Whatever Happened to the Nimmo Smith Report?


I’m all for Justice, fairness, due process, innocent until proved …

Comment on Whatever Happened to the Nimmo Smith Report? by twopanda bears.

I’m all for Justice, fairness, due process, innocent until proved guilty, merciful society, forgiveness and all such noble things. With that sprit to the fore, but that exceptions can prove the rule – could I please request the Fraud Police to immediately bring the lot of them to Court. Thereafter that the Judiciary please find that complete shower of charlatans automatically guilty, promptly thereupon throwing said sad miscreants into some remote dark medieval dungeon gaol. After they’ve dealt with the MSM – Could the Judiciary please turn their attentions to the SPL and SFA? After that, we’ll all be happy to go back to the normal pace of justice M`Luds dutifully waiting patiently for those responsible for the RFC debacle & crash and the consequential and reputation(al) damage to Scottish Football to be called to account.

twopanda bears Also Commented

Whatever Happened to the Nimmo Smith Report?
CG + Sally “have until Friday 17th to respond”

Not sure if “until” means by this afternoon or tomorrow
Anyway – no “Ashley”, “Stripping Titles”, “Agendas” or “Armageddon” today – other things to do today

Whatever Happened to the Nimmo Smith Report?
Just because you’re paranoid…… says: at 10:45
twopanda bears says:
August 16, 2012 at 09:29
As a total layman in such matters what does confuse me is why 8-10 weeks of more fee generation when their proposal to the creditors has been booted out? (Leaving aside the COI stuff)

To be fair to the Joint Administrators, they have to justify their time on fees, and that requires approval by the creditors and the Courts and, for other reasons I don`t believe they`ll stay a millisecond longer than they need to.

However, on the proposal to the creditors, the famous CVA, I think you and many others have mentioned – that was a forlorn mission. They did foresee that but carried on with the CVA proposal nonetheless as there was huge pressure to avoid liquidation and the loss of Club History – so I guess it had to be tried – even though when BK /PM pulled out it was then beyond the deadline for that scenario.

Leaving aside the COI Stuff – 8 to10 weeks could be needed to;
• Wait in reserve – just in case – or at least provide guidance and support
• Prepare case notes for several court actions incl. CB and the 25m plus action + advice to Creditors
• Probably need to compile internal hand-over briefing documents for BDO
• Bring together all the legal paperwork with the brigades of Lawyers
• They`ll need to compile their invoices and expenses for submission of payment
Other Aspects – could well be – but I`m no IP?

But I believe, potentially the most interesting of all – D+P need to prepare a reconciled final Creditors Report – as it should include itemising exactly the state of financial play as partly handed over to CG in mid-June up to the 31 July when he reportedly handed over the 5.5m wonga. Plus – all details through those 6 long summer weeks through to July 31 including any trading losses whilst still then in Administration and, – including deals / and especially any financial agreements of CG with the SFA / SPA in that interim joint management period – to which we have no reliable information – hard facts – so far.

Whatever Happened to the Nimmo Smith Report?
Just because you’re paranoid…… says: at 08:48
It’s been asked many times, but not answered as far as I can remember
Does anyone know when the duffers move out and BDO move in?
Is there a timetable?
Why the delay?

D+P stated 14 June that the Administration could last another 8 to 10 weeks. Thereafter BDO would be appointed as Liquidators. Today is the end of the 9th week. However D+P are awaiting Lord Hodge`s determination on the COI report. That COI report from D+ P was requested nearly 8 weeks ago – took three weeks to prepare – and is now with LH to be slotted into his schedule after an annual holiday.

So as far as a timetable is concerned for D+P to be released as appointed Officers of the Court, and BDO appointed as Liquidators – it should be imminent or any time now if taken from D+Ps original Statement in June of 8 to 10 weeks. But;

To be fair, D+P were surely not expecting to produce a Conflict of Interest Report to add to their planned workload scheduled for 8 to 10 weeks, and the D+P report that took 3 weeks to prepare will need time to consider by LH – So I`m guessing another week at the very least but understandable if it goes beyond that for say another 3 weeks at most before BDO begin the process of their appointment. Another guess is that indicative timeline would also cover the reported 10 September Court date where GW applies to join the litigation with D+P as a defendant in the CB action for 25m.

Recent Comments by twopanda bears

Make our Mind Up Time
Blogs “Deranged, Crass rude unacceptable….. “ and;

jabber was the “first to mention TRFC should be in the Third Division” – Blimey

Make our Mind Up Time
On jabber watch men – just in the mood for that

Here we go – League reconstruction – what`s the odds the old chestnut of the Atlantic League idea raises its MSM news diversion status again?

Ah Yes – Is that the one centred in the middle of the North Sea? – That UEFA has rejected for over a decade – or a new League centred on the Atlantic [does what tin says thing] – where there is no UEFA? Hope the MSM pundits remember the time zones in New York – or it might not work 😉

Make our Mind Up Time
Creepylurker says:
September 22, 2012 at 13:32
Think that`s the gist of Clause [46] – I think……………..
Does this mean that newco, when they win their first trophy, can’t add it on to the oldcos trophy haul and will be their first?

Apart from the Moniker 😉 Two questions there – Clearly the first trophy or title will be their first – you`re next proposition is more challenging / interesting. Forgetting about the SPL Inquiry for the moment – The oldco`s trophy haul that were properly awarded is still there and intact in their trophy room. They`ve not been expunged – they still exist. The oldco that was legally awarded these may not exist going forward but it still existed for 140 years. Unfortunately for them they can have no legal owner if the oldco is liquidated / struck-off. [You can`t buy an Olympic Gold Medal or a Test Match win].

To me Clause [46] indicates the recognisable entity they describe means the memories and tradition of the Club can go on unbroken by those who play and spectate. So when newco wins a trophy, then yes logically – it can sit beside the oldco [memories and tradition] trophy haul – why not? The supporters and players can claim the old trophy haul – collectively – as their own, But not the new incorporated company owners – who have no legal right to them.

All Football owners / operators are really only continuity Guardians of their club for their and future generations. If CG and D+P had played this smart they would have taken over the trophies as new protective Guardians. However, they`ve chosen to brag they`ve “bought” them [for £1!!] and want to defend their monetary value. Suggests to me the whole lot of them are just interested in money frankly.

The Commission is about what we all should really value.

Make our Mind Up Time
the taxman cometh says:
September 22, 2012 at 12:43

Correct ttc! – can only add the FTT is needed to establish the scale of potential void registrations

Make our Mind Up Time
Danish Pastry says: September 21, 2012 at 22:16
twopanda bears says:
September 21, 2012 at 19:22
Think Clause 46 is going to be a talking point for the time being
Kinda caught me out as their definition of a `Club` taken from their remit fits my old fashioned …
Think you`re right but I`ll skip on Horlicks and buy a bottle of creative wine to formulate an idea if I can.
Haha, Horlicks is a euphemism for whatever you like. Yes that (46) takes some mind-bending and (47) shows that nothing is done and dusted. Early on they referred to the no-show of important documents. Guess they were less than impressed by the non-cooperation.
It’s no doubt my difficulty with legalese but the concepts of club, company, and so on, are rather confusing. Maybe Charles has actually bought himself more history than he bargained for? Especially if the club remains accountable in spite of change of division and ownership.

Ok – Much clearer now – “History” – critical distinctions to ponder from the Commissions Notes

Sticking with Clause [46] – Sophisticated in Concept I venture – Bear with me on this.
Yes “Club” – the recognisable entity that plays, spectates and supports the Club [could be any Club]. This creates `memories` i.e. History. It fits with the Andy Cameron view I heard where his view was `Rangers will always be Rangers` – doesn’t matter what the company number is and so on. And his and other views are correct on that I`d say. You can`t forget you were married at a Church even if that Church no longer exists – or you travelled abroad to support your Club and the memories that generated. It is about memories / history / tradition – as the Commission referred to their interpretation from common speech and thought – So fine – There would be an unbroken line of History in memory – but of no legal standing.

The Commission also points to the Club as dependant on the legal “Owner and Operator”. But the owner and operator are affiliated to an association which awards titles and trophies. Every title and every trophy has the names inscribed of the other member clubs in the affiliated association.

The SFA / SPL are therefore the `Parent` of Titles and Trophies – and award same to the affiliated association member as defined in the rules – that is the Owner and Operator. How Titles and trophies are awarded is with the consent of the entire association – to a / in favour of a particular owner and operator responsible for their membership of the Association. If the Owner goes legally bust the association is terminated – as is the history of that association. It stops. Whatever remains stays with the oldco – That history of that association simply can`t go anywhere else – and it certainly can`t be sold on to a newco as the oldco`s association has ceased and there is nothing to sell.

I venture there are two histories – one based on the memory and tradition [trademark/brand] that CG has `bought` and; – to be restarted as a different corporate entity and legally responsible in future. The memories and tradition of the Club go on unbroken by those who play and spectate.

The second History is of a legal affiliation by owners and operators to an association as defined in their articles as a Football Club that has ceased after 140 years. The titles/ trophies remain with the oldco and cannot be legally transferred because they belong to an association membership that has now ceased. If there is a question on previous titles and trophies awarded it is for the oldco to defend – none other – as they were legally responsible for the past.

Think that`s the gist of Clause [46] – I think……………..

About the author