RAM1966

This topic will be updated with the latest information, news and tweets on the current situation for those unable to follow the forum during the day.
Please help by forwarding any of the above to myself by private message only as I receive email notifications.  
Thank you.

Three parties have made offers, any one of which would allow the club to exit administration with a substantial payment to creditors.
These offers need clarity, that the claim by Boro and the potential claim by Wycombe do not qualify as Football Creditors.
The football creditor rule is not defined in the EFL regulations, it is part of the Articles of Association of the Football League Limited, of which all clubs are minority shareholders (the golden share).
The football creditor rule is in Article 48, which clearly defines what constitutes a football creditor, copied below from Companies House.
The rule clearly states that it is to cover payments of "debts due". How possibly, can an unproven, unquantified claim such as Boro's be consider a debt due?
If the EFL is suggesting that any claim by a football club or employee, which is unproven, should be classified as a football creditor it would create mayhem. And, bona fide football creditors with debts due, and other preferential and unsecured creditors would lose out as a result.
The EFL can't have this both ways. If they choose to say Article 48 does not qualify Boro's claim as a football creditor the EFL are suggesting they might be sued by Boro.
However, if they choose to say that Article 48 should be interpreted (which is a wild stretch) in a way that Boro should be classed as a football creditor then it is almost certain that the EFL would be sued by the Administrators and the creditors including genuine football creditors, and HMRC for their easily quantified losses. 
The EFL also risk being sued under section 994 of the companies act for acting prejudicially against the interests of a minority shareholder of the football league ie. DCFC.
We need to apply pressure on the EFL to get off the fence, see that their actions alone are preventing the Administrators from getting a deal agreed. 
Article 48 says that Boro's claim cannot be a football creditor and the EFL must state that and stop this nonesense.
"48         FOOTBALL CREDITORS
48.1      Where a Member Club defaults in making any payment due to any of the following persons, 
the Member  Club ('Defaulting  Club')  shall be subject to such penalty  as the Board may decide 
and subject also to Article 48.2:
48.1.1        The League, The FA Premier League and the Football Association;
48.1.2        any of the Pension Schemes;
48.1.3        any Member Club and any Club of The FA Premier League;
48.1.4        any holding company  of The League and any subsidiary  company  of that holding 
company;
48.1.5        any sums due to any full-time employee or former full-time employee of the Member 
Club by  way  of arrears  of remuneration  up to the date on which that contract  of employment is 
terminated. This excludes for these purposes all and any claims for redundancy,   unfair   or  
wrongful   dismissal   or  other   claims   arising   out   of  the termination  of  the  contract  
or  in  respect  of  any  period  after  the  actual  date  of termination;
48.1.6        any  sums  due  to  the  Professional  Footballers  Association  in  repayment  of  
an interest  free loan together with such reasonable  administration and legal costs as have been 
approved by the Board;
48.1.7        The Football Foundation;
48.1.8        The Football Conference Limited trading as "the National League";
48.1.9        The Northern Premier League Limited;
48.1.1O      The Isthmian League Limited;
48.1.11      The Southern League Limited;
48.1.12      Any member club of the League or organisations listed in Articles 48.1.8 to 48.1.11 
inclusive;
48.1.13      Any County Football Association affiliated to The Football Association; and
48.1.14      Any Leagues  affiliated to The Football Association  and any clubs affiliated to any 
County Football Association recognised by The Football Association.
48.2      Subject to the provisions of Articles 48.3 and 48.4, the Board shall apply any sums 
standing to the  credit  of  the  Pool  Account  which  would  otherwise  be  payable  to  a  
Defaulting  Club,  in discharging  the  creditors  in Article  48.1.  As  between  the Football  
Creditors,  the  priority  for payment shall be in accordance with the order in which those 
Football Creditors are listed in Article 48.1.
48.3      If,  having  discharged  all Football  Creditors  in  any  preceding  class  of  Football 
 Creditor  (as
· required by Article 48.2) the sum then available is not suffident to discharge in full the 
Football Creditors listed in Articles 48.1.1, 48.1.2 or 48.1.4 the Board will decide the 
allocation.
48.4      If,  having  discharged  all Football  Creditors  in  any  preceding  class  of  Football 
 Creditor  (as required by Article 48.2) the sum then available is not sufficient to discharge in 
full the Football Creditors listed in Article 48.1.3, 48.1.5, 48.1.12, 48.1.13 or 48.1.14 the sum 
will be allocated pro rata amongst the creditors of the same class.
Note - Clubs are reminded that any assignment of future entitlements from the pool account are 
subject to Article 45 and this must be brought to the attention of the other party. Furthermore 
assignments must be in legal form and registered with the office. Assignments are given priority 
according to the date and time of registration."

Mel isn't going to spend another penny on this club. He has made that very clear in his actions

Ahhh. Just when it was going so well.

It would but it does not really help us.... No buyer will currently purchase the club whilst no ruling has been made unless they are indemnified against it. 

It actually does all tie up.
A restructuring plan involves starting a new company, transferring the golden share to that company and paying off whatever percentage to the creditors that can be agreed. The old company then folds, and all its liabilities no longer exist, including the claims of Wycombe and Middlesbrough. The administrators would effectively strike off those claims.
The EFL have ruled against this, believing that the claims should go through due process and not just be wiped away because the administrators cannot deal with them.
The EFL are saying that an exit from administration via a CVA is perfectly possible, so a preferred bidder can be named, it's just that the new owners will have to deal with the claims and pay any subsequent liabilities generated as if they were footballing debts. In a CVA the existing company continues, so it can still retain some of the old liabilities. 
It actually makes sense. The problem is, will anyone pay £50m for the club, £20m for the stadium and risk another £50m if they lose the case?
Peculiarly, the Boro and Wycombe cases aren't technically stopping us naming a preferred bidder, but appear to be the reason that no bidder is willing to sign up.
 

I think they are often in the same room and that's the problem. 

So allegedly Quantuma want the EFL to approve a preferred bidder who will put funds into the club to ensure we can finish the season, the EFL’s response is (also allegedly) to say we’re not doing that until you show us you have the funds to finish the season. ? Round and round we go. I’m so bored of this dragging on and on, let’s hope what Rooney seemed so confident of today is closest to the truth and things move forward quickly. 

It’s just John Percy getting some final milage out of our administration because he knows it’s coming to a conclusion. 

Just to scupper us extending contractors, signing people I assume. Assume those making derisory offers for players kicked off as we didnt agree. Assume they will just show what they showed last time we had to prove the same thing as we've hardly splashed the cash since have we? As soon as Wayne mentioned EFL having to sign off had my doubts!!!

I've considered lodging a claim for damages against Steve Gibson's hair.
It has caused me so much distress and anguish that I can barely function.
Had it not been for Steve Gibson's hair I would probably have had a high flying career as an executive of innovation leading multinational companies.
The fact the Steve Gibson's hair existed throughout my life from adolescents to middle age has damaged my mental health and financial position to the tune of what I estimate to ge £45 million in damages and lost earnings.
I expect the EFL to fully support my claims and as a class action, I appeal to everyone who has had their life ruined by Steve Gibson's hair to come forward.

Since the EFL are ultimately responsible for this poo show, we could all bring small claims against them for the psychological and emotional damage their incompetent handling has caused us, as consumers. Only costs £35 and if they got a few hundred might have to explain themselves. 
Or we go one further and crowdfund a lawyer prepared to take them to court, during which every aspect of their handling and decision making would have to be put on record, including conversations with Gibbo. Could well bring them down. 

The midweek matches are usually streamed anyway (or on Sky via the red button where the club get no benefit from it) so I don’t really think it’s lost ticket revenue as such as there were people going to watch it at home anyway.
 
It being picked by Sky as a main fixture unfortunately does mean it’s not available to stream directly from the club. It’s a guaranteed £100K from Sky vs money lost from Rams TV streams.

Excellent news for all UK based plastics. Can’t wait to give the wife the good news.

Neither.
Tell them to swivel and sue the EFL if they side with the two other clubs and stop us coming out of Administration on the basis of a contrived claim that hasn't even been tested in front of an Arbitration panel.
I might as well claim against  the pair of them for damages arising from stress and mental injury brought about by all this crap. As a claim, it would have as much credibility.

If it really does come down to this, football really is in a sorry state. Let’s see a preferred bidder announced and let them negotiate. If they can negotiate a price they deem to be reasonable then so be it. If not, we surely have the right to appeal to the EFL to take it to court? Any less would be extortion and would surely undermine the EFL’s long term position as a custodian of the league and it’s members.

Can we sue boro and wycombe for losses and damages towards our great club.

Anybody that is willing to spend £50m+ on a football club in our state needs all the backing he can get. 
 
He’s certainly not coming to sit at the bottom of the Championship, he’s a guy that know how to get out of this league and keep it sustainable in the best league in the world. 
 
If there’s anybody who has a problem with that, maybe it’s you that’s the problem. 

Ashley will make us a Premier League team . ... End of conversation I would have thought

Surely there aren't bids? 
There has to be a base figure gets the deal done. 100% to admins, football creditors and MSD for post admin loan. Then 25% for unsecured creditors - interesting to see if M Morris appears here. Then either repay or refinance the big MSD loan to take control of the stadium. Then whatever can be negotiated with HMRC. 
Surely whoever takes over will pretty much just have to pay/assume liability for that set amount?
My guess is the delay is down to Middlesbrough and Wycombe. 

Confused by your logic. But Gibson has leverage purely and simply because we need a sale. Hence the rational thing for the admins to do is pay him to slither away
 

Again it seems far more likely that the opposite is the case. Whatever the basis for Gibson's grievance, on the face of it the case looks pretty groundless. if the club wasn't in administration it's almost certain that whoever the owner of Derby was would simply call Gibson's bluff and say see you in court. It's unlikely that Gibson would then pursue because he would be advised by his lawyers that the case would almost certainly be laughed out of court. It's only the fact that Mel Morris put us into administration that has given Gibson any leverage whatsover, because however unlikely it is that Gibson could win the case, the possibility that he might represents an unnaceptable degree of risk  and uncertainty to any prospective new owner. So by putting is into Admininstration, Mel Morris massively strengthened Gibson's hand which in consequence has greatly increased the risk of liquidation precisely because it makes selling the club to new owners much more difficult to achieve.

Morris and Pearce probably needed Quantuma to come in to show them how to prepare a proper set of Accounts.