Its the usual problem isnt it
Timmy claims ACL wont talk to the company he is running which claims ownership of the share CCFCH and CCFC (the club) but doesnt own the lease at the Ricoh. He is in a situation where legally he has no rights at the stadium, no one is locking him out he simply has no legal right to trade from there. If CCFC Ltd only held the lease there is no reason why it would not have been liquidated day 1 of Mr Appletons appointment and TF would be in a much stronger position to do a deal at the Ricoh, so you would have to conclude CCFC Ltd has more than the lease to it.
The lease itself is in CCFC Ltd and until that company is wound up remains active, it is if you like suspended but still in force. What that means is that there is an existing lease that blocks a new one until it is resolved. Of course CCFC Ltd can not be liquidated as yet because there is good evidence that the golden share in that company which is the key to CCFC having any existence at all. ACL for good reasons of their own do not want CCFC Ltd lliquidated. This leaves Mr Appleton in a quandry, he should arguably liquidate CCFC Ltd but that could leave CCFC H in a position of no longer being a member of the League
ACL say they want the Club at the stadium. Certainly that would be the best solution for all if there were a new better deal for the club that is acceptable to all parties. There is still a current lease with CCFC Ltd and the ACL relationship is with that company. Under the terms of the lease, which is still valid, ACL are owed a substantial amount of money. No one has disputed that the lease is in CCFC Ltd. Currently CCFC Ltd is not run by TF it is run by the administrator. When it comes to administration which is a process governed by a court the basis of what goes on is the contracts that exist, anyone stepping away from that puts themselves at risk. It suits ACL to rely on the law yes because it leaves the CCFC owners in a difficult position, and of course they will use that "advantage" who wouldnt? But they have to deal with things on the basis of their contract. Legally the ACL relationship is now with the administrator of CCFC Ltd - might not like it but thats the reality.
All sides have contributed to this, all sides have made mistakes, all sides spin events their way..... but only one side runs CCFC..... in my eyes a company has to take the lions share of responsibility for its own actions be it CCFC Ltd, CCFC H, SBS&L ACL or SISU
the actions of a third party are secondary to the actions/decisions that the company or its directors/owners take or do not take for themselves
