Maharan

Confused by your posts and  @i-Ram’s on this topic 
you’re right of course, limited liability protects shareholders not directors. 
 
But suing directors is very difficult and MM has not offered to be sued as a director. 
 
His offer makes little sense but I think it’s intended to be read as saying two things:
1 “you’re saying I’ve been a cheat, so put your money where your mouth is and agree to sue me in the High Court. “
 
This is a PR exercise - it’s highly unlikely  that a claim by MFC against MM personally would stick 
2 “you’re victimising DCFC, let them be sold and instead bring your actions against the club against me in the High Court. “
I have no idea what the High Court would do with this bizarre proposal. I’m sure MM doesn’t either and that M/W would be advised it is a whacky ruse more aimed at public opinion than resolution
MM needs to indemnify the club against the claims to allow the club to be sold 

They can't do any of those things. I suppose the difference is, they would say, is that the are not preventing Derby exiting administration as per law. They are only saying if they do that they won't be welcome in the club. And they'd say that doing that isn't breaking discrimination law, for example, or tax law or minimum wage law. It's just enforcing membership rules. I think the onus would be on us to name a specific law they were breaking. 
I mean, is the 'football debt' rule itself written into law, or is it just something clubs agree to abide by? 
I have no idea who would win a case, by the way, and have no expertise. I also feel it is ridiculous that 'footballing claims' like this would be given the same status as 'footballing debts'. And I believe the EFL should update its rules to better fit both administration law, and the fact clubs in administration shouldn't face such potentially crippling, speculative 'damages' claims that act as a massive barrier to them ever getting sold.
Just feel it might be a bit of a red herring and that settling the status of the debts (or better still passing that responsibility to Morris) is the priority. 
 

Well of course MM’s hairbrained distraction of a proposal needs M/W consent to proceed.  Because it’s they who are being asked to sue MM in the High Court. The EfL can’t compel a club to sue an individual in the High Court. Anyway the whole thing is two angry vain rich men slugging it out in the court of public opinion. It’s a complete waste of time and everyone should instead be focusing on a solution, before we run out of time. MM needs to indemnify the club against the claims 

What ruined football was the marketing machine. 
I think owners have always been the same. But now thanks to the commercial titan that is the Premier League/Champions League the game attracts all kinds of snake oil salesman and billionaire hipsters. As well as naive businessman who think on pitch results can be controlled by practices they implemented in their other ventures
With the Internet and streaming services etc etc football is able to draw in an audience like never before. And in England the Premier League has been packaged and sold to the mainstream audience. To the casual fan. 
It's like Boxing. 2 YouTubers fight and the viewing figures are insane. 2 top super lightweights fight for a UK record breaking undisputed title fight and its not even televised in the UK.
The way the Premier League works isn't for the purists. It casts its net over a wider audience and knows the real money doesn't come from match tickets. But it comes from subscriptions, from advertising, from getting bums on seats in living rooms as much as stadiums. It's packaged for TV audiences as an experience. 
But it was the Premier League and Sky that forged that path. The rest of football has been playing catch up ever since. 
Clubs like Derby are irrelevant. They're an undercard on a boxing show. They're not part of the marketing machine. 
Derby can die because they are "protected" by the EFL. A pathetic organisation that can't stand on its own 2 feet, can't protect its clubs and can't offer them a way to compete with the top clubs. 
Leicester can't die. They're protected by the Premier League. An organisation that draws money and interest from all the globe. A League that offers clubs everything possible to bounce back even if relegated. A league that will tell the world that Leicester are far far more exciting and interesting than Derby, Forest, Ipswich, Sheffield Wednesday, Sheffield United etc. 
And people drink it in. Bournemouth v Fulham or Burnley v Leicester? What's going to sell? Which one is packaged with those legendary pundits, theatrical music and whatever bells and whistles attached.
If you think "I've been going to Derby for 50 years" matters then you're deluded. 
You matter if you press the red button on your remote, if you subscribe to watch Gilette offer the closest shave ever, if you're 1m Chinese kids who's views attract 1bn pounds worth of advertising from Chinese companies.
The Premier League setting itself apart was a death and rebirth of football. And we see to a lesser extent the Champions League. 
The greed almost reached a new level when the PPV clubs decided they could go off and do it all again without minor inconveniences such as relegation and being kicked by Burnley

Highly unlikely.
Mel needs to indemnify on this or it’s a non starter IMO .
Platitudes won’t work 

Does it mention how he managed to rack up such a heinous tax bill and "forgot" to pay HMRC?
That's the most interesting bit out of the whole debacle which he's managed to omit from his statement. 

The problem is that nowhere in Mel's statement does he actually "offer to transfer liability for the claim from DCFC to himself". What he actually says is "I invite Boro, and in due course Wycombe if they so wish, to take their claims to the High Court against me personally" but it is highly doubtful that this is even legally possible due to limited liability. Boro's claim is against DCFC. How can they pursue a case against Mel Morris instead? It would break the fundamental principle of company law wouldn't it?

If you're a creditor, wouldn't you question why the former owner could commit possibly £50m+ to a court case against two claimants with flimsy cases, but you're expected to take 25p in the pound for actual real debt?

2 different points 
- Gibbo’s is asserting a claim by MFC against the club
- Gibbo has blamed MM for our plight. 
 
Gibbo has never said there is a provable claim against MM. 
 
MM’s offer is pointless. It’s a PR exercise. He needs to indemnify the club against the claims. 

MM gave up ownership of the club when he put us in administration, the issue at the minute is the dispute between M/WW/DCFC and not individuals. It doesn't really alter anything that MM has offered them the chance to take him to court,it is the perceived actions MM took whilst the owner of the club and not for him to gain personally

MM needs to be involved. But not as he proposes in his silly letter. 
 
He’s playing games with Gibson. The offer to be sued in the High Court is baalocks because ‘Gibson’s’ claim is a claim by Middlesborough against DCFC. 
 
Neither Gibson nor MFC can sue MM. MM knows that, the poison Gibbo dwarf knows that. 
 
What is needed is for MM to indemnify the club against the claims. Gibbo and MM are engaged in a PR battle whilst Rome burns 

So Mel thinks, as do many, that he’s the saviour in this? He’s the reason that this whole mess has happened. He left the club for dead,he doesn’t deserve the adoration he’s getting tonight. 

So Mel thinks, as do many, that he’s the saviour in this? He’s the reason that this whole mess has happened. He left the club for dead,he doesn’t deserve the adoration he’s getting tonight. 

So Mel thinks, as do many, that he’s the saviour in this? He’s the reason that this whole mess has happened. He left the club for dead,he doesn’t deserve the adoration he’s getting tonight. 

So Mel thinks, as do many, that he’s the saviour in this? He’s the reason that this whole mess has happened. He left the club for dead,he doesn’t deserve the adoration he’s getting tonight. 

So Mel thinks, as do many, that he’s the saviour in this? He’s the reason that this whole mess has happened. He left the club for dead,he doesn’t deserve the adoration he’s getting tonight. 

The biggest part of me read that and felt sorry for Mel. 
 
The EFL was intent on ruining him and they’ve achieved it. 
 
I just hope that at some point we can all get over this and welcome Mel back to Derbyshire. 

I think it's a tactical move and positioning from Morris, on the basis that the claims are between football clubs under EFL mechanisms, and to demonstrate damages against him personally is not the same. I think it's an offer he made knowing it's not likely to be taken up, and if it is he's fighting it on better ground for him - but - it takes the moral posturing away from Gibson if he does decline it.
In short, Mel Morris is still trying to be clever. At least he's not just in hiding anymore.

Hollow gesture - he knows they won’t go after him, and the claim isn’t against him it’s the conduct of the club
 
if he wanted to guarantee helping he needed to say “I will personally pay the compensation that is due from DCFC to MFC and WWFC as it is decided” that way the third part funding is clearing football debts and satisfies the requirements of EFL insolvency policies.

Wow. I know I'm in a minority but due all his mistakes, I loved Mel's ambition and what he wanted to do for the club. I sincerely hope that this may redress his reputation of only a little. Oh, and a big FU to Gibson, Couhig and the EFL.

This has been mentioned a few times. But to me it looks more and more like Mel put us in admin to try and escape the claims so it just seems so unlikely he will underwrite them - but there could be more twists to come. 

1/  No, not all all.  Quite the opposite.
2/  Agreed.  Unfortunately the club will also be seen as being responsible for our (the fans) behaviour, so they too will be dealt with just like any other game.
3/  I'm sure you can be trusted to behave impeccably, and not besmirch the reputation of the club.  Like I say, my thoughts aren't aimed at you, and those of a similar standing.
4/  I did say I would enrage some folk!  (Don't try to hide it... I can tell a mile off!)
5/  I hope you have a wonderful day,  watch a fantastic game, witness an away win, witness absolutely no bovver whatsoever, and come back on here on the evening of Saturday 12th to point, laugh, ridicule me for being as wrong as any wrong person has ever been with a wrong opinion/prediction, in a world where... let's face it... is accustomed to many a wrong opinion!  (That's this forum generally, just to clarify!)  In fact, I have never wanted to be so wrong, as I do right now!
 
?  
 

Its non of Boro’s business!?
Isn’t it? Or is it everyone’s business?
I believe the EFL are run like a committee. They represent the views of all its members on a majority basis. The rules and regulations are drawn up, altered and voted through by all of the member clubs. There won’t be total agreement all of the time but it will only need a majority or designated percentage to make a rule. At every meeting or ongoing dispute all members will be kept updated and in our case a daily blow by blow account. The EFL are its members nothing will be hidden from any of them. We had an opportunity through the administrators to start the relationship again, distance ourselves from Mel Morris, apologise, show some humility and say how can we make this right and regain the confidence of all the other members. The administrator didn’t take that opportunity and just kept on fighting and taking Mels arrogant stance because imho Mel is pulling the admins strings!
If you’re in a room with 72 people you’ve previously got on with and they all turn against you, it’s more than likely your fault!

Having slept on it,
It might be the case the the EFL's point of view is that they can't have it accepted that administration is seen as a way to avoid having to fight/arbitrate/mediate claims for damages.
Which is why they mentioned the Boro claim was started prior to administration.
It's just that it was also launched when DCFC had only been found to have been guilty of inadequate notes in the accounts...far less than the systemically cheating for years claim of Stephen Mr Gibson Steve or a crime that directly denied Middlesbrough a play off place.
Now, taking my Derby County hat off, could the circumstances look like Mel Morris put the club into administration to avoid having to fight or settle the claims from Boro and Wycombe? It could read that way, and given Mel's Byzantine company structures and Stephen Pearce's accounting tricks, the "optics" aren't great - hence the big push to say it was the covid that done it - just as fans were being allowed back and costs were massively reduced at the club?
I think we can all buy it that Mel Morris has not been playing with a straight bat.
For new ownership, it's a matter of cost - they won't particularly care about Mel's misdeeds beyond what it cost them. For us, it's about the pride and reputation of our club.
I know I don't want a settlement out of not wanting the stain of legitimising Gibson's claims and the language around them. Settle and it's fans of every other club banging on about systemically cheating for years for decades.
God I hate Mel Morris, I hate Steve Gibson, I hate Stephen Pearce, I hate the EFL and I football. Couhig is just an annoyance, like when you get Steve Gibson on your shoe.
Still ducking love Derby.