High Court hearing v Charterhouse 14/07/2010

[Onion_Bag_Dave]

Matt that makes sense to me. I would also add the following

Did Ron know that this was going to happen today--- none of us know the answer to that?

If the answer is yes then this possibly explains

• Why he has stayed on holiday- he wasn't needed for the court case.
• Why we didn't bother to pay them- we can use the money better somewhere else

As always the problem is that we only see a small part of the jigsaw. Maybe Charterhouse are right at the bottom of our list to pay and are not one of our biggest issues right now .
At the time of saying 'we will pay them' he beelived that they would take us to court

Clearly this is not what any of us wanted to hear, and its very diffcult/impossible to be positive over todays news.
ps- why is everyone taking the audit as gospel ? The initial reporting on us last week was totally wrong.

That is very correct, but because it is on the O/S http://www.southendunited.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10444~2091981,00.html

:(

 

[Beefy]

Yes I agree with that Beefy in a further post I made.

Yep so I then saw. There's a lot of words in this thread....

 

[Kestrel]

That is very correct, but because it is on the O/S http://www.southendunited.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10444~2091981,00.html

:(

doesn't mention the audit on there OBD . . . hence my earlier post about the OS statement as being rather brief and potentially lacking in substance

 

[united we stand]

That is very correct, but because it is on the O/S http://www.southendunited.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10444~2091981,00.html

:(

as I missing something, I don't see the audit being mentioned

 

[Firestorm]

Can someone please explain why there is now an independent audit of SUFC's accounts?

Asking the club to provide a detailed plan proving financial security going forward is one thing.

But an Audit? That's one step away from being placed in Administration, is it not?

Where has this information about an independant audit come from ?

 

[pickledseal]

Where has this information about an independant audit come from ?

Echo.

So it is likely to be wrong. ;)

 

[Kestrel]

Where has this information about an independant audit come from ?

in this article

http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/loc...nited_given_more_time_to_sort_out_money_woes/

 

[Shrimpador]

Precisely. People seem to be looking at this somewhat back-to-front. Today's hearing hasn't told us anything new about the club's financial situation.

If the creditor presses for administration, then an administrator is appointed and at that point the creditor effectively kisses goodbye to some of its debt. He definitely won't get back 100p in the £ in administration. A good result in administration is 50p in the £; I've seen some administrations where the dividend is only 1p in the £.

So, Charterhouse could press for winding up today and risk getting back - say - only £70k. Or maybe even only £1,400. If you're Charterhouse, that's a pretty terrible result, isn't it?

Alternatively, you simply postpone your petition, knowing that the court has ordered the club has to present a full audit of its finances / accounts to court on 2nd August. Charterhouse will of course turn up then, so they can see what the picture is.

In a sense, the 28-day postponement is only there as a "stick" with which to prod the club for cash if the club is solvent. If the club has the money, they'll pay the debt (albeit that having the winding up order still listed will encourage payment on or before 11 August). If the club has no money, it'll be wound up.

2 August is the day, folks. If the club can't show the court it is solvent, the court will probably wind the club up of its own motion.

That's how I see it, at any rate.

Matt

Matt,

If the club can't show they are solvent, aren't the directors breaking the law by continuing to trade?

All the creditors could go after them personally couldn't they?
I'm amazed the directors haven't already pulled the plug - probably shows how much Ron Martin has on the line if he's willing to take that risk

 

[Onion_Bag_Dave]

doesn't mention the audit on there OBD . . . hence my earlier post about the OS statement as being rather brief and potentially lacking in substance

Didn't read your post properly, my brain isn't working, I'm just typing rubbish. I apologise I expect my saneness to be regained soon.

Crocodile and a tin of peas went for a up the road circular sausage.

 

[THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK]

I think the amounts are irrelevant now.. What is far more important - is that the Chairman, and indeed board members who side with him are ****ing incompetent, they cannot run this business, and that is indeed a fact.

Sometimes it makes you wonder WTF the Directors are doing about any of this. Or does he say to them ''It's my club'', when or if they speak up.
Or does he have them in his pocket, like he has nice bloke David Scriven.

 

[Swiss Tony]

Time to march,Martini out.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Matt,

If the club can't show they are solvent, aren't the directors breaking the law by continuing to trade?

Solvency is tied to the ability to pay one's debts as & when they fall due - something the club has, admittedly, been very poor at doing... but it has been doing it. So the directors appear to have their noses clean for now.

As to why the money wasn't paid today... well, why pay money now if you can hold onto it for another month? That appears to be the club's philosophy - just ask some of our recently ex-players (Mildenhall, Barrett, McComack, Francis...). It's a tawdry way to go about business, but not it's not an illegal one. Or unique to SUFC, sadly.

 

[Firestorm]

The last winding up order resulted in IIRC
SUFC having to prove their Viability as a business within 14 days otherwise they would be wound up on August 2nd

As far as I am aware that has not changed.

As to why Charterhouse chose to ask for an adjournment ? No Idea, Unless someone else has been talking to them ... but why is it RM's fault that an adjournment was applied for ? Even if we had paid, I believe that an application for an adjournment by the Applicant would be considered before the hearing, If it went to the hearing we would then seek dismissal on the grounds that the debt was paid or an adjournment for time to pay.

There is some other reason why Charterhouse sought the Adjournment

 

[Onion_Bag_Dave]

Sometimes it makes you wonder WTF the Directors are doing about any of this. Or does he say to them ''It's my club'', when or if they speak up.
Or does he have them in his pocket, like he has nice bloke David Scriven.

What If I was to say this, and that I know this to be true??

The court case last week for HMRC - Brunning was sent there with no back up, nothing at all, he is completely ****ed off with situation, and is being completely kept in the dark by Ron Martin...

 

[THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK]

August 11th, jeez, looks like the rotting carcass is being left to rot a lot longer.



Hope the great leader chokes on his banana daiquiri.

 

[Smiffy]

The last winding up order resulted in IIRC
SUFC having to prove their Viability as a business within 14 days otherwise they would be wound up on August 2nd

As far as I am aware that has not changed.

As to why Charterhouse chose to ask for an adjournment ? No Idea, Unless someone else has been talking to them ... but why is it RM's fault that an adjournment was applied for ? Even if we had paid, I believe that an application for an adjournment by the Applicant would be considered before the hearing, If it went to the hearing we would then seek dismissal on the grounds that the debt was paid or an adjournment for time to pay.

There is some other reason why Charterhouse sought the Adjournment

Of course there is.

All creditors aligning themselves as one, ready to strike?

Perhaps they are owed a shed load more than the £140,000 maybe?

 

[Smiffy]

Sometimes it makes you wonder WTF the Directors are doing about any of this. Or does he say to them ''It's my club'', when or if they speak up.
Or does he have them in his pocket, like he has nice bloke David Scriven.

See this is what ****s me off.

I cannot believe for one minute ALL the directors are happy with what is going on.

Grow some ****ing balls and call an EGM.

 

[THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK]

What If I was to say this, and that I know this to be true??

The court case last week for HMRC - Brunning was sent there with no back up, nothing at all, he is completely ****ed off with situation, and is being completely kept in the dark by Ron Martin...

Dave, that would normally be very shocking, and an absolute disgrace.

Would we be surprised? No.

 

[Onion_Bag_Dave]

See this is what ****s me off.

I cannot believe for one minute ALL the directors are happy with what is going on.

Grow some ****ing balls and call an EGM.

What If I was to say this, and that I know this to be true??

The court case last week for HMRC - Brunning was sent there with no back up, nothing at all, he is completely ****ed off with situation, and is being completely kept in the dark by Ron Martin...

Read my post if you haven't already.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Grow some ****ing balls and call an EGM.

The call for an EGM would be carried on votes... which Ron controls as 76% shareholder.