The Administration Thread

[Day]

10 minutes ago, TooFarInToTurnRed said:

From talking to many Derby friends and colleagues they just don’t get it and most seem to apportion the blame solely in one of 3 camps which are the EFL, Boro/Wycombe or Mel Morris when in reality it’s a mix. 

Think we need to remember that not all Derby fans will spend everyday on forums and social media, reading every article, journalists tweet, listening to podcasts, reading independent tribunal reports trying to make sense of it all.

Forest, Boro and Leeds fans won't have read into detail either, they just see Derby cheated, Derby bad, try not to engage with those as it's hard to distinguish between a troll and genuine lack of understanding of the situation. It's not something that can explained fully in a single tweet or Facebook post. 

Not the best person to explain myself either, far more intelligent people on here that will be far too intelligent to waste their time on them.

 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

 

I'm genuinely amazed that this is remotely controversial.  The EFL arbitration process *is* an instance of the official, legal arbitration process (see the repeated references to the Arbitration Act in the EFL rules).  The EFL rules are completely clear that it is the only tool available to solve disputes between clubs (of which this clearly is).  I 100% guarantee you that the process apparently being rushed through next week, is an official EFL LAP hearing, either to make some kind of quick ruling on the football creditor issue, or to run the entire cases through.  There's nothing else it can be.

 

4 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

 

I'm genuinely amazed that this is remotely controversial.  The EFL arbitration process *is* an instance of the official, legal arbitration process (see the repeated references to the Arbitration Act in the EFL rules).  The EFL rules are completely clear that it is the only tool available to solve disputes between clubs (of which this clearly is).  I 100% guarantee you that the process apparently being rushed through next week, is an official EFL LAP hearing, either to make some kind of quick ruling on the football creditor issue, or to run the entire cases through.  There's nothing else it can be.

It is absolutely nothing to do with the EFL. It is moved to the Arbitration Court and Tribunal Service of England and Wales. That is a statutory legal body that has nothing to do with the EFL. I spent 30 years of my working life dealing with senior counsel in the higher and appeal courts. The next and final stage is wholly independent of the EFL and their decision cannot be referred back to the EFL, only upwards to a higher court. This is not an EFL disciplinary process, it is the resolution of a civil claim brought bt MFC & WWFC against DCFC.

[Curtains]

4 minutes ago, Brailsford Ram said:

 

It is absolutely nothing to do with the EFL. It is moved to the Arbitration Court and Tribunal Service of England and Wales. That is a statutory legal body that has nothing to do with the EFL. I spent 30 years of my working life dealing with senior counsel in the higher and appeal courts. The next and final stage is wholly independent of the EFL and their decision cannot be referred back to the EFL, only upwards to a higher court. This is not an EFL disciplinary process, it is the resolution of a civil claim brought bt MFC & WWFC against DCFC.

Mate I think it’s is an EFL process.

98           Appointing the Arbitrators

98.1        Subject to Regulation 98.6, the League Arbitration Panel shall comprise 3 members.

98.2        Within 14 days of service of the Notice of Arbitration, each party shall serve written notice on The League and all other parties to the arbitration of the details of the individual they wish to appoint to act as an arbitrator in the arbitration requested.  Any nominee must be:

98.2.1    a solicitor of no less than 10 years’ admission or a barrister of no less than 10 years’ call; and

98.2.2    independent of the party appointing him and able to render an impartial decision.

98.3        Within 14 days of service of the Notice of Arbitration The League shall appoint (or shall ask the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (or such other body as appointed by the Board from time to time) if The League is a party) to appoint) the third arbitrator who shall be a legally qualified person who shall sit as chairperson.

98.4        If a party refuses or fails to appoint an arbitrator when it is obliged to do so in accordance with these Regulations the Board (or the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (or such other body as appointed by the Board from time to time) if The League is a party) shall make the appointment giving notice in writing to that effect to each party.

98.5        Members of a League Arbitration Panel shall be entitled to receive from The League a reasonable sum by way of fees and expenses, as determined by the Board from time to time.  Where a party seeks to appoint an individual whose costs exceed those determined by the Board, that party will be responsible for any additional fees and expenses in any event, and such excess amounts cannot be the subject of an order for costs under any circumstances.

98.6        Notwithstanding the provisions of Regulation 98.1, the parties shall be at liberty to appoint a single arbitrator (who must be qualified in accordance with Regulation 98.2.1) in which case written notice of such agreement shall be provided to The League.  This Section of these Regulations shall thereafter be interpreted on the basis that the League Arbitration Panel comprises a single arbitrator who shall undertake the duties of the chairperson.

[PistoldPete]

11 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

 

I'm genuinely amazed that this is remotely controversial.  The EFL arbitration process *is* an instance of the official, legal arbitration process (see the repeated references to the Arbitration Act in the EFL rules).  The EFL rules are completely clear that it is the only tool available to solve disputes between clubs (of which this clearly is).  I 100% guarantee you that the process apparently being rushed through next week, is an official EFL LAP hearing, either to make some kind of quick ruling on the football creditor issue, or to run the entire cases through.  There's nothing else it can be.

So when Boro and Wycombe contacted the Administrators did they go through that process? Or did they try and solve the dispute by settling between them first. I think the latter. Jackson or Hosking I forget which said they offered them both their legal fees paid by way of settlement. Which they refused.

Gibson then complained he had heard nothing since. I don't see this as anything more than trying to get the two sides talking, with a possibly independent chair... and maybe involving potential bidders too. This is not a normal situation so you can forget the LAP rules for now... EFL and everyone else were told to be pragmatic.  

Anything more than that and Admin team are ceding too much as Gibson and Couhig have no right to advance their claims at the moment whilst we are in admin.

 

[duncanjwitham]

2 minutes ago, Brailsford Ram said:

 

It is absolutely nothing to do with the EFL. It is moved to the Arbitration Court and Tribunal Service of England and Wales. That is a statutory legal body that has nothing to do with the EFL. I spent 30 years of my working life dealing with senior counsel in the higher and appeal courts. The next and final stage is wholly independent of the EFL and their decision cannot be referred back to the EFL, only upwards to a higher court. This is not an EFL disciplinary process, it is the resolution of a civil claim brought bt MFC & WWFC against DCFC.

I pretty much give up. Last chance...

It's nothing to do with EFL disciplinary processes.  The EFL rules state that clubs *cannot* bring legal proceedings against each other (civil or otherwise), they *have* to go through arbitration.  The way that arbitration process works is documented in the EFL rules.  There is no suggestion *anywhere* that 'Boro and Wycombe have bought civil claims against the club. Thy are simply not allowed to under EFL rules.  They have filed claims through the official EFL arbitration process.  This is repeatedly documented in the written reasons from the hearings against Derby, and the 'Boro attempt to appeal our case.

[strawhillram]

14 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Each group appoint an Arbitrator.

Administrators

The League 

Middlesbrough/Wycombe 

Can only see one outcome from that

[Leeds Ram]

I've not had the time to keep up to date with all the complexities of this so I apologise if I'm completely misreading this. Doesn't the fact they're moving down this route indicate at least one or all parties involved genuinely believe they've got a good claim? I think whilst it's painful, I'd rather go through mediation and try to figure out a number that would be acceptable but offer absolutely no apology. In any process such as this there is a chance we will lose and does anyone really think if we become liable for these claims that the buyers will still be waiting in the wings? 

Edited January 29, 2022 by Leeds Ram

[RoyMac5]

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

So when Boro and Wycombe contacted the Administrators did they go through that process? Or did they try and solve the dispute by settling between them first. I think the latter. Jackson or Hosking I forget which said they offered them both their legal fees paid by way of settlement. Which they refused.

Gibson then complained he had heard nothing since. I don't see this as anything more than trying to get the two sides talking, with a possibly independent chair... and maybe involving potential bidders too. This is not a normal situation so you can forget the LAP rules for now... EFL and everyone else were told to be pragmatic.  

Anything more than that and Admin team are ceding too much as Gibson and Couhig have no right to advance their claims at the moment whilst we are in admin.

 

What is it that Boro fans think they are still waiting on arbitration for since 2019 - that line is a tweet you often see and I'm not sure what they're on about.

Is the current Boro claim the same claim as in 2019 or a different one?

[strawhillram]

1 minute ago, Leeds Ram said:

I've not had the time to keep up to date with all the complexities of this so I apologise if I'm completely misreading this. Doesn't the fact they're moving down this route indicate at least one or all parties involved genuinely believe they've got a good claim? I think whilst it's painful, I'd rather go through mediation and try to figure out a number that would be acceptable but offer absolutely no apology. In any process such as this there is a chance we will lose and does anyone really think if we become liable for these claims that the buyers will still be waiting in the wings? 

Exactly. Win and we get taken over and continue as a club.

 Lose and are liquidated the following day.

 Still not 109% clear of what this B will be asked to arbitrate on

are the claims to be deemed as football creditors ?

or are the claims valid and the values fair?

 or both?

[TuffLuff]

Nice little piece on Football Focus. 
 

It was a fan piece really and they all spoke well, plus a nice surprise to see a small return for Ryan Conway.

Made me a bit emotional really, although that might just be where im at with it all!

[PistoldPete]

1 minute ago, Leeds Ram said:

I've not had the time to keep up to date with all the complexities of this so I apologise if I'm completely misreading this. Doesn't the fact they're moving down this route indicate at least one or all parties involved genuinely believe they've got a good claim? I think whilst it's painful, I'd rather go through mediation and try to figure out a number that would be acceptable but offer absolutely no apology. In any process such as this there is a chance we will lose and does anyone really think if we become liable for these claims that the buyers will still be waiting in the wings? 

They've had an offer to cover their legal fees. Theyve turned it down. It's no good Gibson syaing he will setlle for less than £10m. The offer for the entire club is only £28 million so why would a buyer pay £10m to another club on top of that? Or anything like that.  

The claim of £45m is pure fanatsy. even if succesful the quantum of loss would be massively reduced because loss of revenue is not a pure compensatable loss to Boro FC.. likelihood of Boro getting promoted was tiny anyway, and who is to say Bristol City may not have pipped them to a play off place instead, or Derby come to that. We might have signed cheaper but better players like we did this season..

and then you have the credit risk of the claim. The prospect of the claim being squashed at the insolvency court, Or of Derby going into liquidation and Boro and Wycombe getting nothing.

So even if the merits of the claim was 50/50 (I think it's much less than that especially for Wycombe) , the chances of Boro or Wycombe  getting millions of pounds out of it is nil .

[Leeds Ram]

7 minutes ago, StrawHillRam said:

Exactly. Win and we get taken over and continue as a club.

 Lose and are liquidated the following day.

 Still not 109% clear of what this B will be asked to arbitrate on

are the claims to be deemed as football creditors ?

or are the claims valid and the values fair?

 or both?

I think and again I've not had time to really keep up but I think the first process is deciding if they are football creditors or not and then move onto assessing the claims? 

[WhiteHorseRam]

8 minutes ago, StrawHillRam said:

Lose and are liquidated the following day.

In all seriousness, if this happened - how much money would Boro and HW get?

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

7 minutes ago, StrawHillRam said:

Exactly. Win and we get taken over and continue as a club.

 Lose and are liquidated the following day.

 Still not 109% clear of what this B will be asked to arbitrate on

are the claims to be deemed as football creditors ?

or are the claims valid and the values fair?

 or both?

If we were to lose we could still avoid liquidation as the parasites will just get the agreed haircut on debt and we get -15 points. Just means the other creditors get less if the price people will pay is fixed.

[strawhillram]

3 minutes ago, WhiteHorseRam said:

In all seriousness, if this happened - how much money would Boro and HW get?

Zilch, nada?

Edited January 29, 2022 by StrawHillRam

[ariotofmyown]

30 minutes ago, David said:

Think we need to remember that not all Derby fans will spend everyday on forums and social media, reading every article, journalists tweet, listening to podcasts, reading independent tribunal reports trying to make sense of it all.

Oh, you mean half fans? I was bemoaning them on twitter the other days whilst watching us play Forest on the box.

[Day]

1 minute ago, ariotofmyown said:

Oh, you mean half fans? I was bemoaning them on twitter the other days whilst watching us play Forest on the box.

I mean nothing of the sort, don't go getting me in trouble here! ?

[Leeds Ram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

They've had an offer to cover their legal fees. Theyve turned it down. It's no good Gibson syaing he will setlle for less than £10m. The offer for the entire club is only £28 million so why would a buyer pay £10m to another club on top of that? Or anything like that.  

The claim of £45m is pure fanatsy. even if succesful the quantum of loss would be massively reduced because loss of revenue is not a pure compensatable loss to Boro FC.. likelihood of Boro getting promoted was tiny anyway, and who is to say Bristol City may not have pipped them to a play off place instead, or Derby come to that. We might have signed cheaper but better players like we did this season..

and then you have the credit risk of the claim. The prospect of the claim being squashed at the insolvency court, Or of Derby going into liquidation and Boro and Wycombe getting nothing.

So even if the merits of the claim was 50/50 (I think it's much less than that especially for Wycombe) , the chances of Boro or Wycombe  getting millions of pounds out of it is nil .

If you're not a legal expert in football compensatory claims then you can't realistically assess their chances of success. So either you're close to that line of work or you're making assertions that you probably can't be sure about. A lot of the same arguments could have been made by west ham to deal with their dispute against Sheffield United. I agree that according to how I read it the claims are little more than a shakedown and are utterly spurious. However, the fact they aren't willing to settle for legal fees alone indicates Gibson at least thinks he's got a case, is in the right and as we all heard Couhig thinks the same. 

I just think mediation seems like a safer option; get them to a number that a buyer is willing to additionally stump up and get this business over with so the club can move on. Obviously I'd prefer not to give them a penny but the potential risk if I'm reading it right is that we'll be sunk if we lose and in any case that is a possibility. 

[Curtains]

1 minute ago, Leeds Ram said:

If you're not a legal expert in football compensatory claims then you can't realistically assess their chances of success. So either you're close to that line of work or you're making assertions that you probably can't be sure about. A lot of the same arguments could have been made by west ham to deal with their dispute against Sheffield United. I agree that according to how I read it the claims are little more than a shakedown and are utterly spurious. However, the fact they aren't willing to settle for legal fees alone indicates Gibson at least thinks he's got a case, is in the right and as we all heard Couhig thinks the same. 

I just think mediation seems like a safer option; get them to a number that a buyer is willing to additionally stump up and get this business over with so the club can move on. Obviously I'd prefer not to give them a penny but the potential risk if I'm reading it right is that we'll be sunk if we lose and in any case that is a possibility. 

I think arbitration is a very risky option but they will have recourse to the civil court if it goes against us .

The problem is the EFL won’t determine on Boro/ Wycombe regarding creditor status and the two clubs won’t drop their cases without compensation 

[Gritstone Tup]

1 hour ago, Tyler Durden said:

In a civil case the burden on proof is against the claimant that they produce sufficient evidence which on the balance of probabilities satisfies the court that the event was more likely to have happened than not.

So Boro do not submit conclusive evidence to say that they definitely would have won the playoffs but enough evidence to show that they were more likely to win the playoffs than the other teams involved. 

How they even intend to demonstrate this is beyond me. 

If the court want to see evidence that they lost money as a result of losing their play off place then that is undoubtedly true!

The only thing up for doubt is how much.