Higgs vs CCFC Court Row (40 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
The original plan was nice and simple. Spend some cash, go for a quick promotion, bail.
The problem with such a plan is that it doesn't have a soft landing, if the foundations have been knocked down by their predecessors, and the current owners make no effort to build them back up again.
The problem then when it comes down to it is the apocalypse scenario. When it fails, there's no sentiment to accept it fails and to move it on elsewhere. It's where the absolute doom will come in, as there's no need to keep the club going for political/reputational/emotional reasons.
That doesn't mean if you were to offer them a couple of miracle seasons and two promotions, they wouldn't take it!
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Oh I think your confused. Its Higgs and sisu who are consistent here. Its the council who are not. You know Dave that caring sharing council whose every word you hang on to.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I have no idea why you think I give a toss about the council, I couldn't care less about them! I would hope, assuming they have done no wrong, Higgs don't come out of this worse off but what happens to the council is of no interest to me.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Or you could what I'm doing Tony and wait for the final verdict.
Find it much less a strain than trying to second guess everything and conjure up theories and say 'this must mean this' and 'that must mean that.'
I'm just sitting chilling and waiting for the court to decide for me. Trust them slightly more than the general public posting on a football forum.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Can anyone summarise what's happened so far?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
You'll be in for a shock if they decide you're liable...
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Judge thought the counterclaim was over the top and had no merit, some people believe SISU always knew this and just wanted more evidence out in the open.
PWKH didn't tie a balloon on Fisher's car, but he did put one under a windscreen wiper, importantly it was partially deflated.
Simon Gilbert has more twitter followers.
A chap who posts as Rob S has a nice tie.
There's been a lot of talk about things that happened a long time after the £29k was or wasn't due, but this doesn't seem to matter, and I don't pretend to know why.
Last edited:
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Bloody hell grendull. I thought you said that this thread was pointless. You're giving Rob S a run for his money on number of post today and he's doing running commentary.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The councils interest is to have a profitable stadium. That's where your real issue is.
No future with SISU
New Member
Who said he lied?
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Charity trustee tells High Court hearing he was assured Sky Blues would be informed in advance about council deal for ACL debt A charity trustee has told a court he was assured the Sky Blues WOULD be told in advance about a council deal to buy out ACL’s debt.
The claim came from Paul Harris, a trustee of the Alan Edward Higgs Charity and a board member of ACL – the firm which operates the Ricoh Arena.
Coventry City owners Sisu say they were kept in the dark about the council’s plan to buy ACL’s debt from Yorkshire Bank.
The hearing centres on a dispute for the £29,000 capped costs the charity says it is owed by Sisu after negotiations to buy the charity’s stake in ACL broke down.
The claim emerged during the second day of the court hearing between the Higgs charity and Sisu at Birmingham High Court.
Under questioning from Sisu’s QC, Mr Harris said that, during an ACL board meeting in August 2012, he had spoken to Chris West, finance officer at Coventry City Council and a fellow board member of ACL.
The court has previously heard evidence that after the exclusivity period had ended the council planned to buy ACL’s debt from Yorkshire Bank and effectively become ACL’s mortgage lenders themselves without the knowledge of Sisu - who claim they were still in negotiations with the Higgs charity.
Mr Harris insisted he wanted the charity to be seen as acting ‘‘ethically’’ and therefore wanted the council to inform Sisu of their plan to buy ACL’s debt from Yorkshire Bank.
He insisted he was given assurances, by Mr West, that Sisu had already been informed of the plan by the council - and that the conversation was minuted.
He said: “I said if we are going to change the way we are looking at a potential deal we should be generally open about that.
“I received verbal confirmation of that at the board meeting on the 29th from Chris West, an ACL director.
“He told me Sisu had been informed. I can’t say whether they were. All I can say is I sought that confirmation and I was given that confirmation.
“I wanted the city council, who were in dialogue with Sisu and the trustees, to be very clear about what they were going to do as part of that restructure.
“I was given assurances of that and they were minuted assurances.”
The minutes referred to by Mr Harris could not be entered as evidence as they belong to ACL which is not directly involved in these proceedings. However, they could come to light during an impending judicial review into the council’s deal with Yorkshire Bank scheduled for June.
Earlier the court heard a memo from Mr West to Martin Reeves, chief executive of the council, stated that Sisu would be likely to see the council’s move to buy the bank debt as a ‘hostile act’.
Chairman of the Higgs trustees, Marilyn Knatchbull-Hugessen, was also called to the stand later in the proceedings - as were fellow trustees Roly Higgs and Lucy Barlow.
Mrs Knatchbull-Hugessen was asked by Mr Thompson if she was hostile towards Sisu - and the organisation’s boss Joy Seppala - because she felt the charity had spent enough money and Sisu had not put in enough into the football club.
She said: “Actually, I do think we have put enough in. But it doesn’t come down to that.
“It comes down to the use of threats and bullying to gain a commercial advantage, with which I don’t agree.”
Sisu are defending a claim from the Higgs charity for costs capped at £29,000 which they say they are owed after negotiations to buy the charity’s stake in Ricoh Arena operating firm ACL broke down.
Part of Sisu’s defence is that the Higgs Charity colluded with the council to complete the deal with Yorkshire Bank - thus making any deal with Sisu for the charity’s share impossible.
Mr Justice Leggatt had made clear earlier in the hearing that the Higgs Charity had no legal obligation to inform Sisu of talks with other parties after an ‘exclusivity’ period had expired at the end of July 2012 - leading to the dismissal of Sisu’s £290,000 counter claim.
The trial continues.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/higgs-v-sisu-latest-i-6911141
The claim came from Paul Harris, a trustee of the Alan Edward Higgs Charity and a board member of ACL – the firm which operates the Ricoh Arena.
Coventry City owners Sisu say they were kept in the dark about the council’s plan to buy ACL’s debt from Yorkshire Bank.
The hearing centres on a dispute for the £29,000 capped costs the charity says it is owed by Sisu after negotiations to buy the charity’s stake in ACL broke down.
The claim emerged during the second day of the court hearing between the Higgs charity and Sisu at Birmingham High Court.
Under questioning from Sisu’s QC, Mr Harris said that, during an ACL board meeting in August 2012, he had spoken to Chris West, finance officer at Coventry City Council and a fellow board member of ACL.
The court has previously heard evidence that after the exclusivity period had ended the council planned to buy ACL’s debt from Yorkshire Bank and effectively become ACL’s mortgage lenders themselves without the knowledge of Sisu - who claim they were still in negotiations with the Higgs charity.
Mr Harris insisted he wanted the charity to be seen as acting ‘‘ethically’’ and therefore wanted the council to inform Sisu of their plan to buy ACL’s debt from Yorkshire Bank.
He insisted he was given assurances, by Mr West, that Sisu had already been informed of the plan by the council - and that the conversation was minuted.
He said: “I said if we are going to change the way we are looking at a potential deal we should be generally open about that.
“I received verbal confirmation of that at the board meeting on the 29th from Chris West, an ACL director.
“He told me Sisu had been informed. I can’t say whether they were. All I can say is I sought that confirmation and I was given that confirmation.
“I wanted the city council, who were in dialogue with Sisu and the trustees, to be very clear about what they were going to do as part of that restructure.
“I was given assurances of that and they were minuted assurances.”
The minutes referred to by Mr Harris could not be entered as evidence as they belong to ACL which is not directly involved in these proceedings. However, they could come to light during an impending judicial review into the council’s deal with Yorkshire Bank scheduled for June.
Earlier the court heard a memo from Mr West to Martin Reeves, chief executive of the council, stated that Sisu would be likely to see the council’s move to buy the bank debt as a ‘hostile act’.
Chairman of the Higgs trustees, Marilyn Knatchbull-Hugessen, was also called to the stand later in the proceedings - as were fellow trustees Roly Higgs and Lucy Barlow.
Mrs Knatchbull-Hugessen was asked by Mr Thompson if she was hostile towards Sisu - and the organisation’s boss Joy Seppala - because she felt the charity had spent enough money and Sisu had not put in enough into the football club.
She said: “Actually, I do think we have put enough in. But it doesn’t come down to that.
“It comes down to the use of threats and bullying to gain a commercial advantage, with which I don’t agree.”
Sisu are defending a claim from the Higgs charity for costs capped at £29,000 which they say they are owed after negotiations to buy the charity’s stake in Ricoh Arena operating firm ACL broke down.
Part of Sisu’s defence is that the Higgs Charity colluded with the council to complete the deal with Yorkshire Bank - thus making any deal with Sisu for the charity’s share impossible.
Mr Justice Leggatt had made clear earlier in the hearing that the Higgs Charity had no legal obligation to inform Sisu of talks with other parties after an ‘exclusivity’ period had expired at the end of July 2012 - leading to the dismissal of Sisu’s £290,000 counter claim.
The trial continues.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/higgs-v-sisu-latest-i-6911141
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Ultimately a Ricoh return is the priority.
I'm sure this case will go Higgs way. If it doesn't that would be a positive as it may result in a deal being done before a JR. This is unlikely and so we wait until June. If sisu fail then its bye bye CCFC. Pick your side carefully and be careful what you wish for.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
So your saying that you were wrong yesterday when you said it was pointless?
Astute
Well-Known Member
You missed out the part where someone thought they were witty when they said Tonylinc is a solicitor
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
duffer
Well-Known Member
Well written as ever, but just to pick you up on a couple of things here. A successful club may once have been SISU's aim, but now it seems to have become secondary to getting their hands on the Ricoh for as little as possible (regardless of who gets screwed over). Even if they achieve that aim it's debateable that it will greatly benefit the club, but it will perhaps give SISU a way to recoup some of their losses.
If you wanted a successful club right now, the smart move would surely be to come back to the Ricoh and take advantage of the extra 10,000 or so fans every home game, whilst perhaps negotiating over the other things you might need. However, as we know, that's not likely to happen at the moment.
With regard to the council, I think the only reason they got involved in the Ricoh in the first place was because they didn't want to see the club fall into (self-inflicted) oblivion. It certainly hasn't been a cash cow, and nor was it ever likely to be. I don't think the motivation here ever changed much; I can't see that an organisation largely staffed from people within the City, controlled by those elected by the City, would ever set out to deliberately damage the club that represents the City. SISU, I think we broadly agree, don't really care. What matters to them is the bottom line, and they are willing to threaten and risk the club's very survival to give themselves the maximum chance of improving it.
Last edited:
Yes I agree, Higgs seem to have acted in good faith and have put the blame firmly on CCC.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Pick SISU because if they lose that could be the end of our club?
So that explains your posts then.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Blame for what?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I think that the best thing you can do is wait for the judges summing up and form an opinion on that Rob. That's what I'm going to do.
Thank Simon, he did the hard part. In fact we should pool together and buy him a new pen for tomorrow.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Astute
Well-Known Member
If you want to find someone guilty that hasn't had a chance to speak then yes. But you have always backed SISU all the way anyway so it isn't much of a surprise.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
But what about Masterchef? Celia's dish looks like cat vomit!
No future with SISU
New Member
If you spend £50m and end up in a shed when you had the use of a mansion you are in big trouble. I suppose if they had got the use of wembley it would have got my seal of approval.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Ah right, well thank you Simon on behalf of the Forum, you have kept us all well informed and it's nice to get the opinion of someone who has a good vantage point on the whole situation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Otis
Well-Known Member
Well I'm pliable and that's good enough for me.
I think that somewhere in that sentence you are commending me for being consistent?
Thank you!
No future with SISU
New Member
SISU are consistent BULLSHITTERS
duffer
Well-Known Member
I'm recording it. Generally speaking it just highlights me for the brutish ignoramus I am - the wife tires of me asking questions like, "what's a jus" and "is a ganache just a posh chocolate cake then". But when I ask her to sum up the relevant points from SISU's latest court outing she is utterly stumped, so I can always get my own back.
Plus I think she secretly likes my oldskyblue58 t-shirt.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I'm recording it. Generally speaking it just highlights me for the brutish ignoramus I am - the wife tires of me asking questions like, "what's a jus" and "is a ganache just a posh chocolate cake then". But when I ask her to sum up the relevant points from SISU's latest court outing she is utterly stumped, so I can always get my own back.
Plus I think she secretly likes my oldskyblue58 t-shirt.
I would buy an oldskyblue58 t-shirt. And an "I'm Grendel" t-shirt.