The Administration Thread

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Just now, IslandExile said:

Isn't the ball now firmly in EFL's court?

Isn't it up to them to approach Boro and Wycome over Mel's offer and determine how they now want it settled? Even if that is to flatly refuse to switch their claim to Mel, the person, from Derby County.

Please somebody get the ball rolling.

That's the problem, those that can don't want to. Checkmate!

[BoroWill]

20 minutes ago, vonwright said:

Yep, this latter suggestion is the "pragmatic solution" all sides should be pushing for. If Boro, WW or EFL say no, they need to be pushed very hard indeed on why: they get everything they claim to want, and Derby gets a fair chance of finding a buyer (which Boro, WW and EFL claim to want too, let's not forget!). If Morris says "no, no, I didn't mean that" then he too needs to be called out: his offer was essentially worthless.

Basically having a proposal like this is very clarifying: do all these different parties really mean what they say?

Long time since I posted on here but I logged in to agree that this is by far the most sensible solution that all sides should be pushing for. Morris is the root cause of your problems and our (and Wycombe's) ire. He shouldn't hide behind the convenience of UK company law to avoid having to fix the mess he made.

I'm aware that you will all have strong views on Gibson but I'm 99.9% certain he would support this kind of arrangement, he doesn't want your club to go out of business. 

[Arsene Titman]

On RD last night an ex solicitor was categoric in saying that the MFC/WWFC claims ,which are against DCFC as a club, could not be dealt with at the High Court because it would have to be our club contesting the claim , an individual club director cannot be sued in these circumstances. Later in the programme, a current solicitor phoned in and effectively said there is no problem , what MM is offering is to indemnify DCFC should the claim go against it. Richard Kramer, a partner at Front Row Legal, specialist sports solicitors ,was interviewed by Radio Derby this morning. He confirmed the view of the first solicitor and stated that the claims would have to be settled by arbitration. Having reread MM’s statement, it doesn’t seem to me that it represents an offer to indemnify the club, it merely invites MFC/WWFC to seek recourse against him personally  through the High Court. So, assuming arbitration is the only way to go, does anyone know if  arbitration has actually commenced? Richard Kramer’s view is that the result of arbitration will be that an award will be made to MFC/WWFC but would be nowhere near the amounts being claimed and would be a small sweetener so that all three clubs could claim victory. The way things are, I would take that outcome

 

[Curtains]

1 minute ago, Arsene Titman said:

On RD last night an ex solicitor was categoric in saying that the MFC/WWFC claims ,which are against DCFC as a club, could not be dealt with at the High Court because it would have to be our club contesting the claim , an individual club director cannot be sued in these circumstances. Later in the programme, a current solicitor phoned in and effectively said there is no problem , what MM is offering is to indemnify DCFC should the claim go against it. Richard Kramer, a partner at Front Row Legal, specialist sports solicitors ,was interviewed by Radio Derby this morning. He confirmed the view of the first solicitor and stated that the claims would have to be settled by arbitration. Having reread MM’s statement, it doesn’t seem to me that it represents an offer to indemnify the club, it merely invites MFC/WWFC to seek recourse against him personally  through the High Court. So, assuming arbitration is the only way to go, does anyone know if  arbitration has actually commenced? Richard Kramer’s view is that the result of arbitration will be that an award will be made to MFC/WWFC but would be nowhere near the amounts being claimed and would be a small sweetener so that all three clubs could claim victory. The way things are, I would take that outcome

 

That’s why MM need to address the indemnify issue.

He basically has just clouded the issue.

Did he mean he would indemnify against the claims or not .

 

[PistoldPete]

35 minutes ago, Ram a lamb a ding dong said:

Where does it state that clubs can't go against each other? Has @Davethrown this at Parry?

Where do EFL Rules state that they can?

[May Contain Nuts]

8 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

I'm aware that you will all have strong views on Gibson but I'm 99.9% certain he would support this kind of arrangement, he doesn't want your club to go out of business. 

He'll only accept it if it goes through the EFL's arbitration system, not a proper legal system.

If he didn't want our club to go out of business there would be no claim, or there would be claims against other clubs too. There would be no hiding behind EFL processes.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[StarterForTen]

3 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

I'm aware that you will all have strong views on Gibson but I'm 99.9% certain he would support this kind of arrangement, he doesn't want your club to go out of business. 

Maybe he doesn't, but it does appear that he feels that the Club (or perhaps Mel) has not yet paid a sufficiently high a price for the historical financial breaches for which they have accepted a punishment on.

Makes you wonder what is the price he'll accept - and I'm not talking about a monetary figure for compensation - it's all about sporting sanctions. So is that liquidation? Is it relegation? Is it the complete dismantling of the squad and a reset position so far down the scale that you need binoculars to see where you have come from?

[Tamworthram]

27 minutes ago, Ram a lamb a ding dong said:

Boro won't go to court as they know 100% they don't stand a chance.

They are either completely deluded or downright parasites.

I think the truth is somewhere in between

I don’t think they’re deluded. As you say, they probably know they wouldn’t stand a chance of winning. So, their best hope is either:

1) A kangaroo court (sorry, I mean arbitration set up by the EFL) finds in their favour or

2) The administrator/PB (as yet unnamed) blinks first and agrees a settlement.

[RoyMac5]

8 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Long time since I posted on here but I logged in to agree that this is by far the most sensible solution that all sides should be pushing for. Morris is the root cause of your problems and our (and Wycombe's) ire. He shouldn't hide behind the convenience of UK company law to avoid having to fix the mess he made.

I'm aware that you will all have strong views on Gibson but I'm 99.9% certain he would support this kind of arrangement, he doesn't want your club to go out of business. 

I take it you think Boro are owed money then? When are you going after Sheffield Wednesday they took points off you!

[Jimbo Ram]

7 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Long time since I posted on here but I logged in to agree that this is by far the most sensible solution that all sides should be pushing for. Morris is the root cause of your problems and our (and Wycombe's) ire. He shouldn't hide behind the convenience of UK company law to avoid having to fix the mess he made.

I'm aware that you will all have strong views on Gibson but I'm 99.9% certain he would support this kind of arrangement, he doesn't want your club to go out of business. 

The Gibbon knows he has no case, there is no precedent for his actions and he knows he will lose in a court of law. But that is not his motive, he doesn't care about any pay out. His sole motive is to prevent for as long as possible the Derby takeover. He is a very sad and bitter man. You should be pressurising him, as football fans, to end the nonsense.

[PistoldPete]

23 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Some interesting extra bullet points in the 'unofficial minutes'. Clearly Q are very supportive of Stephen Pearce, and of his work pre- and post-administration. Time perhaps to give that guy some slack, particularly on the terraces?

I thought the final sentence, and in particular the last 5 words, were quite enlightening too:

Quantuma remains cautiously optimistic, not understating the hurdles that have arisen, but prospective purchasers are still there and now Mel is helping.

Where are the "unofficial minutes" iram?  I have only seen the official ones on twitter I think.

[BoroWill]

Just now, Coconut's Beard said:

He'll only accept it if it goes through the EFL's arbitration system, not a proper legal system.

I don't think he would have any power over whether Mel can indemnify the club or not, to be perfectly honest. If the EFL said no arbitration and it had to go through the courts he would take it through the courts, I'm not sure what would suggest otherwise?

 

2 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

If he didn't want our club to go out of business there would be no claim, there would be no hiding behind EFL processes.

Well the claim started quite a long time before Mel Morris voluntarily placed your club into administration, so I'm not sure this is quite true.

[Tamworthram]

12 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

Isn't the ball now firmly in EFL's court?

Isn't it up to them to approach Boro and Wycome over Mel's offer and determine how they now want it settled? Even if that is to flatly refuse to switch their claim to Mel, the person, from Derby County.

Please somebody get the ball rolling.

Where are we with this arbitration? I’ve lost the plot a bit. Isn’t that the EFL trying to get the ball rolling?

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, BoroWill said:

I don't think he would have any power over whether Mel can indemnify the club or not, to be perfectly honest. If the EFL said no arbitration and it had to go through the courts he would take it through the courts, I'm not sure what would suggest otherwise?

 

Well the claim started quite a long time before Mel Morris voluntarily placed your club into administration, so I'm not sure this is quite true.

You think you are owed money for being rubbish at football?

[Day]

5 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Long time since I posted on here but I logged in to agree that this is by far the most sensible solution that all sides should be pushing for. Morris is the root cause of your problems and our (and Wycombe's) ire. He shouldn't hide behind the convenience of UK company law to avoid having to fix the mess he made.

I'm aware that you will all have strong views on Gibson but I'm 99.9% certain he would support this kind of arrangement, he doesn't want your club to go out of business. 

Will try not to bombard you with questions, but out of interest as a Boro fan do you:

1) Believe that Derby/Morris owe Boro/Gibson compensation for the stadium sale, which gave us an unfair financial advantage?

2) If yes to the above, would this not mean you are owed compensation by Sheffield Wednesday also, due to the fact they sold their stadium also and beat Boro at the Riverside. 

3) What are your thoughts on the EFL's handling of the situation and why Boro/Gibson chose to withdraw legal action against the EFL.

------

Looking at Boro forums there strong dislike for our club, which is bizarre as I found topics back in 2020 urging Gibson to drop the cases and you didn't deserve the play offs nor had any chance of going up.

Just from a personal point, I have nothing against Boro the club, which is you the fans, players and staff until you reach Gibson.

I can't speak for everyone, but imagine a few would share those views and when we say Boro, or revel in your defeats, it's purely aimed at Gibson and this legal action which we feel is ludicrous.

[Rev]

2 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Well the claim started quite a long time before Mel Morris voluntarily placed your club into administration, so I'm not sure this is quite true.

Yes, Gibson's in such a rush he can't find legal counsel to represent Boro until May 2022.

[duncanjwitham]

5 minutes ago, Arsene Titman said:

On RD last night an ex solicitor was categoric in saying that the MFC/WWFC claims ,which are against DCFC as a club, could not be dealt with at the High Court because it would have to be our club contesting the claim , an individual club director cannot be sued in these circumstances. Later in the programme, a current solicitor phoned in and effectively said there is no problem , what MM is offering is to indemnify DCFC should the claim go against it. Richard Kramer, a partner at Front Row Legal, specialist sports solicitors ,was interviewed by Radio Derby this morning. He confirmed the view of the first solicitor and stated that the claims would have to be settled by arbitration. Having reread MM’s statement, it doesn’t seem to me that it represents an offer to indemnify the club, it merely invites MFC/WWFC to seek recourse against him personally  through the High Court. So, assuming arbitration is the only way to go, does anyone know if  arbitration has actually commenced? Richard Kramer’s view is that the result of arbitration will be that an award will be made to MFC/WWFC but would be nowhere near the amounts being claimed and would be a small sweetener so that all three clubs could claim victory. The way things are, I would take that outcome

 

I think it's fairly obvious that 'Boro and Wycombe couldn't just sue Morris unprompted (limited liability companies and and all that), but if Morris was to sign a bit of paper that said e.g. "for the purposes of these proceedings, I assume legal responsibility for the actions of the club during my tenure", would that change things? 

Morris must have some kind of plan to make this happen, or I can't imagine he would have suggested it.  If 'Boro and Wycombe were to accept his offer, and they rock up at court and it gets kicked out on day 1 because they don't have standing to sue him, Morris is going to look like an (even bigger) idiot, 'Boro and Wycombe immediately re-open their claims against the club and we're back to square one having wasted loads of time we don't have.

[rammieib]

Where are these unofficial extra notes from yesterdays meeting?

Also - Does anyone actually know what Quantama's next actions are?

[Tamworthram]

4 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

The Gibbon knows he has no case, there is no precedent for his actions and he knows he will lose in a court of law. But that is not his motive, he doesn't care about any pay out. His sole motive is to prevent for as long as possible the Derby takeover. He is a very sad and bitter man. You should be pressurising him, as football fans, to end the nonsense.

I still remain convinced that he does care about the money and his tactic is to do all he can to block a takeover and exit from administration as long as he can in order to force a settlement.

[BoroWill]

5 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

The Gibbon knows he has no case, there is no precedent for his actions and he knows he will lose in a court of law. But that is not his motive, he doesn't care about any pay out. His sole motive is to prevent for as long as possible the Derby takeover. He is a very sad and bitter man. You should be pressurising him, as football fans, to end the nonsense.

If this is all true, why did he start the action long before you went into administration and were looking to be taken over? Your theory doesn't make any logical sense.