Legal action (13 Viewers)

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2016

oldskyblue58 said:
Couple of comments

- Wasps are named on the second JR as interested parties. That action is suspended pending the outcome of the JR1
- I do not see why the two sides should not be talking even if the legal action between primarily CCC and SISU is still going on
- personally I think it is a convenient excuse. Wasps are being hard nosed, saying make a decision as to which way you want to go. "we" as in Wasps "need to know which way we are heading in the longer term" and are basically saying stay or go but choose one. (the court cases will go on for years yet)

Completely agree.
What I am asking is can we see if there is an agreement that we would actually be happy with first that also includes the academy.
If there is and it suits us. Then we agree to ditch the legal action on signing it.
It's seems the only compromise that could resolve this.
As many have pointed out you ditch the legal action first then discover you can't make an agreement anyway.
However I must say as a Cov fan it seems very bizzare to choose legal action that doesn't benefit Cov over the long term future of the club.
In one respect I am pleasantly surprised a lot of people in the past have said Cov City is the most important thing. However now they seem to have a broader perspective and are saying finding out the truth and letting the legal process see its natural cause is far more important.
So fair play.

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

chiefdave said:
I was making a general point not something specific to this case.

This is a general point?

"So given that letting the legal action run its course will last years beyond the end of our current agreement to play at the Ricoh what do you think will happen when we have nowhere to play?"

chiefdave · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
This is a general point?

That isn't as it was in response to your post on this specific case. The original post you responded to was general.

chiefdave said:
Also I'm not sure I'm comfortable with saying action against public bodies and their use of taxpayers money should be called to a halt if a company, not involved in the legal action, but who are in a better position financially say so.

Any chance of an answer to the question of what you think will happen when the legal action is still ongoing and the current Ricoh deal ends?

Brylowes · Jun 6, 2016

oldfiver said:
Is he also not part American?

Isn'theis

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

chiefdave said:
Any chance of an answer to the question of what you think will happen when the legal action is still ongoing and the current Ricoh deal ends?

They'll make arrangements to play elsewhere.

Nick · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
They'll make arrangements to play elsewhere.

So effectively told to stop if they want to play in Coventry?

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
They'll make arrangements to play elsewhere.

Hopefully not a ten k stadium after been "forced" out

Nick · Jun 6, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Hopefully not a ten k stadium after been "forced" out

It would be forced out wouldn't it? Pretty much blackmail.

Astute · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
They'll make arrangements to play elsewhere.

So would you agree that what Wasps have said is stop all legal action or find somewhere else to play?

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2016

Nick said:
So effectively told to stop if they want to play in Coventry?

I get that impression.
Wasps can't tell us to stop.
However they are well within their rights to say they don't want to conclude a 20-25 year agreement with someone wrangled in legal action that eventually drags them in a third party.
Not agreeing with their action just saying they are well within their rights to do it and it seems they are.
As stands we now need to do a deal with them to get access to our academy and stadium.
So we only have a few options....

We either are genuinely going to build a new stadium/adapt BPA and we have a couple of years to do it.

We try a Northampton again whilst building a new stadium.

Or

We exchange the legal action for a 20-25 year agreement on both academy and club. ( if we can find an agreement that we are actually happy with)

I can think of other options really. I suppose the only shining light here is other than the Northampton option we will possibly finally know our future.

Grendel · Jun 6, 2016

Lol first it's 10 years, then 20 years, now 25 years.

There is of course no correlation between dropping legal action and securing any sort of deal at all.

Which most people on here have sussed out.

oldfiver · Jun 6, 2016

Grendel said:
Lol first it's 10 years, then 20 years, now 25 years.

There is of course no correlation between dropping legal action and securing any sort of deal at all.

Which most people on here have sussed out.

It was 10 years but with no figures attached after year 2 nor a break clause if CCFC did not like the year 3 proposal

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2016

Astute said:
So would you agree that what Wasps have said is stop all legal action or find somewhere else to play?

They can't say that, as Grendel keeps pointing out to me that's not what has been said.
However as I keep pointing out to Grendel that is what it seems to be if you read between the lines.
For me personally I have always found the legal action a complete waste of time and money, as JR1 has shown.
It seems in civil cases the courts are less forgiving if they think you have created this situation yourself. Hence I don't hold JR2 in much regard either.
So if Wasps seem to value getting rid of it then use this to our advantage and get the deal we need for a secure future long term IMO

Grendel · Jun 6, 2016

oldfiver said:
It was 10 years but with no figures attached after year 2 nor a break clause if CCFC did not like the year 3 proposal

I was advised on a no break clause.

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2016

Grendel said:
Lol first it's 10 years, then 20 years, now 25 years.

There is of course no correlation between dropping legal action and securing any sort of deal at all.

Which most people on here have sussed out.

Told you Astute
Wasps are not saying drop the legals in order to conclude a long term deal :banghead::banghead:

Yes DA said it was a 20-25 year deal, did you miss this?

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

Astute said:
So would you agree that what Wasps have said is stop all legal action or find somewhere else to play?

No, they've said the negotiations are on hold whilst the legal matters are ongoing.

JR1 may conclude and a decision made by SISU not to proceed with JR2.

Nick · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
No, they've said the negotiations are on hold whilst the legal matters are ongoing.

JR1 may conclude and a decision made by SISU not to proceed with JR2.

Which is the same thing isn't it? As SISU not proceeding is them dropping the legals.

Grendel · Jun 6, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Told you Astute
Wasps are not saying drop the legals in order to conclude a long term deal :banghead::banghead:

Yes DA said it was a 20-25 year deal, did you miss this?

It's a 10 year deal on offer.

Astute · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
No, they've said the negotiations are on hold whilst the legal matters are ongoing.

JR1 may conclude and a decision made by SISU not to proceed with JR2.

JR1 could take longer than the present rental agreement. Then what?

Grendel · Jun 6, 2016

oldskyblue58 said:
Couple of comments

- Wasps are named on the second JR as interested parties. That action is suspended pending the outcome of the JR1
- I do not see why the two sides should not be talking even if the legal action between primarily CCC and SISU is still going on
- personally I think it is a convenient excuse. Wasps are being hard nosed, saying make a decision as to which way you want to go. "we" as in Wasps "need to know which way we are heading in the longer term" and are basically saying stay or go but choose one. (the court cases will go on for years yet)

Yeah I agree.

People are getting far too hung up on the vague legal response.

What they really should be looking at is the directness of the actual response. This effectively is "here is a deal take it or leave it"

Wasps are giving the impression they want budge an inch. I suppose why should they? They hold all the cards.

If a tenant was looking to extend and literally had nowhere else to go what's really going to concern them? A legal action against the previous owner if the property or how much they can screw out of them in terms of rent?

It's obvious really and pretty much confirmed by the bold statements they make.

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

Astute said:
JR1 could take longer than the present rental agreement. Then what?

As I've said we make arrangements to play elsewhere.

Astute · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
As I've said we make arrangements to play elsewhere.

So you agree that Wasps have said either SISU drops all legal action or they find somewhere else for CCFC to play?

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

Astute said:
So you agree that Wasps have said either SISU drops all legal action or they find somewhere else for CCFC to play?

No, they've said the negotiations are on hold whilst the legal matters are ongoing.

JR1 may conclude and a decision made by SISU not to proceed with JR2.

Nick · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
No, they've said the negotiations are on hold whilst the legal matters are ongoing.

JR1 may conclude and a decision made by SISU not to proceed with JR2.

Again, SISU choosing not to proceed is them dropping it isn't it?

rupert_bear · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
As I've said we make arrangements to play elsewhere.

Like where ? Northampton won't happen again and I doubt the FL will allow anywhere else. Remember sisu gave a commitment to identify a site for any new ground, have they ?

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

Nick said:
Again, SISU choosing not to proceed is them dropping it isn't it?

No.

If a legal proceeding hasn't started you can't drop it.

Nick · Jun 6, 2016

rupert_bear said:
Like where ? Northampton won't happen again and I doubt the FL will allow anywhere else. Remember sisu gave a commitment to identify a site for any new ground, have they ?

I am pretty sure if the FL look and see that the club is being forced out and blackmailed by the landlord they would make exceptions

Nick · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
No.

If a legal proceeding hasn't started you can't drop it.

Jeez, choosing not to go ahead with something you have planned to and going ahead and then stopping it is pretty much dropping it.

Pretty sure you understood what Astute was getting at.

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

rupert_bear said:
Like where ? Northampton won't happen again and I doubt the FL will allow anywhere else. Remember sisu gave a commitment to identify a site for any new ground, have they ?

That would be, if required, for SISU to make the necessary arrangements - Walsall was mooted previously.

Yes they have as a back up plan to moving to The Butts.

chiefdave · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
That would be, if required, for SISU to make the necessary arrangements

See the its all SISU's fault, no blame on Wasps PR is starting already just in case we do have to leave.

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

Nick said:
Jeez, choosing not to go ahead with something you have planned to and going ahead and then stopping it is pretty much dropping it.

'Pretty much' - Honestly!?

If legal proceedings haven't started you can't drop them.

The answer to your question remains no.

armybike · Jun 6, 2016

chiefdave said:
See the its all SISU's fault, no blame on Wasps PR is starting already just in case we do have to leave.

What are you on about fault?

If a situation was reached whereby it was necessary for an alternative venue to be found, who would make those arrangements?

Nick · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
'Pretty much' - Honestly!?

If legal proceedings haven't started you can't drop them.

The answer to your question remains no.

Dropping them or choosing not to go ahead with them is the same result, either way it means no legal action. You knew that was what Astute meant.

chiefdave · Jun 6, 2016

armybike said:
What are you on about fault?

What I'm on about is the fact that our current deal at the Ricoh ends before JR1 is likely to run its course, let alone JR2.

If Wasps won't restart talks with CCFC while SISU are engaged with CCC in JR1 or JR2 that will impact the club severely. We will have no choice other than to leave the Ricoh. It is naive in the extreme to think it won't be present as the fault of CCFC and / or SISU rather than those operating the stadium.

rupert_bear · Jun 6, 2016

Nick said:
I am pretty sure if the FL look and see that the club is being forced out and blackmailed by the landlord they would make exceptions

I would take an educated guess the FL would not see SISU as being blackmailed, sisu gave an undertaking to propose their new ground venture ages ago and haven't have they ? That is why the FL gave us a concession to their 10 year ground rule and allowed us a 2+2 temporary deal to rent the Ricoh and I seem to remember at the time some rumblings from other clubs about it. Remember there are loads of ex FL clubs with very adequate grounds looking to get in the FL.

Legal action (13 Viewers)

Legal action

No the two areas are seperate and Wasps shouldn't be sticking their noses in that area

Yes, the legal action doesn't help CCFC so if it helps secure the future of the club why not?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency