The Football Creditor rule is explicit, simple, and solves all of Derby's issues

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

I'm not clued up Pete but I didn't think that was said. They used a phrase which I thought basically meant if they followed the law of the land their claims would be squashed? 

 

PS . I think they spoke of coming out of administration clean?

The word they used was compromised not squashed. But I guess it means the same thing. Compressed or reduced due to the solvency situation. 

[Gaspode]

40 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Well your unqualified view, is as good as my unquallified view, is as good as anyone's unqualified view.

It seems we have no expert on this forum, well versed in the practical applications of Insolvency Law. I think it high time that David brought in some membership bar whereby you can only become a member and post if you are of some professional standing. I would like my own chair too.

I don't think we need an expert to explain to the EFL that the law of the land trumps any 'rules' they may have put in place - if thery've not kept up with changes to the law, that's on their heads and I'd hope the relvant authorities will give them a good kicking (and a huge fine; and imprison all of their committee members; and disband their dubious organisation.....etc, etc....)

[i-Ram]

7 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

I don't think we need an expert to explain to the EFL that the law of the land trumps any 'rules' they may have put in place - if thery've not kept up with changes to the law, that's on their heads and I'd hope the relvant authorities will give them a good kicking (and a huge fine; and imprison all of their committee members; and disband their dubious organisation.....etc, etc....)

You Sir should have your own chair too.

[PistoldPete]

49 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Well your unqualified view, is as good as my unquallified view, is as good as anyone's unqualified view.

It seems we have no expert on this forum, well versed in the practical applications of Insolvency Law. I think it high time that David brought in some membership bar whereby you can only become a member and post if you are of some professional standing. I would like my own chair too.

The Efl has experts on insolvency.

Peter Ridsdale. He’s had loads of insolvencies . 

[DavesaRam]

4 hours ago, Kathcairns said:

Have just read this, has gibson forgotten this. I think it wants bringing up in our figh for our club.

(https://intelligenceuk.com/index.php/2021/05/06/teesside-is-the-fraud-and-asset-stripping-hub-of-the-corrupt-establishment/)

As well as telling us about Gibson's shady business activities, this article also tells us that he has connections with Boris Johnson and his cronies, so there is a very good chance that there will be little help from the Government regardless of how weak Gibbo's claim is.

[Day]

4 hours ago, Ramitupper said:

Although it's really helpful, I think you may be barking up the wrong lamp post..

Article 48 merely defines who is a Football creditor when payment is due and is in default.

Under these terms, the rule simply defines that if we owe money to Middlesbrough et al, for whatever reason, then the debt is then treated as a preferential football debt and must be repaid in full.

At the time of going into administration, and as of right now, we do not owe Middlesbrough or Wickham any money at all. Zilch. 

However, the administrators view, quite rightly, is that although Middlesbrough are a football creditor ordinarily by definition, this action is potentially one of litigation for damages, and is clearly in dispute and indeed was not even filed for litigation prior to DCFC going into administration (presumably with Middlesbrough following EFL instruction).  

There is no debt, there are no amounts owed, currently.

The EFL however will have convinced Middlesbrough that they [EFL] will decide what, if anything, is owed - to avoid costly litigation. And we all know very well what that usually means... ?

The problem is that, as this should have been a matter of litigation not arbitration, the EFL has indeed shot themselves in both feet and may now, quite rightly, either be sued by DCFC or sued by Middlesbrough.

The EFL's own incompetence and delusions of an all-powerful being, has put all parties in a lose/lose situation. 

The only way out I can see is for the EFL to pay off Middlesbrough and Wickham.

The alternative being that DCFC goes into liquidation and the EFL's litigation problem potentially goes away, but things then may get a whole lot worse and the EFL risks being reformed into something else..

I'd like to see all parties stick to their guns, we go to court external from the EFL, and DCFC finds funding for the remainder of the season.

That way the EFL will almost certainly implode, DCFC gets to survive.

So, admins - find the cash from one of the potential owners, go to court and get a ruling. The EFL can whistle. The new owners then buy the club once the litigation is concluded. I.e. some time in the summer... 

You have put forward a case that suggests Boro and Wycombe are not football creditors, which article 48 confirms.

Which is also exactly the purpose of this topic to highlight this.

Boro and Wycombe are not football creditors, remove them and all this goes away.

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, David said:

You have put forward a case that suggests Boro and Wycombe are not football creditors, which article 48 confirms.

Which is also exactly the purpose of this topic to highlight this.

Boro and Wycombe are not football creditors, remove them and all this goes away.

How?

When Q tried this last Friday the EFL stopped them.

[Day]

4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

How?

When Q tried this last Friday the EFL stopped them.

Continue the pressure, bring attention to the issue, MP's, media.

The point was raised in the House of Commons yesterday calling for the Sports Minister to investigate.

Can't stress enough how pivotal this is.

[Day]

Just going back to highlight a key section of the Boro statement yesterday.

The club believes that it is a Football Creditor but accepts that, as things stand, the size of the debt due is unknown. All MFC have said is that any new owner should be required to honour the final decision of the Arbitration Panel on behalf of Derby County once that is known.

Article 48 clearly shows they are not football creditors. There is no debt, this isn't outstanding transfer payments, sell on clauses, just a claim for an unknown in their words amount.

[CBRammette]

On 18/01/2022 at 12:00, Rev said:

Who wrote that for you?

Know who I like to think it is. Makes some things clearer. Very well summarised ??

[Kathcairns]

1 hour ago, DavesaRam said:

(https://intelligenceuk.com/index.php/2021/05/06/teesside-is-the-fraud-and-asset-stripping-hub-of-the-corrupt-establishment/)

As well as telling us about Gibson's shady business activities, this article also tells us that he has connections with Boris Johnson and his cronies, so there is a very good chance that there will be little help from the Government regardless of how weak Gibbo's claim is.

Not so sure Boris fighting for his life at the moment, don't think he would want this cropping up again at the moment.

[John_Oppo_N]

Fantastic post and excellent work David. This absolutely cannot happen to this wonderful football club. I’ve not posted in years on here, but in our beloved clubs time of grave need, I too will do whatever it takes, for justice and for Derby County FC. 
 

Sorry if I’m late to the party guys, but anyone wanting to form a protest march, I’m all in.

[Indy]

16 minutes ago, Kathcairns said:

Not so sure Boris fighting for his life at the moment, don't think he would want this cropping up again at the moment.

This is a distraction at the moment. Start waving this around and it makes our situation a party political issue, at which point we lose the cross-party support and pressure. We should stick to the facts around EFL’s duty to us and football in general (as eloquently pulled apart by Margaret Beckett), their failure to update their rules to match the statute, and the natural justice around Boro’s fantasy speculation and Wycombe’s case, whatever that is. 

[Kathcairns]

10 minutes ago, Indy said:

This is a distraction at the moment. Start waving this around and it makes our situation a party political issue, at which point we lose the cross-party support and pressure. We should stick to the facts around EFL’s duty to us and football in general (as eloquently pulled apart by Margaret Beckett), their failure to update their rules to match the statute, and the natural justice around Boro’s fantasy speculation and Wycombe’s case, whatever that is. 

My comment was answering the comment that  the goverment would not do anything. You are probably right, am just trying to think of things to help our club.

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, David said:

Just going back to highlight a key section of the Boro statement yesterday.

The club believes that it is a Football Creditor but accepts that, as things stand, the size of the debt due is unknown. All MFC have said is that any new owner should be required to honour the final decision of the Arbitration Panel on behalf of Derby County once that is known.

Article 48 clearly shows they are not football creditors. There is no debt, this isn't outstanding transfer payments, sell on clauses, just a claim for an unknown in their words amount.

The issue is even worse for Boro in trying to get football creditors status.

if the buyer offers Boro a settlement as football creditors but doesn’t adjust the price already offered then the proper creditors get less . 
 

Hmrc won’t like that and neither will the Government. In fact it may be contrary to what insolvency law says for preferred creditors like Hmrc are now.

[Day]

[simmoram1995]

16 minutes ago, David said:

I think we’re done for … ???

 

[Day]

3 minutes ago, simmoram1995 said:

I think we’re done for … ???

 

I think the opposite. The amount of exposure this has now in the media and with MP's, made public that EFL cut a deal with Boro to save themselves from legal action and go for us. 

I'm more optimistic than ever that the EFL could not see us go under, it's in their best interests now to see us taken over and all this brushed under the rug as quickly as possible.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I admire your optimism David, but cant help but agree with simmo.  The conflicts of interest within the EFL may pull them down in the eyes of those wanting to introduce proper and fair regulation into football, but we could be the victim to prove that point

Edited January 19, 2022 by Geoff Parkstone

[Crewton]

7 minutes ago, Geoff Parkstone said:

I admire your optimism David, but cant help but agree with simmo.  The conflicts of interest within the EFL may pull them down in the eyes of those wanting to introduce proper and fair regulation into football, but we could be the victim to prove that point

If we die, so do they - I reckon Parliament will finish them off.