The Administration Thread

[IslandExile]

9 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

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

The EFL suggestion for Arbitration came before Mel's statement. So, to me, it's now back with the the EFL, Boro and WW. They now need to accept/reject Mel's offer.

Edited February 8, 2022 by IslandExile

[BucksRam]

If we all work at it I reckon we can get to 700 pages by the end of today......

[RoyMac5]

4 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

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.

Because then he'd have had to pay to do it. This way it's costing him nothing. Do you actually understand what he's done?

[Alph]

19 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. 

So what does he want beyond the massive points deductions, administration and players sales that we're going through?

It's alright slamming his fist against his desk saying you would have been promoted if we hadn't cheated. We thought about doing the same after our losses to QPR and Villa but then reminded ourselves we aren't petty, vindictive dick swinging ********. 

So, what does he want?

[vonwright]

14 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. 

Morris is the reason we are in administration. Gibson is the reason we can't get out of it. 

Expediting his claims and getting them heard may be the pragmatic solution, but let's be clear: I (and most Derby fans) think these claims are spurious, completely unprecedented (no club has ever "sued" another over P+S breaches), motivated by personal malice, and being exploited by Gibson to mete out his own personal "punishment" to a club facing liquidation.  

[Alph]

Oh I also let's not forget the people that have lost their jobs or money to DCFC. Which 100% isn't Gibson's fault

But it is from that point onwards. 

[PistoldPete]

2 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

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.

I agree his motive for starting action was nothing to do with our  takeover. 
 

but even from the outset one of the many problems with his claim is that we didn’t really gain any advantage … and now are at a significant disadvantage.

so by continuing now it just looks like he is taking advantage of our current predicament. And his public statements have been blatantly ridiculous and inflammatory.

[PistoldPete]

3 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

@tinmangave a link to them a few pages back Pete (in the last two hours). Let me know if you cant locate them ?

Oh silly me I’ve done some actual work since then instead of stressing about the rams. I will look back. 

[Tamworthram]

2 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

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.

Welcome @BoroWill. I hope exchanges between yourself and Rams fans on this forum remain polite and civil.

As you’ll see from my post, I think Gibson wants his pound of flesh, whether he genuinely feels it is owed or not. But, I do think he knows that he wouldn’t win his day in court and his best hope is to extort an out of court settlement by doing his best to block a takeover until he receives his money.

Some have suggested that Mel Morris should indemnify the new owners from any potential payout should the case go to court thus allowing a new owner to step in without the fear of financial repercussions should we lose the case. I don’t think Mel will that that but, if he did, it would be interesting to see Gibson’s response. I can’t think of any reason why he could justifiably decline it.

[May Contain Nuts]

27 minutes 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.

The power Gibson has is his hold over the EFL. You must be forgetting the part where he threatened to sue them, the EFL proffered us as an alternative and all of a sudden any potential action against the EFL was stayed.

You really think if Gibson was willing to go through the courts he would have kept silent after Morris' challenge? It'd be headed to court already.

The EFL publicly see no reason why it couldn't happen one day, a few days later after they privately rule it out. Gee I wonder what made them change their made? A chat with Gibson with him saying he refuses to go down the court route, perhaps?

The claim started before administration, but realistically administration put an end to any chance he had of getting the money he's claiming for ended at that point. Continuing with the action despite this is proof of his grubby intent.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[Alph]

9 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

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.

Another question 

Why is he continuing?

Morris is gone, we had points deductions, we're selling first team players against their will and our own managers interests, we're in administration

But he can't possibly stop, can he? Nope. That would mean he would be at the exact same point he's going to be at anyway in the near future. What a soldier

[BoroWill]

3 minutes ago, David said:

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.

Thanks for the reply, I'm really not here to have a slanging match or an argument. I've been following this thread for a while and just wanted to log back in to try and give a bit of our side, which I hope I can do.

1) No, despite the clearly inflated price the stadium was sold for this was deemed to be within the rules by the EFL even after appeals. If we have an issue with that aspect we should be pursuing the EFL.

2) See above.

3) I think the EFL have handled the situation terribly since the start (and I mean the end of the 18/19 season when they had access to your accounts that have since been found to be against the rules). As for why Boro/Gibson dropped any action against the EFL, I believe the prospective case was about them not enforcing their own rules properly. By giving you a fine and points deduction that would make our case pointless as at that point they have enforced their rules.

I think the dislike towards your club/fans (which I don't share) stems from a few things. Since 18/19 a number of your fans on social media revelled in the fact that Mel Morris had the whole league "on strings" and could do whatever he pleased, when Gibson originally raised his concerns over your spending these same people aimed abuse and mockery at him. As I'm sure you're aware, Steve Gibson is extremely well liked by Middlesbrough fans, so seeing him take abuse for pointing out that someone was cheating definitely got a lot of our fans backs up. Seeing him now being portrayed as the villain by many who also drank Mel's kool-aid is pretty irksome too I'd imagine, he told you that you were cheating, he told you that Mel was a liar, and now he has been proven correct he still gets abuse.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

Without going in depth, if this is looked at via the EFL procedure and the parasites lose, can they appeal.  If they can't appeal, can they take it outside to a real court.  How long can they drag this on if they initially lose .  

The fact that Wycombe accuse Derby of cheating by filing the information requested by an agreed 1 week extra deadline, whilst they might drag this out with the Leo Sayer tribute act till May is laughable.

[Ram-Alf]

23 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. 

Maybe you should look at yourselves, You lost 6 games on the bounce from early March to early April, You spent more money than we did, We beat you to Martyn Waghorn, Your owner sold/transfered one of his businesses debt to another of his businesses, You employed Tony Pulis, You have NO! legal case against us, You may be 99.9% sure your owner isn't trying to destroy DCFC on his own, But with the help of the EFL he'll get his wish, When Gibson sent a letter threatening to sue them, But if the EFL will go after DCFC then we'll drop our claim against the EFL.

Ask your owner why he'll not go to the High Court to settle this case if he believes he's in the right...No i'll answer that, Because he'll lose, WW claims are more rediculous than yours.

I await your logical answers...if you have any.

 

[Foreveram]

30 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’d agree to this as long as we can claim off QPR.

[Alph]

1 minute ago, BoroWill said:

Thanks for the reply, I'm really not here to have a slanging match or an argument. I've been following this thread for a while and just wanted to log back in to try and give a bit of our side, which I hope I can do.

1) No, despite the clearly inflated price the stadium was sold for this was deemed to be within the rules by the EFL even after appeals. If we have an issue with that aspect we should be pursuing the EFL.

2) See above.

3) I think the EFL have handled the situation terribly since the start (and I mean the end of the 18/19 season when they had access to your accounts that have since been found to be against the rules). As for why Boro/Gibson dropped any action against the EFL, I believe the prospective case was about them not enforcing their own rules properly. By giving you a fine and points deduction that would make our case pointless as at that point they have enforced their rules.

I think the dislike towards your club/fans (which I don't share) stems from a few things. Since 18/19 a number of your fans on social media revelled in the fact that Mel Morris had the whole league "on strings" and could do whatever he pleased, when Gibson originally raised his concerns over your spending these same people aimed abuse and mockery at him. As I'm sure you're aware, Steve Gibson is extremely well liked by Middlesbrough fans, so seeing him take abuse for pointing out that someone was cheating definitely got a lot of our fans backs up. Seeing him now being portrayed as the villain by many who also drank Mel's kool-aid is pretty irksome too I'd imagine, he told you that you were cheating, he told you that Mel was a liar, and now he has been proven correct he still gets abuse.

No, he's not being portrayed as a villain for pointing out our cheating. But while he's at that can his solicitors come and sort us out for our losses to QPR and Villa. We forgot to cry about it

I think he's being portrayed as the villain because he continues his pathetic war after Morris has gone and we lost 21 points, people lost jobs, players sold and we can't move forward because of him. 

That would probably tip the balance. 

[Chris_D]

31 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

 

They’d all have to agree (including the court) https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part19/pd_part19a

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

34 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. 

Do you not think this all patently ridiculous.  Bournemouth took 4 points off you at one point denying you automatic promotion and they broke FFP by a mile that year.  I imagine the pay out from that one would be much better. Unfortunately, they have plenty of money in the bank to bat of such ridiculous claims so your chairman isn't bothered.  

[Day]

2 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

Thanks for the reply, I'm really not here to have a slanging match or an argument. I've been following this thread for a while and just wanted to log back in to try and give a bit of our side, which I hope I can do.

1) No, despite the clearly inflated price the stadium was sold for this was deemed to be within the rules by the EFL even after appeals. If we have an issue with that aspect we should be pursuing the EFL.

2) See above.

3) I think the EFL have handled the situation terribly since the start (and I mean the end of the 18/19 season when they had access to your accounts that have since been found to be against the rules). As for why Boro/Gibson dropped any action against the EFL, I believe the prospective case was about them not enforcing their own rules properly. By giving you a fine and points deduction that would make our case pointless as at that point they have enforced their rules.

I think the dislike towards your club/fans (which I don't share) stems from a few things. Since 18/19 a number of your fans on social media revelled in the fact that Mel Morris had the whole league "on strings" and could do whatever he pleased, when Gibson originally raised his concerns over your spending these same people aimed abuse and mockery at him. As I'm sure you're aware, Steve Gibson is extremely well liked by Middlesbrough fans, so seeing him take abuse for pointing out that someone was cheating definitely got a lot of our fans backs up. Seeing him now being portrayed as the villain by many who also drank Mel's kool-aid is pretty irksome too I'd imagine, he told you that you were cheating, he told you that Mel was a liar, and now he has been proven correct he still gets abuse.

Appreciate the reply, also appreciate you coming on, always good to hear the thoughts from the opposite side.

We have however had a very large number of registration requests from the North East which I have declined given the ongoing situation.

You can usually tell by the timing of joining what the intentions are. 

[Indy]

18 minutes ago, BoroWill said:

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.

If we believe the timeline being put forward by Gibson, he started action in January 2019 - is that correct? Because that’s five months before we were found guilty of anything. So what would be the basis of that complaint? And how could DCFC reasonably be expected to respond to an accusation of wrongdoing that was still being adjudicated upon at that point?