sky blues in court today (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter covkid69
- Start date
IF..the rent contract was a legally binding agreement
And I can't conceive any reason why it wouldn't be.then there can only be one outcome to the hearing, and that is the court to order the payment of the arrears owing.
If SISU won't/Cant, the ball will be firmly stuck in the ACL court.
A dangerous game of chicken is about to be entered into, with neither side wanting to lose face and back down, but with the very existence of the club at stake.
I get the impression that the Council/ACL will be damaged far greater than SISU, it means nothing to the owners if we go Belly up, and with the Rent issue in court today, what an ideal opportunity for SISU to abandon ship, on the grounds of inflexible Landlords enforcing an agreement that is no longer sustainable.
ACL are sure to become the bad guys, by some of the fans, but if you take the emotion out of the equation, legally and morally there was only one course of action they could take.
Sky Blue Sheepy
New Member
Typical. This is the most excited I've been about on-field stuff and I can see this being messy...
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Wish some people would stop being melodramatic. Its hardly going to threaten the existance of the club.
Stevec189
New Member
It is I believe possible for ACL to issue a winding up order to get the money back they are owed but I'll leave OSB and Godiva et el to confirm this. PUSB
Sky Blue Sheepy
New Member
Not sure I necessarily agree. SISU lose the case and decide they don't fancy funding us, then things get messy...
coundonskyblue
New Member
If ACL win and Sisu still refuse to pay does that mean an automatic winding up order is in place or would ACL have to reapply to court for that?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
As CCFC are the only client they have this will rather a pointless persuit. An adjournment with further negotiation is the only conceivable ourmtcome.
skybluebeduff
Well-Known Member
Why would they sign all them players (free or not) then let the club go out of existence? I'm inept at business but that even to me sounds retarded.
Stevec189
New Member
As I understand it the rent was paid into the ESCROW fund which ACL drew down from. That ESCROW account is now empty and there CCFC are in breech of contract for not putting funds into the ESCROW. Might be wrong but I think that is correct.
Whilst i understand ACL taking this route to get what they're owed, surely a winding up order would see them worse off. Some rent a month is better than none. It's not like anyone else will move in to the Ricoh if CCFC are no more.
They'll be stuck with a stadium used for one gig a year and conference halls that get the low key exhibitions because of the lack of hotels in the area.
They'll be stuck with a stadium used for one gig a year and conference halls that get the low key exhibitions because of the lack of hotels in the area.
coundonskyblue
New Member
That is my understanding of it as well. The account is empty so ACL have not received this months payment.
Also it is a condition of the contract that the ESCROW is kept topped up.
Stevec189
New Member
Or they extend the exhibition space and build a hotel over the East and South stands (think I ve got that right?) Jewson and Tersco is what I mean! Just a thought.....
ericagradus
Member
You are right...
The lease is the 'contract' that requires payment of rent and also contains forfieture provisions for non - payment of rent. But unless there is someone lined up to occupy the stadium and pay rent then little point in forfieting the lease.
The 'escrow account' people are referring to is a rent deposit deed. This is security for the landlord for breach of the lease, this includes non payment of rent. The landlord is entitled to draw from the rent deposit for non payment of rent, but there is an oligation on the tenant to top up the deposit back to the original rent deposit amount.
So basically, from what I understand, the rent has not been paid, the landlord has used the rent deposit monies and the tenant has failed to top up the account. Therefore breaching the rent deposit deed.
I hope that clears things up for everyone.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
there was a sports lawyer on cwr this morning (8:10 ish) that basically said if they dont have the funds but intend to pay then might be an adjournment...... however if CCFC are simply saying wont pay then in his words "CCFC have a serious problem".
he also confirmed that in his opinion this arguement that because we have gone down a division and not trading so well rent should go down is a "nonsense" It doesnt stand up because there is a valid contract for rent
CCFC are not the only tenant at the Ricoh, the casino, Hotel are there too.......... with CCFC in League 1 then income streams will be down so ACL are already feeling the effects of a poor under performing tenant and yet they are expected to reduce their income further because SISU/CCFC cant manage their own affairs ?
I would imagine that ACL management are putting extra efforts in to getting exhibition and event income to cover shortfalls from CCFC. Wonder how much a band like Take That paid to use the stadium, wonder how much other income they brought in..... wonder how many other events they could bring to the Ricoh if not bound by the football season.
Could ACL put a winding up order on CCFC - yes. Will they want to - No. Pretty obviously no constructive proposals or negotiations have come from the club (otherwise ACL would not be going to court) ...... the purpose of this action is to force a resolution. ACL is a business too with costs to pay, plans to make etc ...... it can not allow itself to be left in limbo because a tenant refuses to pay. What ACL want and have always wanted is a tenant with a viable business, and they have been willing to negotiate, i dont think the same could be said of CCFC in terms of negotiation.
Plus dont think a judge is going to have much sympathy if he has to look at the figures or the number of players brought in instead of paying the rent.
he also confirmed that in his opinion this arguement that because we have gone down a division and not trading so well rent should go down is a "nonsense" It doesnt stand up because there is a valid contract for rent
CCFC are not the only tenant at the Ricoh, the casino, Hotel are there too.......... with CCFC in League 1 then income streams will be down so ACL are already feeling the effects of a poor under performing tenant and yet they are expected to reduce their income further because SISU/CCFC cant manage their own affairs ?
I would imagine that ACL management are putting extra efforts in to getting exhibition and event income to cover shortfalls from CCFC. Wonder how much a band like Take That paid to use the stadium, wonder how much other income they brought in..... wonder how many other events they could bring to the Ricoh if not bound by the football season.
Could ACL put a winding up order on CCFC - yes. Will they want to - No. Pretty obviously no constructive proposals or negotiations have come from the club (otherwise ACL would not be going to court) ...... the purpose of this action is to force a resolution. ACL is a business too with costs to pay, plans to make etc ...... it can not allow itself to be left in limbo because a tenant refuses to pay. What ACL want and have always wanted is a tenant with a viable business, and they have been willing to negotiate, i dont think the same could be said of CCFC in terms of negotiation.
Plus dont think a judge is going to have much sympathy if he has to look at the figures or the number of players brought in instead of paying the rent.
Last edited:
coundonskyblue
New Member
That is an interesting point. This seasons lower attendences will certainly affect income for the Casino, yet I don't see what argument they would have for a rent reduction.
ashbyjan
Well-Known Member
If negotiations were so advanced and agreed ready to be signed in the next few days as spinmeister Fisher claims then I doubt ACL would be wasting money taking City to court - I think its the very fact that ACL are taking them to court that has forced them to stop being belligerent and actually negotiate. They have been made offers over the rent by the council but have refused to give assurances the council sought that the saved money would be reinvested in the club and not spirited away to the Cayman Islands. Cov City is supposed to be a community club yet by this non payment of rent it is acting against the interests of the citizens of Coventry - after all they are the ultimate owners of the Ricoh.
ashbyjan
Well-Known Member
Compass have the contract to handle all the catering at the Ricoh - they signed a contract and pay an annual fee for the exclusive rights and signed the contract on the basis that one of the major tenants CCFC generated a certain attendance and therefore a certain return for them. Should they now refuse to pay ACL the agreed contracted fee because attendances will be down now CCFC have been relegated through no fault of Compasses? Personally I would actually have more sympathy with Compass because CCFC/SISU have only themselves to blame for relegation and the subsequent drop in income.
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Everyone has interesting points of view but i believe this to be just a storm in a tea cup.
Not sure, but they have to go through the court process even if SISU are saying it is almost sorted. These things take time, so in case it doesn't happen the process is under way. The proceedings were adjorned today, so maybe some truth in it.
The Penguin
Well-Known Member
Yes, well, he would say that, wouldn't he?
The citizens of coventry got £21m when the council sold the 50 year lease.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Actually the choice was a lump sum 21m or an annual rent for use of the freehold i believe. Hard to argue that over 50 years of the lease that the citizens of Coventry have been overly rewarded.
Astute
Well-Known Member
This could be a big gamble by SISU. Sign lots of players, not pay the rent as they want to pay less and hope that the worse that happens is another embago. They would see it as a slight inconvenience as we wouldn't be getting any more players anyway. Then hope for promotion which would bring in more income and settle what is owed ready for next season. Maybe they are gambling on nobody wanting us to go out of business over just 1m
