latest statement from Mr Appleton (9 Viewers)

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Every day that passes the picture becomes ever murkier, with the only way to clear it being SISU's removal. This is such a tangled web of issues, complicated by the management structure, which is no coincidence-seriously fed up with it all at the moment.

 

---

[oldskyblue58]

So basically: PA- Lies. PWKH - Truth.

Does that about sum it up?

not what i was saying torch .......... just putting the legal situation

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

So basically: PA- Lies. PWKH - Truth.

Does that about sum it up?

Don't think anyone has called Appleton a liar-just that the tone of his statements appear a little beyond the impartiality expected of someone in his position.

 

[covboy1987]

this is getting beyond a joke :slap:now this adminstartor needs to be kicked into touch and one be appointed that plays on an even playing field not one tilted well and truly to one side !!!!

Simple truth is that Higgs trust have lost all trust in the 'owners' for the way they swee that they conduct there business and will not deal with any company that SISU are remotely associated with which of course is absolutely there right

 

[cloughie]

If the contract has always been with CCFC Ltd and paid by CCFCH why doesnt the administrator ask CCFC H to give him funds specifically and only earmarked so that CCFC Ltd can meet its contractual liabilities to pay for the academy at the AEH. That way CCFC Ltd retains the academy but the debt to CCFCH increases. Clearly he thinks he can get CCFCH to pay accumulated debt of CCFC to AEH so must have some influence or instruction. If the share is in CCFC Ltd then so too is the academy

who actually pays is a complete red herring...... it is who has the contract and therfore the legal liability that is the crux of it

What he appears to be saying though is that the contract between CCFCLtd and AEH is finished and he is accepting no further liability. Then saying a new contract is necessary between CCFCH and AEH to use the facilities. Except CCFCH can not enter in to a contract as academy provider as at the moment CCFCH can not prove ownership of club or academy

So Appleton is just about saying he dosen't consider the acadamy to have any value for CCFC Ltd

 

[torchomatic]

Somehow I thought that would be the response. If he said "good morning" it would be the same. Hysteria would follow.

I'll just leave them to slug it out with each other without further comment, I think.

Don't think anyone has called Appleton a liar-just that the tone of his statements appear a little beyond the impartiality expected of someone in his position.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Somehow I thought that would be the response. If he said "good morning" it would be the same. Hysteria would follow.

I'll just leave them to slug it out with each other without further comment, I think.

Extrapolating things to an extreme I think Torch.

 

[rupert_bear]

I can't undersand all these posts and threads on administrator Appleton . As i understand things he has given or been given by the courts a date to report back his findings to the judge. He ain't going to reveal anything official before that hearing. He may have a chit-chat over tea and biscuits with whoever but the real meat on the bones will be for the court i should think.

 

[Sub]

Originally Posted by torchomatic
Somehow I thought that would be the response. If he said "good morning" it would be the same. Hysteria would follow.

I'll just leave them to slug it out with each other without further comment, I think.

Extrapolating things to an extreme I think Torch.

I would look at my watch to check it was not the afternoon though

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I would look at my watch to check it was not the afternoon though

Haha, touche

 

[Ashdown1]

Of course he is asking them to do business with Holdings - that is his point, the arrangement has always worked like that. The company he is running has no money - zilch, it is essentially non-trading. Tell me, would you rather the conversation went like this:

PA: Can our academy please play at the Higgs Centre?
HT: Can you pay for it?
PA: No, I run a company with no income streams whatsoever.
HT: OK, bye then.

He is calling for Higgs to accept money direct from Holdings, because that is all he can do.

I agree !! They should start by accepting the £1.3 million owed to them !

 

[blueflint]

i'll just wait and see what happens in may then panic

 

[cloughie]

Of course he is asking them to do business with Holdings - that is his point, the arrangement has always worked like that. The company he is running has no money - zilch, it is essentially non-trading. Tell me, would you rather the conversation went like this:

PA: Can our academy please play at the Higgs Centre?
HT: Can you pay for it?
PA: No, I run a company with no income streams whatsoever.
HT: OK, bye then.

He is calling for Higgs to accept money direct from Holdings, because that is all he can do.

Why would Holdings pay? its not there acadamy is it and they (Holdings) are nothing to do with CCFC Ltd

 

[lordsummerisle]

Why would Holdings pay? its not there acadamy is it and they (Holdings) are nothing to do with CCFC Ltd

So Higgs have wanted to close the Academy down since ACL first mooted Administration then?

 

[cloughie]

So Higgs have wanted to close the Academy down since ACL first mooted Administration then?

The Acadamy as in young players belongs to CCFC Ltd.

The building belongs to Higgs trust who have not been paid .

What I'm saying Appleton/ Holdings can't have it both ways, they can't claim to be running part of CCFC Ltd and not another part either one and the same company or they are seperate, in which case Holdings would have no right to play in the league

 

[chiefdave]

I think just becuase you do not agree with what is said, doesnt mean its not impartial- it's just not what you agree with!

I can understand the hatred of SISU given what's happened to the club under their charge but it seems strange that people feel the need to find a way to blame them for everything while putting no blame on ACL / Higgs / Council.

Appleton has to act impartially as he will have to report to the courts. If he doesn't he could be in big trouble. There's not a lot of info about him online but I can't find anything to suggest that either him or the company he works for are in any way dodgy. Here's a radical thought, maybe he's telling the truth!

To be honest if you look at things since the administrator has come in ACL / Higgs / Council don't come off too well. The balloon thing, all this with the academy, the bailout and use of tax payers funds. Doesn't make those parties look entirely blameless in this mess.

With this academy situation I'm pretty sure there's nothing in the agreement that requires CCFC to use Higgs, the terms are just that a certain standard of facility has to be used. This is playing out exactly the same as the situation at the Ricoh. You have Higgs telling the club they can't use the facilities then getting upset because they've gone somewhere else. Assuming the faculites at the Uni are up to standard then all that's happened here is the academy have moved and Higgs have lost a tenant.

 

[skyblue1523]

READING the paper it clearly says that sisu do not operate ccfc ltd and the acadamy is in ccfc ltd so why is he asking ccfch to talk to higgs they are nothing to do with it as they dont own it or is it different.I got a funny feeling that PA favors sisu.I HOPE THE FL & FA take note.ccfc still being screwed.

 

[lordsummerisle]

The Acadamy as in young players belongs to CCFC Ltd.

The building belongs to Higgs trust who have not been paid .

What I'm saying Appleton/ Holdings can't have it both ways, they can't claim to be running part of CCFC Ltd and not another part either one and the same company or they are seperate, in which case Holdings would have no right to play in the league

The players always have been part of CCFC Ltd,(I think) and Higgs,(I think) have always been paid by Holdings.

Higgs seem to be letting the ACL/SISU dispute spill over into other areas where they apparently have never had any problem witn getting paid fro the use of the facilities by Holdings in the past.

 

[chiefdave]

What I'm saying Appleton/ Holdings can't have it both ways, they can't claim to be running part of CCFC Ltd and not another part either one and the same company or they are seperate, in which case Holdings would have no right to play in the league

That's not how I interpret what he's saying. Bear in mind that as administrator he can't run the company at a loss, to me it looks like he's saying holdings paid before, they are prepared to pay now so take the money off them. Didn't Gregor Rioch say he would pay it himself? Why not accept that. It seems that Higgs, who are of course tied to ACL, are not making things easy.

 

[sky blue john]

all that the higgs are doing is proving that ltd and holdings are one company nothing to do with the academy !!!
They are playing by Sisu rules now !!

 

[lordsummerisle]

all that the higgs are doing is proving that ltd and holdings are one company nothing to do with the academy !!!
They are playing by Sisu rules now !!

So now we're complaining that Sisu want to pay for something rather than them not paying for something?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Come on, since when do SISU offer to pay anything?:facepalm:

 

[Jack Griffin]

Of course he is asking them to do business with Holdings - that is his point, the arrangement has always worked like that. The company he is running has no money - zilch, it is essentially non-trading. Tell me, would you rather the conversation went like this:

PA: Can our academy please play at the Higgs Centre?
HT: Can you pay for it?
PA: No, I run a company with no income streams whatsoever.
HT: OK, bye then.

He is calling for Higgs to accept money direct from Holdings, because that is all he can do.

The academy grant is £480,000.. accordring to the FL that goes to CCFC Ltd.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

The academy grant is £480,000.. accordring to the FL that goes to CCFC Ltd.

Think you might have to start looking in a off shore bank account for that £500k....allegedly

 

[Sky Blue Dal]

Hi!

I am new here and have been reading this forum for a couple of months now.

I just want to make a point. I do not understand why Mr Appleton is involved in issues regarding CCFCH and AHT? This is not part of his domain therefore making
statement regarding these two third parties seem to baffle me.

I myself have three LTD companies which are running along well. I know for fact that if one of my LTD companies goes into administration, the administrator is the one responsible and has a duty for that company that is in administation and not any issues outside the administrators jurisdiction. Therefore he/she cannot get involved in any issues involving any of my remaining two companies and its third party unless the third party is the one he/she is representing.

Mr Appletons duty is with CCFC ltd and them only. CCFCH's issue with AHT are classed as separate entities and I fail to understand how he is in a position to publish such statements.

The statements he makes should be regarding issues between CCFCLTD and any direct third parties invovled and not squables between two other third party outside his jurisdiction

The following is an analogy of what he is doing.

1. We have Curry/PC world. which works as a partnership but two LTD companies.

2. PC-world ltd go into administion before that, they have tranfered all there new electrical stocks and contracts to Curry's ltd.

3. An administartor is appointed to PC-World.

4. In the meantime, the PC-worlds ex wholesale suppliers who's contract had been tranfered to Curry's have stopped supplying to Curry's Ltd due to outstanding bills that are owed to them. Causing heated exchanges between the two organistions.

5. PC-World's administator makes a public statement regarding the conflict between Curry's and there suppliers and how the supplyers were happy dealing with them when Curry's was Curry's/PCworld.

The obvious response from retail business world media and the retail suppliers lawyers would be why is the Administartor of PC world getting involved in other peoples business when he should be concentrating on getting all the facts and figures ready for a quick impartial resolution for PCworld who he was appointed by.



Mr Appleton please stick to the road and stay within your boundaries. You are assigned as an administrator and spokesman for CCFCLTD. Please refrain from getting involved in other peoples problems.

Thankyou.

 

[RPHunt]

One could read into the statement by Mr Appleton that Limited & Holdings are inextricably linked and that it is impossible for other parties to do business with and for administration of Limited be effective while Holdings are not in administration.

Perhaps that was the real intent of this statement.

 

[SkyBlueBlood]

Was that written by SISU, because it sounded very much like it. A very tainted view!

 

[Bluegloucester]

One could read into the statement by Mr Appleton that Limited & Holdings are inextricably linked and that it is impossible for other parties to do business with and for administration of Limited be effective while Holdings are not in administration.

Perhaps that was the real intent of this statement.

Seem to agree with you RPH, how can Holdings be a going concern? Its income is derived from the contracts held at CCFC Ltd. No CCFC Ltd and therefore no CCFC Holdings.
Simples!

 

[CCFCDan87]

Hi!

I am new here and have been reading this forum for a couple of months now.

I just want to make a point. I do not understand why Mr Appleton is involved in issues regarding CCFCH and AHT? This is not part of his domain therefore making
statement regarding these two third parties seem to baffle me.

I myself have three LTD companies which are running along well. I know for fact that if one of my LTD companies goes into administration, the administrator is the one responsible and has a duty for that company that is in administation and not any issues outside the administrators jurisdiction. Therefore he/she cannot get involved in any issues involving any of my remaining two companies and its third party unless the third party is the one he/she is representing.

Mr Appletons duty is with CCFC ltd and them only. CCFCH's issue with AHT are classed as separate entities and I fail to understand how he is in a position to publish such statements.

The statements he makes should be regarding issues between CCFCLTD and any direct third parties invovled and not squables between two other third party outside his jurisdiction

The following is an analogy of what he is doing.

1. We have Curry/PC world. which works as a partnership but two LTD companies.

2. PC-world ltd go into administion before that, they have tranfered all there new electrical stocks and contracts to Curry's ltd.

3. An administartor is appointed to PC-World.

4. In the meantime, the PC-worlds ex wholesale suppliers who's contract had been tranfered to Curry's have stopped supplying to Curry's Ltd due to outstanding bills that are owed to them. Causing heated exchanges between the two organistions.

5. PC-World's administator makes a public statement regarding the conflict between Curry's and there suppliers and how the supplyers were happy dealing with them when Curry's was Curry's/PCworld.

The obvious response from retail business world media and the retail suppliers lawyers would be why is the Administartor of PC world getting involved in other peoples business when he should be concentrating on getting all the facts and figures ready for a quick impartial resolution for PCworld who he was appointed by.



Mr Appleton please stick to the road and stay within your boundaries. You are assigned as an administrator and spokesman for CCFCLTD. Please refrain from getting involved in other peoples problems.

Thankyou.

Great post, some sense made.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Its quite simple how I see it.

If the academy belongs to ccfc ltd then the administrator needs to pay. If it belongs to holdings then sisu needs to pay.

Why is the administrator expecting sisu to pay for something he is responsible for?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

He is limiting himself to looking after Ltd. That's why he's saying as Ltd have never paid the bill, he's not going to start now!

 

[Bluegloucester]

Its quite simple how I see it.

If the academy belongs to ccfc ltd then the administrator needs to pay. If it belongs to holdings then sisu needs to pay.

Why is the administrator expecting sisu to pay for something he is responsible for?

Historically, Holdings paid the rent. It was/is the commercial arm of the football club.

 

[lordsummerisle]

He is limiting himself to looking after Ltd. That's why he's saying as Ltd have never paid the bill, he's not going to start now!

That's how I see it as well.

dDd Higgs refuse the money for however long they've received it from Holdings before?

Don't think they did, so why do so now?

 

[oldskyblue58]

I would have thought items paid by CCFC H for CCFC form part of the management charges and inter company transactions for each year. So that items contracted for by CCFC Ltd and paid for by CCFCH appear on the correct set of accounts...... that is the set of accounts relating to which company has the liability to pay not who actually paid

 

[lordsummerisle]

I would have thought items paid by CCFC H for CCFC form part of the management charges and inter company transactions for each year. So that items contracted for by CCFC Ltd and paid for by CCFCH appear on the correct set of accounts...... that is the set of accounts relating to which company has the liability to pay not who actually paid

So Holdings paying despite not having the liability to pay is a bad thing then?