Eatonram

I wonder how many clubs would have a claim against QPR, and for how much, if an EFL panel rules that we do in fact owe Middlesbrough cash and sets an incredibly dangerous precedent.
Us? For half the supposed premiership windfall? The team they beat in the semi-final? Do they get a quarter? What about the team who finished seventh? Any team that can "prove" QPR's results against them had an effect on them - ie how did the relegated and nearly-relegated teams do against QPR? 
Did QPR sign any players during that time that other clubs can prove they were pursuing? Have those players since been sold for a profit?
What kind of total bill are we looking at here?
Does the EFL specify some sort of time-limit on these claims in its rules? If not, why can't we pursue them now, or at whatever point we feel like it in the future?
How do we formalise how we quantify the points loss to the "affected" teams? Is a £1million overspend equivalent to one unearned league point, for example? And are we just going to make that up on the hoof at an EFL hearing, or shouldn't we actually agree it between the clubs first?
And do the points deductions get adjusted or is this some additional penalty on top of the one we thought we had all agreed?
It's an absolute mess. 

That assumes that Mel is asking for a payment for the stadium. It is very possible that he intends to gift PP back to the club once the MSD loan had been settled.

I really am fed up of it all now. The very heart and future of the club is being stripped away bit by bit player but player with no end in sight. All I see is incompetence and inconsideration from all sides. Throughout all this who is actually considering what this is doing to the fans. More proof if it is needed that football no longer cares for the fans, the very fabric of the game. ???

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

Scumbag trying to make themselves out to be willing to negotiate and we're not helping. 
Stuff them, don't engage with them at all, do nothing to legitimise their claims.
There is NOTHING to negotiate.
Quantuma have taken stick, rightly at times, but not engaging with either of the two chancers is exactly the right way to deal with them. They wanted to 'Class cram' them without a word of hello, that's the best thing to do!
Edit: had forgotten of course legally they won't after receiving QC advice. Why can't this be pointed out?

From 24th January
The EFL said on Monday: "Following positive developments over the course of the weekend, a proposed meeting involving the EFL and political stakeholders to discuss the ongoing challenges at Derby County set for later today has been postponed to allow for additional progress to be made by the administrators.
"It is now expected that the league and the administrators will sit down in the next 24 hours as we seek to resolve the outstanding issues to the satisfaction of all parties."
1 week later the transfer deadline happens, more DCFC playing staff leave
2 days after the transfer deadline comes this latest statement containing their belief that MFC & WWFC claims WILL be football debt, which they previously wouldn't rule on.
Suspicious ??

They're different points. Agree, most of this is down to Morris's utter incompetence. You were suggesting handing over money to the two parasite clubs based on their ridiculous claims. I firmly believe we shouldn't. The claims are laughable to say the least. Paying these is an admission of guilt and sets a precedence for the whole of football. In effect hammering in the final nails in its coffin.

Can I just ask and perhaps @Brailsford Ram may know. Will the court hearing clear up the question as to whether the claims are “creditors” as they currently stand? Putting aside whether they are football creditors under EFL rules. Because surely if they are not creditors under statute they cannot be football creditors under EFL rules?

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

To even be 25% it would have to be a debt, which by all the definitions I have seen, it isn't.

Can I just ask and perhaps @Brailsford Ram may know. Will the court hearing clear up the question as to whether the claims are “creditors” as they currently stand? Putting aside whether they are football creditors under EFL rules. Because surely if they are not creditors under statute they cannot be football creditors under EFL rules?

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

Can I just ask and perhaps @Brailsford Ram may know. Will the court hearing clear up the question as to whether the claims are “creditors” as they currently stand? Putting aside whether they are football creditors under EFL rules. Because surely if they are not creditors under statute they cannot be football creditors under EFL rules?

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

Can’t agree. This would instantly legitimise their claim. That would be insane Jimbo. They would just say that Derby have accepted they “cheated” and paid compensation. Mediation as suggested by the EFL is just a posh way of saying you have to give the parasites some of f your money. Extortion. 

I like how Ryan suggests that the EFL want a “Game of Thrones style summit” - I wouldn’t be averse to the EFL encountering their own “Red Wedding” tbh…

To be fair I wouldn't settle with these parasite for £7 m even if I had that money. What for? 

Well I can't sleep as a result of continuously being elbowed in the ribs for snoring so I've decided to get up for a cup of tea. 
I can't help but think the EFL are akin to a bully's sidekick trying to extort the dinner money off a fat kid.
No idea why I think that but that's where I'm at with all this.  I can't see beyond this season.

I would hope that Quantuma have finally learned the lesson that Mel learnt: that the EFL lie and cannot be trusted. It needs to be escalated out of their authority - immediately. 

This saga is so infuriating, absolute shambles. A football debt is like any other debt surely? Non payment of an amount owed for services provided, whether that be £3.50 for a pint, £200k for a house or £8m outstanding for Beilik. You enter into a contract whether written or verbal for goods or services provided I.e. a legitimate debt if not paid. The amount owed is clearly defined. If one party is claiming they might have made X if Y had / had not happened then it’s a claim for “projected loss of damages” no? So, how the hell does a claim for damages or compensation become defined as a debt?
 
Surely it has to be agreed by both parties that services or goods have been provided without payment? And the value had to have been agreed upon. A debt is transactional. No transaction has taken place. A claim. For loss of earnings has been made essentially. But not a cut and dry loss of earnings in the sense of “I’m going to make £2k this week but I didn’t because I was in a car accident  that was someone else's fault and if they hadn’t hit me I was guaranteed to make £2k”But, in the sense of, “if I wasn’t in a car accident, I might have made £2k, or I might have made £4m or I might have not made anything.” 
 
This whole thing is an absolute farce. The governing body that sets the rules by which we operate has set the penalty as minus 9 points plus 12 for entering administration. So by the logic of allowing the claims by Middlesborough and Wycombe they’re essentially saying, anyone affected by our actions can make a claim for compensation against us regardless of that fact that they as the governing body, have already decided on the offence and set the punishment.
Meanwhile, instead of standing up and leading and helping to find a pragmatic solution or trying to mediate, they pass the buck back to all the parties in disagreement and say “you sort it out”
Absolute flipping nonsense 

Could the court be asked to make a judgement as to whether the parasite claims meet the legal definition of "creditor" in insolvency law? Surely that is the critical question?