undercovershrimper
Director
Do we know if they are representing themselves in court?
Unlikely I would think, they will probably have a KC of some sort
Do we know if they are representing themselves in court?
Someone else to be contacted? How would we know who it is?Unlikely I would think, they will probably have a KC of some sort
Someone else to be contacted? How would we know who it is?
What a shocking reply!our response to Stewarts Law LLP ill-considered attempt to get our football club wound up, having acted on its behalf to defend against previous petitions and argued for it as an important community asset. We ask them to “read the room” and withdraw the petition.View attachment 31620View attachment 31621View attachment 31622View attachment 31623
Apparently my friend has known Mr Symes for about 20 to 30 years! He contacted Mr Symes - but the response was just that he couldn't say anything about it.oh - we have a mutual connection - a very good friend - let me contact him, doubt it will help but you never know
How is it shocking? It's a pretty standard response.What a shocking reply!
Contesting previous WUPs, perhaps?I’ve heard the figure of £400,000 bandied about. Don’t know if that is correct but if it is why has the club incurred legal costs of £400,000?
Despite all my affection and bias towards Southend Utd, the stuff below keeps rolling around my head:
Why would a legal firm that has just filed for Southend Utd to be wound up because they are owed £400k, enter into a conversation with anyone before the day of the hearing? Especially those of us that have nothing whatsoever to do with the amount owed. It's not nice for us, it's not nice for the Consortium, I don't care if it's not nice for the rat, but it is what it is, and legal morality or decency doesn't come into it where money owed is concerned.
The only way out of this before the court hearing is if the debt is cleared and no amount of us being outraged is going to change that.
You missed off Paul HollywoodContesting previous WUPs, perhaps?
As Jimmy Finlayson, Peter Glaze and Homer Simpson might have said, "D'oh!!!"
I see what you did there.You missed off Paul Hollywood
And Lieutenant Pigeon.I see what you did there.
That's a rather mouldy old joke.And Lieutenant Pigeon.
I think it is great to try, but I really don't think that anyone there will worry too much about what a few Southend fans will think. As for their image, solicitors represent the most reprehensible people at times - the image comes from winning cases. You win, people hire you. You look soft or loose I suspect people are less keen to hire you.TBH I don't expect them to engage with the fans.
There are more than 1 out of this. 1. As you say pay the debt off
2. Go into admin - doubt this will be carried out unless they think an adjournment is unlikely to be given and they 100% don't want/unable to pay
3. Stewart's withdraw the petition
3. Is what we can influence by attempting to sway their minds and or obtain enough publicity that it becomes the best way for Stewart's to manage their image.
I think we're on roughly the same page, ultimately they will be paid -the question is when?I think it is great to try, but I really don't think that anyone there will worry too much about what a few Southend fans will think. As for their image, solicitors represent the most reprehensible people at times - the image comes from winning cases. You win, people hire you. You look soft or loose I suspect people are less keen to hire you.
Also, the replies that people get are likely to be standard responses probably sent by quite a junior administrator from a stock of standard emails. I briefly worked for a major telecommunications company, and there were a list of standard replies to complaints that we used to give and people could sometimes be quite cruel in their replies.
They won't give a detailed response to a case in which they are involved. They will want their money. The way out of this is to pay them.