to inform them that Collyer Bristow was in fact holding £3.918,106.54. The situation then became even more peculiar. To use a colloquial expression, Mr Withey ‘did a runner’. From 24 February, he was absent from Collyer Bristow’s offices and on 2 March 2012 he resigned as a member of the firm. It was clear that something was seriously wrong.”

    £3.6m was then transferred to the administrators’ English lawyers Taylor Wessing, so that a court hearing could decide how to divide it up between various claimants. But, the skeleton argument alleges, “things were not as they had seemed”.

    “As a result of the joint administrators’ review of the documents provided to them by Collyer Bristow and others, they came to realise that things were not as they seemed, and that their initial understanding of the position had been based on a deliberate deception by [the Rangers FC] Group and Collyer Bristow.

    “Most importantly, although group and Collyer Bristow has led the vendor and the board to believe that group had paid a sum in excess of £9.5m to Collyer Bristow, and that Collyer Bristow had been holding this sum in its client account for the club at the time of the takeover, it is now clear that this story was untrue,” the argument claims.

    The court heard that instead, Whyte used the club’s own potential income from future season ticket sales to show that he had the money. However, Phillips said that money was spent on, amongst other things, paying Collyer Bristow for its legal advice on the takeover.

    The allegations against Withey are substantial. He is being represented by Mayer Brown, but is not a named defendant in the case. He has been sent a list of questions by Taylor Wessing – instructed by the administrators – but is yet to respond. Withey is now a consultant at City boutique Segens Solicitors (11 April 2012).

    According to Phillips, the case against the former Rangers company secretary is that he wrote letters to other firms confirming that Collyer Bristow had received the takeover money and was holding it in its private client account, when in fact the group “never paid these sums to Collyer Bristow” and the firm “was not, and never had been, holding them”.

    Withey is also accused of forging Whyte’s signature on one of the letters claiming to have the funds stashed away.

    Phillips added: “Mr Whyte and Mr Withey conspired together with intent to injure the club by unlawful means. The principal purpose or objective of the conspiracy was the acquisition by group of the majority stake.

    “Mr Whyte and Mr Withey knew that the share issue and the takeover were mutually exclusive alternatives […] and the success of the conspiracy would therefore cause financial detriment to the club in the sum of £25m. […] The club will therefore incite the court to conclude that they intended to cause loss to the club or were recklessly indifferent.”

    At today’s case management hearing, Phillips was trying to persuade Arnold J to agree to an expedited hearing as soon as July because the club is struggling to stay afloat. “Money is tight, time is short,” he argued. The hearing had already been put back so that today’s claims could be lodged with the High Court (17 April 2012).

    Philips added: “It is extremely difficult to see what case Collyer Bristow can mount that the repeated statements of Gary Withey were anything but false. It is incontrovertible that these statements are untrue. I find it fanciful that it needs a great deal of investigation.”

    But Philips’ motion for an expedited hearing was opposed by Cyril Kinsky QC of 3VB, instructed by Clyde & Co partner Richard Harrison for Collyer Bristow. Kinsky QC said the administrators’ conduct had created maximum expense and inconvenience for his clients.

    The full hearing has been set for October this year.

    Collyer Bristow business development director Paul Newhall said: “The details disclosed in court today were contained in the original particulars of the claim forms previously filed and we will be defending them vigorously.”

    The line-up:

    For Collyer Bristow: Clyde & Co partner Richard Harrison and senior associate Nicole McKinnon, instructing 3VB’s Cyril Kinsky QC and Matthew Hardwick.

    For the administrators: Taylor Wessing restructuring partners Nick Moser and Neil Smyth, instructing South Square Chambers’ Mark Phillips QC, Daniel Bayfield and Stephen Robins.


  46. Long Time Lurker says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 11:23

    If Whyte does go ahead with legal action, then the SFA will have no option but to get involved. Their only get out at the moment, laughable as it is,( given the events of last year) is that there appears to be no link with Whyte and Sevco Scotland. That will be their get out right now, however if/when Whyte presses the button they will be obliged to get involved.

    What is the betting on them taking a back seat when this happens ? Stating that they cannot involve themselves until the legal action is resolved ?

    It has been a re-occurring tactic from the SFA since the very beginning of this saga – keep schtum, delay, delay pass the buck, delay, delay then when everything has died down a bit – ignore,bend,break rules to get the establishment club off.

    Make no mistake, everything else right now is subservient to the tribute act getting to the SPL. They do not care how shameless or corrupt they appear. By the time they get there I wouldn’t be surprised to see an open top bus parade around the Ibrox area with Ogilvie,Longmuir,Ballantyne,Bryson, Regan and Doncaster on it


  47. Gregory Ioannidis ‏@LawTop20 26m

    Won’t be long before a Scottish grievance reaches UEFA. I am told there are powerful words to be used such as ‘transparency’ and ‘justice’.
    ———————————
    I’m not holding my breath.


  48. Meanwhile, over on RM a forum has opened up “come back Charles Green”

    Hook, line and sinker spring to mind.


  49. essexbeancounter says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 08:02

    ‘…I thing our disappointment is a result of high expectations when BDO were appointed…it is not going to happen!’
    —-
    G’morning , EB. Thanks for that.

    Now that I’ve read the report to the creditors, I see that BDO are very much aware of the various investigations -even though they cannot comment on them.

    I tend to assume (in my general ignorance) that if any of those investigations point to the possibility of hanky-panky in the Administration, the Liquidators would be the ones with the forensic skills (and the duty) to establish the financial facts and evidence in conjunction with the fraud police?

    There may yet be hope that certain parties may find themselves on conspiracy charges??


  50. TW (@tartanwulver) says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 10:37
    9 0 i
    Rate This

    goosygoosy says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 09:45

    TW
    The statement to the Stock Exchange is a carfully worded RIFC interpretation of the PN report
    The PN report will have been submitted to RIFC in draft form for comment and amendment before it was finalised.
    That’s how whitewashes are done
    ———————————————-
    I wonder if Pinsent Masons consider Rangers International’s summary of their findings to be a full and accurate precis of their investigations and conclusions. Then again, unless they tell us (presumably client confidentiality precludes this) or RIFC decide to issue the report (or Charlotte’s web extends further than expected) we’re unlikely to ever know.

    Maybe the SFA will insist on the details being brought to light. And maybe pigs will fly.

    _____________________________________________

    Statement is a work of art. CW not involved in Sevco Scotland… who he alleges stole Ibrox and MP from him. Good to know that stealing from himself is not listed among his nefarious dealings. Now if the honourable QC would be so kind as to venture an opinion as to whether the assets were transferred from SEvco 5088 to Sevco scotland in a proper manner, and whether CW and CG and IA had any dealings therein, and who is actually the beneficial powner fo these assets, they may go some way to justifying the fee they charged.

    Oh… and I can similarly prove no Rangers players went down in the box to gain an unsporting advantage within the entire SPL campaign this year either btw., so anyone accusing them of being a bunch of divers can shut up as well…

    Finding someone not guilty of a crime that was never alleged is a great way of appearing to vindicate yourself, apropo of nothing!.


  51. Sam says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 11:49

    Sam, could you cite the source of your piece, please? It makes interesting reading.


  52. After this mornings events can i assume that Walters first job will be to hire a legal team to fight off CW?
    His second will be working out how to pay for it?.
    Costs could run into millions.Thank God he’ll have Green.Ahmad.Mather etc to advise him.They won’t be directors but they’ll still own the place.
    Smith would be crazy to accept chairmans role.


  53. Nothing on BBC news at noon about Sir Cardigan’s ‘appointment ‘?
    Is it confirmed?


  54. john clarke says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 12:12

    0

    0

    Rate This

    Sam says:
    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 11:49

    Sam, could you cite the source of your piece, please? It makes interesting reading.

    Sam says:

    http://www.thelawyer.com/collyer-bristow-defiant-in-face-off-with-rangers-administrators/1012373.article

    Collyer Bristow speaks out about the Rangers FC case.

    Collyer Bristow has spoken for the first time about how it will fight the claims that are threatening to drag the firm’s name through the muddy waters of a Scottish football administration.

    Following another week of negative headlines, the firm has spoken exclusively to The Lawyer to contest the mounting claims and hit out at the conduct of its accusers.

    Collyer Bristow is accused of “deliberate deception” by Rangers FC’s administrators, Duff & Phelps partners Paul Clark and David Whitehouse, in relation to the advice former partner Gary Withey, who was also Rangers’ company secretary, provided on businessman Craig Whyte’s doomed bid for the club.

    There is a tangible feeling of ‘us against the world’ behind the high walls of the Collyer Bristow camp at the moment. Its legal team is furious at its opponents’ turn of phrase, feeling that the administrators are courting the popular press and playing up to the passion of pulsating football fans, who are livid at the plight of their proud club.

    There was much shaking of heads and muttering from the firm’s contingent in the High Court last week (24 April) as the full details of the negligence allegations were laid bare by the prosecutors.

    Rocking Rolls

    A volley of accusations encompassing words such as ‘conspiracy’, ‘injure’, ‘unlawful’, ‘negligence’ and ‘reckless’ sent ripples of consternation through the packed Rolls Building courtroom.

    But where such intense scrutiny on both sides of the border may force lesser firms to buckle, The Lawyer understands that the siege mentality made famous by one of Glasgow’s most decorated footballing sons, Alex Ferguson, has only served to stoke Collyer Bristow’s defiance.

    The firm’s defence team – partner Richard Harrison and ­senior associate Nicole McKinnon from Clyde & Co and 3VB’s Cyril Kinsky QC and Matthew Hardwick – are remaining tight-lipped over exactly how they will “vigorously defend” the firm.

    They do insist, though, that there will be a ­defence, despite the administrators’ counsel, South Square’s Mark Phillips QC, saying in court: “It’s extremely difficult to see what case Collyer Bristow can mount that the repeated statements of Gary Withey were anything but false. It’s incontrovertible that these statements are untrue. I find it fanciful that it needs a great deal of investigation.”

    Withey has also now spoken out in response to the barrage of accusations laid against him by the administrators.

    He told The Lawyer: “Those allegations are an outrage – they are groundless, they should not have been made, and at the appropriate time the true facts surrounding this matter will be brought to light. The solicitors representing me, namely Mayer Brown, and the solicitors representing Collyer Bristow, Clyde & Co, will be taking all appropriate steps to protect the interests of me and my former firm, respectively.”

    Phillips admitted last week that there is “no evidence” that anyone else inside Collyer Bristow was involved in the alleged “deliberate ­deception”.

    The firm is standing by its former partner. The assertion in court that Withey “did a runner” when Whyte’s Rangers FC Group’s £25m takeover was revealed to be built on sand, brings a bristling response from his former firm and its advisers.

    Death threats

    The firm says Withey was receiving death threats from irate Rangers ­supporters and went to ground to shield his family from the worst of it. Suggestions that he fled prejudge his guilt, they say. They fear trial by press, feeding on scraps thrown from the administration process, which wants the same critics to see that it is doing a good job.

    In court, Kinsky said the administrators’ conduct had created “maximum expense and inconvenience” for his clients.

    “There’s been a great deal of press coverage surrounding Tuesday’s [24 April] court hearing,” says Collyer Bristow business development director Paul Newhall. “To date we’ve ­chosen not to comment on this in any detail, beyond restating our ­intention to defend vigorously the claims brought against us. From the outset it’s been the administrators’ deliberate strategy to conduct this case in the press. We have not and do not intend to do so. However, it’s now necessary to ensure that a more balanced understanding of the situation is reported.”

    Newhall claims that the administrators have relied on “emotive” and at times “misleading” arguments, adding that the administrators were “fully aware” that Withey had not done a runner, but had removed himself from the public view in a bid to protect his family.

    “Indeed, [Duff & Phelps’] Scottish lawyers expressed that they, and the administrators [themselves], were ‘appalled’ by this,” he adds.

    Newhall says the firm did not put forward any substantive arguments against the administrators’ claims, as last Tuesday’s hearing was “essentially a case management conference, the main issues being the ­timing of the trial and an application for specific discovery”.

    He continues: “The administrators seem to be suggesting that the club’s received little or no money since the takeover. That’s not correct. Approximately £28m was paid into our client account at or prior to completion of the takeover and thereafter nearly all of that money was paid out on behalf of, and for the benefit of, the club.

    “More than £18m was used to repay the club’s longstanding problematic debt owed to Bank of Scotland. At the time of the administration £3.9m remained in our client ­account, of which £300,000 was paid to the administrators and the balance of £3.6m was paid over, to be held to the order of the court, while the competing claims to it are resolved.

    “As heard in court, the administrators’ new headline claim is the alleged conspiracy on the part of Craig Whyte and Gary Withey to cause ­injury to the club. The allegations on which this claim is based are highly speculative and we’ve seen nothing that gives a credible basis to the claim or the £25m in damages being sought.”

    Controversial character

    Withey has since resurfaced at City boutique Segens.

    The Lawyer understands that Withey is subject to an SRA complaint relating to his own action against Rangers’ former firm Levy & McRae, which he accused of having a conflict of interest, lodging a complaint to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. The watchdog found Withey’s claim “totally without merit” and Levy & McRae senior partner Peter Watson hit back with a claim of his own.

    Withey has been quoted previously in The Daily Telegraph as saying he had “no day-to-day running of the club” and that he went to ground after receiving “a very serious and very specific” threat that he said was “deeply alarming”.

    Withey is being represented by Mayer Brown, but is not a defendant in the case. He has been sent a list of questions by Taylor Wessing, representing the administrators, but Withey is yet to respond. Whether he will be called as a witness during the trial is also undecided.

    Early goal

    At each turn the administrators have tried to expedite hearings with the sort of speed not seen since magistrates sat through the night to clear the police cells of London rioters.

    They wanted March, then May, and this week were asking for July; but after representations from Kinsky they were stuck with an October trial date.

    Their argument was that, with the summer months seeing a dramatic downturn in income, they would have liked to wrap up the £25m ­damages claim in time to secure the club’s future for the start of the next season. As it now stands there will be inevitable question marks over Rangers’ financial health way into the 2012-13 campaign.

    “The club’s future is now in jeopardy […] Money’s tight and time is short,” argued Phillips.

    The full allegations against Collyer Bristow and Withey relating to the firm’s advice on the takeover were contained in a skeleton argument document seen by The Lawyer.

    Put before Mr Justice Arnold on Tuesday, the series of accusations was revealed in detail for the first time. Collyer Bristow stands accused of “deliberate deception”. The administrators are suing Collyer Bristow and Whyte’s takeover vehicle Rangers FC Group for at least £25m in damages. The firm is accused of conspiracy, breach of undertaking, negligence and breach of trust, with Withey named as being complicit in the allegations.

    Phillips told the court there was no evidence that anyone else at Collyer Bristow was involved, but that as Withey had authority to act for the firm it is therefore “vicariously liable” for the losses flowing from his alleged “conspiracy”.

    The court heard that Whyte’s majority-stake takeover offer in May 2011 pledged to pay off the cash-strapped club’s £18m debt to Lloyds Banking Group and invest £9.5m of ‘new money’ into the club – £5m for players, £2.8m to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and £1.7m for capital expenditure.

    That offer persuaded then-director Paul Murray and the board not to launch an alternative £25m share issue to generate the money needed to stabilise Rangers. Instead, the court was told, they agreed to Whyte’s takeover, with Collyer Bristow acting for his group. Murray perceived “a solicitors’ undertaking to be ‘as good as cash’ and Collyer Bristow promised unequivocally and unconditionally to pay these sums to the club”, the documents say.

    The administrators were called in in February 2012 and various parties – including HMRC, private equity firm Merchant Turnaround and the trustees of the Jerome Pension Fund – lobbied to reclaim their stakes in Rangers.

    Merchant urgently wants its £1m back and Jerome has £2.9m missing from its pension fund.

    The ‘ticking timebomb’

    As paperwork began to be exchanged between Collyer Bristow and the administrators, further questions were asked. Phillips fired a further broadside at the firm and its legal team, ­accusing them in court of “sitting on a ticking timebomb”.

    He added: “The defendants are a firm of solicitors who’ve instructed a very able firm of solicitors and a very able chambers. They’re competent lawyers who would have known they were sitting on a ticking timebomb. I find it extraordinary that they didn’t know [Withey] had made dishonest representations.”

    Documents provided to the court said: “Initially Mr Withey responded by stating that Collyer Bristow did not hold any money for the club. Then he changed his story and said that Collyer Bristow was holding only £260,544.14 for the club.

    On 22 February 2012, however, Biggart Baillie [representing the administrators in Scotland] received an email from Jeff Roberts of Collyer Bristow to inform them that Collyer Bristow was in fact holding £3,918,106.54.

    The situation then became even more peculiar. To use a colloquial expression, Mr Withey ‘did a runner’. From 24 February he was absent from Collyer Bristow’s offices and on 2 March 2012 he resigned as a member of the firm. It was clear that something was seriously wrong.”

    £3.6m was then transferred to the administrators’ English lawyers Taylor Wessing for safekeeping and so that a court hearing could decide how to divide it up between various claimants. But, claims the skeleton argument, “things were not as they had seemed”.

    “As a result of the joint administrators’ review of the documents provided to them by Collyer Bristow and others, they came to realise that things were not as they seemed, and that their initial understanding of the position had been based on a deliberate deception by [the Rangers FC] Group and Collyer Bristow,” ran the argument.

    “Most importantly, although [the] group and Collyer Bristow has led the vendor and the board to ­believe that [the] group had paid a sum in excess of £9.5m to ­Collyer Bristow, and that Collyer Bristow had been holding this sum in its client account for the club at the time of the takeover, it is now clear that this story was ­untrue.”

    The court heard that, instead, Whyte had used the club’s own potential income from future season ticket sales to show that he had the money. However, Phillips said money was spent on, among other things, paying Collyer Bristow for its legal advice on the takeover.

    According to Phillips, the case against the former Rangers company secretary is that he wrote letters to other firms confirming that Collyer Bristow had received the takeover money and was holding it in its private client account, when in fact the group “never paid these sums to Collyer Bristow” and the firm “was not, and never had been, holding them”.

    Written request

    Withey is also accused of forging Whyte’s signature on one of the letters claiming to have the funds stashed away. In negotiating a date of trial, Phillips said a handwriting expert should be called to show that Whyte’s signature had been forged.

    The suggestion of a forensic accountant to go through Withey’s ledgers was abruptly dismissed by Arnold J, who said: “Forensic accountants are the bane of courts in this country. They cost the earth, with all due respect, and this is probably a schedule that can be produced by junior counsel.”

    Phillips continued: “Mr Whyte and Mr Withey conspired together with intent to injure the club by unlawful means. The principal purpose or objective of the conspiracy was the acquisition by [the Rangers FC] Group of the majority stake.

    “Mr Whyte and Mr Withey knew that the share issue and the takeover were mutually exclusive alternatives […] and the success of the conspiracy would therefore cause financial detriment to the club in the sum of £25m. […] The club will therefore incite the court to conclude that they intended to cause loss to the club or were recklessly indifferent.”

    The full two-week trial has been set for October this year.

    Collyer Bristow’s court appearances

    Following on from Collyer Bristow’s October 2012 court outing, the firm will be back in November in another dispute over its solicitors’ professional indemnity insurance cover.

    The case came to light last summer in the run-up to another dispute being fought by the firm, the Innovator One case.

    The firm and two ex-partners are joint defendants in that litigation, which was brought by 500 investors in a complex investment scheme known as Innovator One, which Collyer Bristow is alleged to have promoted. Enyo Law partner Michael Green instructed 4 New Square’s John Powell QC for the claimants.

    The firm, however, alleged that Lockton Companies International was negligent when it arranged the firm’s insurance cover for the year affected by the Innovator One claim.

    At a court hearing in July last year the firm formally requested an expedited hearing for the insurance dispute, the outcome of which, it claimed, could determine its financial future.

    The firm’s counsel, 7KBW’s David Edwards QC, argued that Collyer Bristow could be at risk of collapse if the court did not grant it an expedited staged trial.

    Edwards told the court: “As far as Collyer Bristow’s concerned, they regard the risk of bankruptcy and the demise of the LLP as very real and it’s a cause of discomfort and concern.”

    Collyer Bristow contended that it would suffer a £50m shortfall should it lose its case against the broker, leaving it unable to indemnify the Innovator One claims. The difference in insurance cover is a low of £10m for a single event and £64m for 19 events.

    Crown Office Chambers’ Michael Harvey QC, appearing as counsel for the broker, told the court that fears over the financial future of the firm were ill-founded.

    “If there was a fear the guillotine was going to come down and [Collyer Bristow] was going to be made bankrupt overnight, there might be some justification for taking that unusual course [of expediting the trial],” he said.

    Mr Justice Blair refused to expedite the dispute, leaving the firm to deal with Innovator One in October 2011 without knowing whether it could indemnify the potential loss.

    The insurance dispute was originally intended to be heard in the spring, most likely April, but it has now been delayed until November. Any attempts to settle have failed.

    Judgment in Innovator One, meanwhile, is expected before the end of May.

    The legal line-up

    Collyer Bristow:3VB’s Cyril Kinsky QC and Matthew Hardwick instructed by Clyde & Co partner Richard Harrison and senior associate Nicole McKinnon

    Duff & Phelps partners Paul Clark and David Whitehouse: South Square’s Mark Phillips QC, Daniel Bayfield and Stephen Robins instructed by Taylor Wessing restructuring partners Nick Moser (pictured above) and Neil Smyth
    Merchant Turnaround:MacRae & Co partner Julian Turnbull instructed Maitland Chambers’ James Clifford Jerome Pension Fund: Hazelwoods principal Sharan Hassett instructed Outer Temple’s David E Grant HMRC: In-house lawyer Ian Rees instructed South Square’s Lucy Frazer

    Gary Withey (not a named defendant): Mayer Brown partner Will Glassey


  55. Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 4m

    Hmm This Form SH01 of 9th May 2012 signed by Charlie seems significant.

    Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 1m

    There are forms AR01 (Annual Return) and AP01 (recording Craig Whyte and Aidan Earley as directors of #Sevco5088). They’re interesting too

    Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 21s

    This Letter Before Claim and the accompanying 330 pages of evidence cost a lot to compile. Someone is serious about this.


  56. Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 1m

    Not only have they provided the chaps at RIFC with 333 pages of evidence they also want some documents themselves from the mighty #Sevco
    Expand
    Phil MacGiollaBhain Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 6m

    RIFC have until 19th June to get back to the chaps at Merchant Legal. I’m sure it will be all cleared up. Big misundertsanding.


  57. From the BDO report I am troubled by several references to trade debtors of the Oldco that were sold to Newco. It’s not enough that the assets themselves were sold at a massive discount but that debts that were collectable (for the benefit of creditors) were sold as well e.g.

    SPL Prize Money 2011/12 Season: We can advise that the right to this prize money was sold to Newco …….

    Similarly Jelavic transfer monies.

    Outrageous.


  58. Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 35s

    Merchant Legal have requested “..the long form and other due diligence reports..” prepared for RIFC for admittance to the AIM.


  59. May 30, 2013 · 12:54 pm

    How Headines Can Misrepresent A Story – Rangers and Pinsent Masons Edition

    At the end of my post this morning about the Pinsent Masons investigation into “the connections between Craig Whyte and former and current personnel of the Company and its subsidiaries” I wondered how the mainstream media might report matters.

    The answer has come quickly.

    The BBC has a story, which can be found here, headlined “RANGERS CONFIRM NO LINKS BETWEEN CRAIG WHYTE AND CHARLES GREEN.”

    The Scotsman’s website has a similar story here. That has the headline – “RANGERS PROBE FINDS NO GREEN-WHYTE LINKS”.

    The Daily Record’s headline, on its story here, is – “RANGERS’ INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION FINDS NO LINKS BETWEEN NEW REGIME AND CRAIG WHYTE”.

    Maybe I am obtuse. Maybe I have problems reading. But the statement released to the Stock Exchange today, and reproduced in my earlier post, does not say any of the things mentioned in the headlines!

    Mr Green is not mentioned at all, so there is no “confirmation” of there being no link between Messrs Green and Whyte. The Record headline, referring vaguely to the “new regime” might pass muster, but again it is not what the report summary produced says. That states that he had no involvement with the PLC which owns the company which owns the business and assets which make up the football club, nor with the company which owns the business and assets etc. By “new regime” does the Record mean the post Charles Green administration?

    When stories are spun so blatantly, it ought to focus attention on who is briefing the press that the truth is in fact different from what the published story is – especially when we can all read the statement and see that the headlines do NOT reflect it!

    So three leading media organisations in Scotland all produce headlines which misrepresent the report theya re commenting on!

    However praise should go to STV news.

    Under the headline – “NO LINKS BETWEEN CRAIG WHYTE AND RANGERS NEWCO” CLAIMS INVESTIGATION – it includes the following paragraph.

    Rangers did not comment on the investigation’s findings on the alleged links between Mr Green, Mr Whyte and Sevco 5088 – a separate company which had an exclusive deal with Rangers’ administrators to buy the club’s assets.

    That is one of the points I flagged up this morning, and well done to STV for raising it.

    However, as Rangers have said that they will not comment any further because of Mr Whyte’s threatened legal action, there are unlikely to be answers given to the questions.

    Posted by Paul McConville


  60. It seems a pretty simple matter to establish whether Sevco 5088 Ltd and Sevco Scotland Limited co-existed at the same time as separate companies, or one morphed into the other by changing its name and registering in Scotland as we were led to believe at the time. Can those who have had a look at the Companies House records confirm which it is?


  61. Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 1m

    Hmm Merchant Legal also want “Copies of Zeus Engagement letter(s) signed by Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland Limited.


  62. torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:

    Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 13:02

    So three leading media organisations in Scotland all produce headlines which misrepresent the report they are commenting on!
    ————————

    Every story you read in the press must be treated with the same degree of scepticism. If they don’t get it completely wrong, they misrepresent it. And they call themselves professionals.

Comments are closed.