Higgs vs CCFC Court Row (26 Viewers)

[torchomatic]

Eternal damnation?

Rob, you're going to go the way of Nikki Sinclaire and Les Reid if you carry on.

 

---

[wingy]

don't think so stupot because it was disclosed in the CCFC accounts as restricted funds (ie the account balance)

£230-£260K matchday fees.

 

[Rob S]

How do they get £800 -900K from the escrow account when there was only ever £536k in it ?

Paul Harris meant Escrow + other payments = £8-900k

 

[lewys33]

Did they? I thought the impression was "we want CCFC here but if they leave then don't worry we'll ok"?

That was after CCC had bought the mortgage out though wasn't it?

 

[sky blue john]

With hindsight and in view of what's happened since? Everyone, inc Higgs and CCC / city of Cov

Fair enough but in hindsight I'm more inclined to believe it might have been a lucky escape now we know the colour of Sisu's spots.

 

[chiefdave]

2 questions. Didn't the rent agreement require the escrow to be maintained at a certain level? Also the money in the escrow didn't actually come from SISU or CCFC did it?

 

[lordsummerisle]

Paul Harris meant Escrow + other payments = £8-900k

Was obviously dazzled by your tie!

 

[Noggin]

Rob, you're going to go the way of Nikki Sinclaire and Les Reid if you carry on.

Rob was already part of the council protest with Les Reid etc yet everyone is managing to be friendly, no need to try and cause trouble.

 

[lordsummerisle]

2 questions. Didn't the rent agreement require the escrow to be maintained at a certain level? Also the money in the escrow didn't actually come from SISU or CCFC did it?

Think it came from CCFC at the time of Ricoh rental agreement.

Seem to remember that Robinson was supposed to be personally liable for the rent if the club didn't pay it.

Don't think anything came out of that in the end though.

 

[stupot07]

2 questions. Didn't the rent agreement require the escrow to be maintained at a certain level? Also the money in the escrow didn't actually come from SISU or CCFC did it?

They got a grant IIRC, I could be wrong and think I probably read that on here, but that would still be classed as their money as it was given to then for that specific purpose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[duffer]

Yes - but this is something I have on about for the past two years. Something capsized a deal that everybody wanted.
Must have been something - or someone - arriving out of nowhere.

Any mentioning of Hoffman or Elliott btw?

Do you think SISU not paying the rent, and not following through with the HoT around five months beforehand might have soured the deal? You can't really negotiate from a position of trust at that point.

 

[lewys33]

Fair enough but in hindsight I'm more inclined to believe it might have been a lucky escape now we know the colour of Sisu's spots.

CCC "secretly" talking to YB and buying the mortgage was never going to end well. SISU went to the next step and moved us to Northampton after that so who had the lucky escape?

 

[oldskyblue58]

Fisher and Seppala put the debt for rent as follows.

The original demand £1.4m less the rates rebate £230k less the escrow account £536k leaves amount due £634k (in round figures) ....... which is the amount or thereabouts in the administrators report .......

 

[Sub]

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert25 secsHere's our update from this morning's Higgs v Sisu court case as promised http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sisu-v-higgs-high-court-6909074 …

 

[Rob S]

Just to help out with clarity and everything:

I think we should get to see the stenographer's transcript and the details of the arguments inc. referred to evidence if released at the end of the case so will be easier to follow everything.

 

[olderskyblue]

Rob, you're going to go the way of Nikki Sinclaire and Les Reid if you carry on.

Blimey, is that why we haven't heard much from Les recently? Has he been "under the knife" ???

 

[Sub]

Interesting bit in simons write up

Mr Justice Leggatt said that there was nothing in law which said the charity could not negotiate with other parties and that there was nothing in law which meant the charity should have informed Sisu other negotiations were ongoing with Coventry City Council.
He said: “There was no implied term of the contract as agreed. It follows that the counter claim must be dismissed and all that remains is whether the charity is entitled to succeed in its claim.”

 

[Danceswithhorses]

Also the money in the escrow didn't actually come from SISU or CCFC did it?

IIRC grant for stadium building, but stadium already built...couldn't be given to ccfc, as it would look like state aid (yes, really!), so was agreed to put in an escrow account in case of rent arrears.

 

[duffer]

2 questions. Didn't the rent agreement require the escrow to be maintained at a certain level? Also the money in the escrow didn't actually come from SISU or CCFC did it?

I'm pretty certain a judge said that the escrow fund needed to be topped up during the whole third-party debt order process. The escrow fund was there before SISU arrived, but I don't know it's source. Escrow really means that the money doesn't belong to anyone unless certain contract terms are met or broken, as I see it.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Rob, you're going to go the way of Nikki Sinclaire and Les Reid if you carry on.

Are you saying Les Reid has had a gender reassignment operation!

 

[fernandopartridge]

Blimey, is that why we haven't heard much from Les recently? Has he been "under the knife" ???

It's Leslie, actually.

 

[Nick]

Interesting bit in simons write up

Mr Justice Leggatt said that there was nothing in law which said the charity could not negotiate with other parties and that there was nothing in law which meant the charity should have informed Sisu other negotiations were ongoing with Coventry City Council.
He said: “There was no implied term of the contract as agreed. It follows that the counter claim must be dismissed and all that remains is whether the charity is entitled to succeed in its claim.”

So there was nothing to say "If it doesn't go through, SISU pay the fees"? This is the bit I don't get.

 

[fernandopartridge]

So there was nothing to say "If it doesn't go through, SISU pay the fees"? This is the bit I don't get.

No - he's probably saying that Higgs / ACL haven't broken any laws, they might have broken the exclusivity agreement but that's to be established.

 

[Nick]

No - he's probably saying that Higgs / ACL haven't broken any laws, they might have broken the exclusivity agreement but that's to be established.

What does he mean by terms of the contract as agreed?

 

[wingy]

What does he mean by terms of the contract as agreed?

The charity had insisted on a clause which said Sisu would cover their costs for negotiations - up to £29,000 - if talks broke down, when they commenced discussions with Sisu.

 

[wingy]

No - he's probably saying that Higgs / ACL haven't broken any laws, they might have broken the exclusivity agreement but that's to be established.

seems like he's established it from his comments.

 

[Nick]

The charity had insisted on a clause which said Sisu would cover their costs for negotiations - up to £29,000 - if talks broke down, when they commenced discussions with Sisu.

But is that is the one the judge said isn't there?

 

[fernandopartridge]

What does he mean by terms of the contract as agreed?

I am not sure whether he's saying there was no implied term of exclusivity beyond the 6 week period, or whether he's on about something else altogether.

EDIT - Just read the CT story:

Sisu’s QC Rhodri Thompson had argued that, even though a six-week ‘exclusivity’ period for negotiations between Higgs and Sisu had expired, there was an implied term that the negotiations were continuing ‘in good faith’ and that the charity was not talking to any other parties.

So yes, that is what the judge was talking about.

 

[chiefdave]

But is that is the one the judge said isn't there?

No he's saying SISU never inserted a similar clause to cover their costs. He hasn't got the bit about Higgs costs yet.

 

[Nick]

I am not sure whether he's saying there was no implied term of exclusivity beyond the 6 week period, or whether he's on about something else altogether.

EDIT - Just read the CT story:



So yes, that is what the judge was talking about.

Ah that makes sense now, cheers!

 

[wingy]

He's saying there were no implied terms in the Contract that had the clause ,that should talks break down SISU were liable to £29k.contribution to Higgs costs incurred ,and once the six week period of HOT was over no right to expect exclusivity.

 

[Sub]

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert4 minsHarris says he sought, and was given, assurances by Chris West at CCC that Sisu had been informed of CCC Ricoh bank debt buy out plan.

 

[Nick]

He's saying there were no implied terms in the Contract that had the clause ,that should talks break down SISU were liable to £29k.contribution to Higgs costs incurred ,and once the six week period of HOT was over no right to expect exclusivity.

I am lost now, so that term for the legal fees wasn't there either?

 

[shmmeee]

I am just amazed how many legal experts we have on Sky Blue Talk, whoever loses I am sure will be recruiting them in advance of the JR.

I will happily admit I know nothing about the law an understand less than 10% of Rob or Simons posts.

 

[Nick]

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert4 minsHarris says he sought, and was given, assurances by Chris West at CCC that Sisu had been informed of CCC Ricoh bank debt buy out plan.

It sounds as if Higgs might be dropping the council in it?