Telegraph probe into Sky Blues administration raised in Parliament by Coventry MP Bob (1 Viewer)

Sub

Well-Known Member
10 Sep 2013 12:58Mr Ainsworth call on administrator 'to explain why he sold the company without first establishing what its assets were'



Share on printShare on email

</body>


Coventry-City-Keep-Coventry-In-Coventry-16-5165775.jpg
MP Bob Ainsworth
A Telegraph probe in which Coventry City chief executive Tim Fisher belatedly admitted players were registered in the company in administration has been raised in Parliament.
Coventry North east Labour MP Bob Ainsworth’s latest Commons motion concerning the Sky Blues crisis seizes on club chief executive Tim Fisher’s comments last week following the leaking to us of internal club documents.
The documents - letters from other clubs relating to transfers of players in and out of the club - appear to provide more evidence that between 2006 and 2010 players had been registered in Coventry City Football Club Limited - not CCFC Holdings as the club has repeatedly insisted.
Under Telegraph questioning, Mr Fisher accepted: “In these instances, the documentation clearly shows Limited as the registering company.”
He had added: “Historically the administrative side of the business was a complete mess. We found documentation to be contradictory in some instances, and often error strewn in others.”

It raised further questions over the administration which resulted in a sale of relatively minor assets to former club owner Sisu’s company, Otium Entertainment Group Ltd, minus the players - which administrator Paul Appleton believed were registered in Holdings.
Last month, the Telegraph revealed the Football League had admitted errors and “administrative oversights” in registering players to CCFC Holdings. Crucially, the League would not say whether they related to some or all of the players, or over what timescale.
But the League accepted the players should have been registered in CCFC Limited, as this was the company holding the League’s “golden share”, and therefore constituting “the club”.

Mr Ainsworth’s motion states: “That this House notes that at the time when Coventry City Football Club Ltd went into administration on 21 March 2013, the club’s owners claimed on the club’s website that Coventry City Football Club (Holdings) Limited is the club and that Coventry City Football Club Ltd, now in administration, was merely a property subsidiary which owns no material assets and has no employees on or off the pitch.
“Further notes that in response to evidence that some players were registered with CCFC Ltd, Mr Tim Fisher, Chief Executive Officer, told the Coventry Telegraph there had been errors and that, in these instances, the documentation clearly shows Limited as the registering company.
Further notes that since then the intangible assets register, signed off by Mr Fisher on 19 June 2012, has come to light, and shows that 23 named players at a closing value of £5,507,953.63 were registered as assets of the limited company as at 31 May 2011.

“Further notes that this information flies in the face of what has been claimed repeatedly by Mr Fisher and that this information has been passed to the Football League, the Football Association, HM Revenue and Customs and the joint administrator who has been asked whether he accepts that these assets were held by the limited company at that date; and calls on Mr Fisher to say, in light of the above, why he has made the claims he has, and on Mr Paul Appleton, the joint administrator, to explain why he sold the company without first establishing what its assets were.”

Mr Appleton has repeatedly said his ongoing investigation includes examining evidence about the location of assets including players between companies. His findings will go to the government’s Business Innovation and Skills department (BIS) next Thursday - before he is expected to complete CCFC Ltd’s liquidation within ten days.
Liquidation has been expected since August 2 when part council-owned Ricoh firm Arena Coventry Ltd refused to sign a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) to bring the company out of administration - resulting in the Sky Blues losing ten Division One points.
HM Revenue and Customs also refused to sign the CVA. But the Telegraph understands HMRC - a creditor based on a small sum related to the Sisu group of companies - would not have had the power to block the CVA on its own.

ACL has publicly called on Mr Appleton to re-start the administration process, and for the Football Association to intervene.
Mr Appleton has also stated CCFC Holdings Ltd could have had a claim to “beneficial ownership” over assets located in Limited - and that such claims could be open to court challenge.

ACL is tightlipped over whether it might seek further costly court action - after its failed attempts via the courts and administration process to prevent Sisu companies continuing as club owners with the League’s crucial “golden share”.
Some experts on both sides believe it is unlikely.

Insolvency expert and Coventry City supporter Alan Limb, of BRI (Business Recovery and Insolvency), which has a Coventry office, said: “There’s nothing to stop ACL as a creditor from taking action in the court if they don’t think Paul Appleton has done a good job.
“Whether it would be successful would depend on the quality of the job he’s done. I’m sure he’s taken legal advice over every move, knowing this is a high profile administration, and knowing everything he does would be highly scrutinised and criticised.
“For any ACL action to succeed, they would need to show that someone else doing the job would have been able to achieve a better outcome for them as a creditor.
“From everything the administrator’s disclosed, I don’t really see how that could be the case.”
Mr Appleton declined to comment, other than to say his investigation continues.
The club’s directors also declined to comment this morning.
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
Is the highlighted text true?
If it is it looks damning to me.

It says that most, if not all, our main players were in Ltd.
Which is where they should be with the football league registrations.
Surely Fisher would not transfer them over to holdings. Are they still there?
I bet ACL thought they were there when they tried to place CCFC Ltd into administration !!
If they were then we could be in the Ricoh with new owners by now.
 

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Just what you would expect from them and people still trust them lie at any occasion just to get what they want then threaten anyone who wants to question them..

once bitten twice shy they say, we have been bitten 10's of times just by Sisu..:mad:


Is the highlighted text true?
If it is it looks damning to me.

It says that most, if not all, our main players were in Ltd.
Which is where they should be with the football league registrations.
Surely Fisher would not transfer them over to holdings. Are they still there?
I bet ACL thought they were there when they tried to place CCFC Ltd into administration !!
If they were then we could be in the Ricoh with new owners by now.
 

Sub

Well-Known Member
looks like there may have been alot of billy bullshit from SISU and the directors it also raises alot of questions about the administrator :thinking about:
 
Last edited:

TheRoyalScam

Well-Known Member
Thank goodness for EDMs and Parliamentary Privilege, otherwise we wouldn't be keeping this travesty in the national spotlight. Keep up the good work, Bob!:D

The next few weeks should be very interesting, starting next Thursday when PA reports to the Government's BIS department.

Just how long will SISU be able to delay filing overdue company accounts, which could crucially reveal the truth concerning alleged transfer of player assets from CCFC Ltd (in administration) to CCFC (Holdings)?

:thinking about:I'm particularly interested in this information regarding the intangible assets register:

“Further notes that since then the intangible assets register, signed off by Mr Fisher on 19 June 2012, has come to light, and shows that 23 named players at a closing value of £5,507,953.63 were registered as assets of the limited company as at 31 May 2011.
“Further notes that this information flies in the face of what has been claimed repeatedly by Mr Fisher and that this information has been passed to the Football League, the Football Association, HM Revenue and Customs and the joint administrator who has been asked whether he accepts that these assets were held by the limited company at that date; and calls on Mr Fisher to say, in light of the above, why he has made the claims he has, and on Mr Paul Appleton, the joint administrator, to explain why he sold the company without first establishing what its assets were.”

There's a combined 'no comment' from CCFC/SISU and Appleton who merely states that his investigations are (still) continuing....:facepalm:

I believe this could allegedly be of relevance: http://www.sfo.gov.uk/fraud/what-is-fraud/corporate-fraud/asset-stripping.aspx and apologise in advance for starting a new thread drawing peoples' attention to it.

Don't give up the fight.

NOPM

KCIC

PUSB

:blue:


 

DaleM

New Member
Further notes that since then the intangible assets register, signed off by Mr Fisher on 19 June 2012, has come to light, and shows that 23 named players at a closing value of £5,507,953.63 were registered as assets of the limited company as at 31 May 2011."

So if the players were in Ltd as of May 2011 and they then moved them in the 2012 accounts would there then be enough evidence of shenanigans going on to get the serious fraud office involved bearing in mind this would be just before SISU stopped paying rent and allegedly tried to distress ACL ?
 

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Exercise extreme caution with what you add to this debate boys and girls; as many of us don't enjoy parliamentary privilege, and SISU's advisers like the occasional look-in, as I have been made aware....
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Further notes that since then the intangible assets register, signed off by Mr Fisher on 19 June 2012, has come to light, and shows that 23 named players at a closing value of £5,507,953.63 were registered as assets of the limited company as at 31 May 2011."

So if the players were in Ltd as of May 2011 and they then moved them in the 2012 accounts would there then be enough evidence of shenanigans going on to get the serious fraud office involved bearing in mind this would be just before SISU stopped paying rent and allegedly tried to distress ACL ?

This is a key question. It's fairly clear to all of us that asset stripping has taken place and just the lease has been left in Ltd by design but what's the tipping point for that being formally investigated? Surely it doesn't rely on Appletons report?
 

TheRoyalScam

Well-Known Member
Exercise extreme caution with what you add to this debate boys and girls; as many of us don't enjoy parliamentary privilege, and SISU's advisers like the occasional look-in, as I have been made aware....

Agreed, MMM

The word 'allegedly' is of paramount importance here folks.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Exercise extreme caution with what you add to this debate boys and girls; as many of us don't enjoy parliamentary privilege, and SISU's advisers like the occasional look-in, as I have been made aware....

not even SISU could be that stupid as to start legal action against the clubs fans could they???
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Think the problem is that at 31/05/11 the players register may well have been as stated above however in the year From 01/07/12 to 30/06/13 there were 41 registrations and I would guess by March 2013 the players were registered in CCFC H Ltd ....... with very little value attached

The value £5m was the original cost not the actual value at 31/05/11 ....... that was 1.8m, which by March 2013 would have little value..... most players being loans, freebies and youth.

Would seem to indicate a longer plan to the events rather than a rapid reaction to the threat of administration in March, however that doesnt mean it was. Until all facts are put out we just do not know

Where that takes us who knows .............. unless a body with real clout picks it up and investigates I suspect as far as CCFC goes it will be swept under the carpet for now.......

However I would have thought the Football League might be getting a bit worried though about a government involvement in their affairs
 
Last edited:

jaytskyblue

New Member
This is heaping the pressure on Appleton and his report, due on the 15th (I think). I guess he will use beneficial ownership as a fig leaf, but this would now seem to be way beyond that, if true.

There can be little doubt this will go to court and hopefully we will then get full and proper transparency of what has gone on.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Who is going to take it to court though?
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
This is a key question. It's fairly clear to all of us that asset stripping has taken place and just the lease has been left in Ltd by design but what's the tipping point for that being formally investigated? Surely it doesn't rely on Appletons report?

Lol...did you not read M_M_M's post not 3mins before you typed???
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
as posted on another thread

just a thought but if you let contracts come to an end and then ask those players to sign another in a different company, or , only sign new contracts for youth, loans freebies etc in that different company whilst say leaving the players you dont want or are too expensive to run down contracts in the old company has any asset actually been stripped?
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
I would guess ACL, CCC dependent on Appletons' report. Even he anticipated some action, especially if creditors perceived they were not offered correct values.

Exactly...joint action from ACL & the non-SISU bidders perhaps??? With view to instigating a proper & fair bidding process where assets are properly listed if the last was is found or proven improper. I would think that to be a very long shot though unless SISU's legals & PA have messed-up big time.
 

sky blue john

Well-Known Member
The problem is that even if the bidding process started again i would think it is highly unlikely that a different outcome would ensue !!!!
Just down to the fact Arvo can right off / transfer millions to Otium !!!
 

jaytskyblue

New Member
As I said this is all about putting the heat on Appleton and his report. You can bet his bosses and legal reps all over this,

it will be very interesting to see if they have to admit to any weakness in the process caused by incorrectly supplied information, if that was the case.
 

wes_cov

New Member
as posted on another thread

just a thought but if you let contracts come to an end and then ask those players to sign another in a different company, or , only sign new contracts for youth, loans freebies etc in that different company whilst say leaving the players you dont want or are too expensive to run down contracts in the old company has any asset actually been stripped?

this could have been SISU's plan over a longer term but ACL may have forced there hand early with the Administrator order? but thats is only conjecture
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
I would guess ACL, CCC dependent on Appletons' report. Even he anticipated some action, especially if creditors perceived they were not offered correct values.

Trouble is at some point you have to take the business decision as to the benefit of spending hundreds of thousands of pounds against what is achieved. ACL and CCC do not have pots of money sitting around to do this. What would a re run administration actually achieve?

from the directors of ACL point of view there comes a point where you say enough and get on with running the business, back up the claim the business is sound without CCFC. From SISU's point of view I would think they want CCC and ACL to get involved in costly and lengthy legal process because it drains funds, focus and business. The last thing that SISU want to see is ACL successful without CCFC.

So will they take it to court or employ other means to deal with it. Would a government involvement in the"public interest" be more effective where funding is not an issue?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
this could have been SISU's plan over a longer term but ACL may have forced there hand early with the Administrator order? but thats is only conjecture

given that SISU never challenged the County Court judgement, the statutory demand, the third party debtor orders did ACL actually force anything with the administration order or were SISU just waiting for it to happen?
 

Dhinsa's_Millions

Well-Known Member
When Dulieu set up Otium (Thanks OSB - too many SISU companies to choose from!) it could be alleged this was the plan all the time - people questioned it back then but it was labelled 'normal business practice'. It appears that Seppala is pulling all the strings and has been for quite some time - the master plan is hers - the hapless muppets are making it a reality. Allegedly.
 
Last edited:

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Think you mean Otium not Arvo, D_M
 

Dhinsa's_Millions

Well-Known Member
I actually do think this is ACL's 'non' plan. Wait and see with a real push for non footballing revenues in the meantime. I don't see them selling the Ricoh to any SISU related business ever. This will ultimately push SISU to make a decision - their dwindling asset needs to be sold!
 

sky blue john

Well-Known Member
when is the JR review ?
The outcome of this is paramount to Sisu's next move i believe !!!
If they lose will they sell ?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Would be interesting to see who the 23 names on the player asset list were and when each of their contracts ran out.

I would suspect but do not know that there were no contracts registered in CCFC Ltd that ran past 30/06/13.

Why 30/06/13 well CCFC Ltd went into administration 21/03/13 by 13/06/13 final best offers for the rights to any assets in CCFC Ltd had to be filed and by that time the value of any remaining contracts in CCFC Ltd were worthless. The bidding process was set out clearly even if the assets were not described. So PA can say with some validity he got a good price for what was actually left in CCFC Ltd on the actual date of sale at the end of June, knowing that there were no contracts valid after 30/06/13. So he got £1.5m for the rights to assets when there was very little there

Would that explain why it took so long to get from administration to sale? I dont know but makes me wonder. Would that mean there were no assets player wise when the administration hit as they had been removed as they terminated or were never registered there?

how long ago was this orchestrated?:thinking about:
 
Last edited:

thaiskyblue

New Member
Why would you keep the club when its worth is dying by the game. Even if a miraculous promotion occurred next season they may get 2-3 million in revenue with NO fictional stadium built. Lets hope they see some sort of sense and sell up!
As i said before i hope they go, but i don't understand why they said before that they wanted to sell, now they say they don't.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top