Show us the document Tim (1 Viewer)

[Ddccfc]

You say you agreed and signed a deal with the council for part ownership of the Ricoh Arena.

No handshakes, no room for misinterpretation. A tangible, existing document.

Then show us this document Tim. Banish the doubters. Prove that ACL and the council have acted disingenuously.

You do still have this document don't you Tim?

 

---

[Manchester_sky_blue]

You would assume that a man in his position would not be stupid enough to base his entire argument upon a document that doesn't really exist........... then again......

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

You would assume that a man in his position would not be stupid enough to base his entire argument upon a document that doesn't really exist........... then again......

It does exist in his head floating around not hitting anything

 

[lordsummerisle]

You say you agreed and signed a deal with the council for part ownership of the Ricoh Arena.

No handshakes, no room for misinterpretation. A tangible, existing document.

Then show us this document Tim. Banish the doubters. Prove that ACL and the council have acted disingenuously.

You do still have this document don't you Tim?

Are you James Smith or just a plagiarist?

 

[James Smith]

As I posted in the other thread:

Point 9

This deal was documented, signed by all parties and then reneged on by the council. The council made the problem even worse by then using public funds, something that is now subject to the judicial review proceedings

Okay so just show us the signed document Tim, as that would prove the council are liars as you claim. No need to talk about handshakes that have been misinterpreted or who said what to whom.

Just show us the document, you can can't you?

 

[James Smith]

Are you James Smith or just a plagiarist?

He is not me!

 

[Ddccfc]

Are you James Smith or just a plagiarist?

I thought I was Tim Fisher? I'm having a personality crisis on this forum. Never have I witnessed such paranoia.

 

[Godiva]

You say you agreed and signed a deal with the council for part ownership of the Ricoh Arena.

No handshakes, no room for misinterpretation. A tangible, existing document.

Then show us this document Tim. Banish the doubters. Prove that ACL and the council have acted disingenuously.

You do still have this document don't you Tim?

Why don't you ask Mutton or PWKH? Surely if it is a signed document they can remember signing it.

It is probably amongst the documents filed to the court by sisu.

 

[Godiva]

I thought I was Tim Fisher? I'm having a personality crisis on this forum. Never have I witnessed such paranoia.

Will the real Tim Fisher please stand up!

 

[lordsummerisle]

I thought I was Tim Fisher? I'm having a personality crisis on this forum. Never have I witnessed such paranoia.

We're all Tim Fisher on here.

 

[Ddccfc]

As I posted in the other thread:

Sorry James there are a lot of posts and threads to sift through. If I missed yours, it wasn't intentional.

But I'm glad I wasn't the only person to have been intrigued by this illusive document.

 

[James Smith]

Sorry James there are a lot of posts and threads to sift through. If I missed yours, it wasn't intentional.

But I'm glad I wasn't the only person to have been intrigued by this illusive document.

No worries, probably deserved its own thread anyway given the severity of the claim by TF.

 

[fernandopartridge]

You say you agreed and signed a deal with the council for part ownership of the Ricoh Arena.

No handshakes, no room for misinterpretation. A tangible, existing document.

Then show us this document Tim. Banish the doubters. Prove that ACL and the council have acted disingenuously.

You do still have this document don't you Tim?

The document was binding on two parties.

Show us the denial ACL / Coventry City Council

 

[Danceswithhorses]

Why don't you ask Mutton or PWKH? Surely if it is a signed document they can remember signing it.

It is probably amongst the documents filed to the court by sisu.

Seeing as it's TF who has made the claim about this document, surely it's up to him to back it up with some proof.
If he can prove this, he may well win some fans over.
If he can't, it will probably just be lost amongst all the other 'fisherisms' like we are 'debt free' etc etc

 

[fernandopartridge]

We're all Tim Fisher on here.

I'm Tim and so's my wife.

 

[Godiva]

Seeing as it's TF who has made the claim about this document, surely it's up to him to back it up with some proof.
If he can prove this, he may well win some fans over.
If he can't, it will probably just be lost amongst all the other 'fisherisms' like we are 'debt free' etc etc

When ACL claimed it was ccfc who renerged on the agreement nobody asked them to substantiate their claim. So why should there be different rules?

Anyway, if such a signed document exists it will surely be included in the filings to the court.

 

[DaleM]

No im tim ;-)

 

[fernandopartridge]

When ACL claimed it was ccfc who renerged on the agreement nobody asked them to substantiate their claim. So why should there be different rules?

Anyway, if such a signed document exists it will surely be included in the filings to the court.

I do wonder whether some of the posters on here could satisfy their curiosity by making a Freedom of Information request to Coventry City Council.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

When ACL claimed it was ccfc who renerged on the agreement nobody asked them to substantiate their claim. So why should there be different rules?

Anyway, if such a signed document exists it will surely be included in the filings to the court.

ACL claimed that a verbal agreement had been made. If the other party denies this, it's difficult to prove.

TF has claimed that he has documentary evidence. This is very easy to prove.

Hence the "different rules".

 

[Godiva]

I do wonder whether some of the posters on here could satisfy their curiosity by making a Freedom of Information request to Coventry City Council.

PSGM1 would do it for free ... if it would be certain to prove Fisher is lying. But it could backfire, so I doubt he will risk it.

 

[Danceswithhorses]

When ACL claimed it was ccfc who renerged on the agreement nobody asked them to substantiate their claim. So why should there be different rules?

Yes, we all totally accepted TF's entirely plausible explanation that the handshake on the deal was just a 'goodbye' handshake and not a 'deal agreed' handshake.

 

[Godiva]

Yes, we all totally accepted TF's entirely plausible explanation that the handshake on the deal was just a 'goodbye' handshake and not a 'deal agreed' handshake.

I think the 'handshake' was reported by ACL.
But I also think the 'goodbye' meaning was suggested on this board (Paxman?) - I can't remember Fisher even commenting on it. Might have missed it though.

 

[James Smith]

ACL claimed that a verbal agreement had been made. If the other party denies this, it's difficult to prove.

TF has claimed that he has documentary evidence. This is very easy to prove.

Hence the "different rules".

As Tim made the claim it would be up to him to prove it existed in a court of law.

 

[Hobo]

As Tim made the claim it would be up to him to prove it existed in a court of law.

If there was a signed document and Tim had it I am sure SISU would have been in court months ago!!

 

[James Smith]

If there was a signed document and Tim had it I am sure SISU would have been in court months ago!!

I do wonder if anyone ever thought it was a good idea to vet what Tim plans to say before he is let loose in the media spotlight.