covcity4life
Well-Known Member
Is there really any chance sisu r willing to accept an offer now?
Your house belongs to you, the Ricoh belonged to the people of Coventry ccc were supposed to act in the people's best interest
Sent from my 5010X using Tapatalk
I think that drawbridge is 90% up alreadyThere is another issue we are missing, if as we think sisu appeal where does that leave us regarding where we are to play next season. Should they appeal I'd think Wasps will pull the drawbridge up regarding negotiating a rental deal. The Football League could come demanding to know where our home games are to be played, they can insist on a 10 year plan too. Failure to have anywhere could reduce the value of CCFC significantly.
The judge listened to all the arguments from lawyers for both sidesCan someone summarise what's happened today? Really can't be bothered to read through 29 pages.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
The judge listened to all the arguments from lawyers for both sides
After a short break he ruled against SISU and their allies in all cases
His language and brevity in delivering the verdicts suggest to me that only an idiotic organisation would bother with an appeal
Three years ago I could give you the benefit of the doubt, but now it's just delusion.
At every step you have been wrong.
Time to accept it and move on. You backed the wrong horse and let your hatred of the council cloud your judgement.
The shit the likes of you Nick and Grendel have been spewing towards anyone that didn't join you has been ridiculous. Be a man and accept you fucked up.
There is no conspiracy, there are no plants, we just have shitty owners.
very few options left for SISU and none are very palatable for them.
The action they brought for JR2 missed the point of a judicial review, was poorly constructed and misunderstood the facts procedures and process. You cannot just throw reams of "evidence" around painting a half picture hoping it might stick. Lot of reputations other than Seppala damaged by such poorly constructed/founded arguments. It just amounts to misuse of the legal process in my opinion
Time they stopped wasting everyone's time and money, time they stopped damaging our club and its reputation, time they were gone and good riddance
Never mind shower she needs a jet wash.she looks better in the shower
It seems they were ill prepared and wanted to make amendments. The judge even asked them what they were actually claiming. After over 2 years you would think they would have a well prepared and thought through argument complying with normal JR procedures.
They nearly lost on a technicality.
If I were Joy I would be looking into claiming damages from Rhodri. He seems to have led her to believe that she had a chance- when most even on here saw that she had little chance ( she should have read SBT instead of listening to Rhodri ).
He will have some form of client liability insurance. My lawyer made a mistake and his insurance covered it after confirming that I was falsely advised.
Can someone summarise what's happened today? Really can't be bothered to read through 29 pages.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Just catching up on the days action. Apologies if I'm being thick but am I missing something here? We know that selling a freehold has rules attached that need to be followed. The argument for many months has been that its not a freehold sale so those rules don't apply.Mr Goudie argues, from previous case law, that council’s do not have to market land prior to sale and it doesn’t have to get a valuation.
Mr Goudie says extending the lease to 250 years “effectively made it a freehold valuation”.
Just catching up on the days action. Apologies if I'm being thick but am I missing something here? We know that selling a freehold has rules attached that need to be followed. The argument for many months has been that its not a freehold sale so those rules don't apply.
Isn't the council's QC basically saying it is effectively the freehold but we don't have to follow the rules if we don't feel like it?
Anyway, on to the next appeal.
Or she is paying and driving the protocol. Clients don't always listen to the expert advice. They sometimes think their ego knows better.
So CCC keeping the arena without a tenant, losing money on it, having to make repayments on the loan secured on it and leaving themselves to endless litigation from SISU was in the best interest of the local people?Your house belongs to you, the Ricoh belonged to the people of Coventry ccc were supposed to act in the people's best interest
Sent from my 5010X using Tapatalk
Just catching up on the days action. Apologies if I'm being thick but am I missing something here? We know that selling a freehold has rules attached that need to be followed. The argument for many months has been that its not a freehold sale so those rules don't apply.
Isn't the council's QC basically saying it is effectively the freehold but we don't have to follow the rules if we don't feel like it?
Anyway, on to the next appeal.
Im not against the sale of the arena Astute, just think with a little more negotiating nous they could easily have secured a much better return for coventarians, I respect any guy who pays his mortgage off at a good few years before retirement so we'll done buddy, on the other I guess we'll have to agree to disagreeSo CCC keeping the arena without a tenant, losing money on it, having to make repayments on the loan secured on it and leaving themselves to endless litigation from SISU was in the best interest of the local people?
Yes my house belongs to me. I plan to retire in about 10 years when my youngest two are 18 and 19. I will be giving the house to the kids. But if any of them try taking the piss they will get nothing.
Can someone summarise what's happened today? Really can't be bothered to read through 29 pages.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I understand that. But how has that decision been arrived at given what has been said in court today?What the judge has ruled is that there are no arguable grounds that the rules or process have not been complied with. That the CCC process and decision was appropriate to this set of facts. Legal and above board be it viewed as long lease extension or equivalent freehold. That the requirements of s123 had been complied with as far as or if they apply
But who would they have sold to? Wasps only bought it because it was a bargain. SISU didn't want to take on the loan. In the end they were only offering Higgs 1m for their 50%. And how many people have the need of a football ground?Im not against the sale of the arena Astute, just think with a little more negotiating nous they could easily have secured a much better return for coventarians
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?