• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Stewarts Law LLP/PG Site v SUFC - 26 June 2024 - DISMISSED WITH COSTS

So answer me this, who came to agreement with Stewarts and PG? Was it Rat or COSU?

Now petition dismissed does the Unbongo get lifted?
 
But the bond and the embargo aren’t linked are they?
No- embargo should be lifted.
If we failed to post bond (no-one know when it due- not in NL statement, CP could find anyone who knows either) it possible another embargo could be a sanction so best close any ongoing transfer activity/extensions quickly!
 
Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Burton10:30amThe Rolls Building Court 30Winding up petitionCR-2024-001132Southend United Football Club Limited (The)

10:30am KO this morning away at the Rolls Building. Home from home really and what a record we have.

Judge Catherine Burton is the ref today and also officiated the previous meeting in which she marked the next as final, so will be well aware of the enormity of this fixture.

Stewarts Law LLP have come to a "settlement" out of court with COSU, but what about PG Site Services, will they push for a late winner to break Shrimpers hearts. Or will their defence crumble and settle for a draw?

The Shrimpers defence has been resolute up until now, can it hold again?

The latest odds would suggest a draw (adjournment) is the odds on favourite today. But there is also a late flurry of money being placed on an away win (petition dismissed), with a home win (Liquidation) a big outsider.
Did anyone jump on?

££££
 
One person sitting there not coughing up enjoying the theatre?

Was the female companion necessarily built like a brick sh.t house?

I wonder when we will ever get a normal start to a season, so depressing reading about how all our competitors are setting up to go
 
So answer me this, who came to agreement with Stewarts and PG? Was it Rat or COSU?

Now petition dismissed does the Unbongo get lifted?
The word settlement was used in both cases wasn’t it… it’s possible we paid in full but didn’t want to aggravate/set expectations with other creditors. More like we offered a lump now with balance on takeover. PG obviously played hard ball but probably were always going to agree something. COSU understandably would want to minimise what the stump up now? My reading anyway
 
SOUTHEND United's winding up petition has been dismissed at the High Court this morning.

A settlement with PG Site Services was reached just minutes before the hearing got underway this morning.
READ MORE: Follow all the latest from the High Court hearing
Shrimpers chairman Ron Martin was in attendance but the hearing lasted less than a minute.
Blues also reached a settlement with Stewarts Law yesterday.
I suspect my tweet to them pushed them into a settlement
 
But wasn’t the bond put in place because the wup which is now cleared
No it was required because

the National League has today advised Southend United Football Club that as a result of the Club’s failure to provide the League with detailed, objective and independent evidence that the Club has sufficient funds to meet its financial obligations for the forthcoming National League season, and in light of previously-expressed concerns (underscored by the most recently-filed accounts), the Club will be required to post a bond of £1million, which will be held in escrow to the order of the League.

No mention of the Winding Up Petition.
 
One person sitting there not coughing up enjoying the theatre?

Was the female companion necessarily built like a brick sh.t house?

I wonder when we will ever get a normal start to a season, so depressing reading about how all our competitors are setting up to go
Might it have been his cleaner doing a bit of work experience?
 



PG SITE Services agreed to a financial settlement with the custodians of Southend United today “in the best interest of the club’s future.”

A winding up petition against Blues by PG Site Services was dismissed at the High Court in under a minute this morning.

And Dave Goodger, the manager director of PG Site Services, has revealed in a statement to Echosport that he has agreed to payment plan to allow the Shrimpers to proceed with less problem.

Goodger said: “We reached settlement today with the consortium to disperse the club’s debt to us over instalments over the next 11 weeks.

“Our debt was a secure debt as we have legal charges over property owned by Ron Martin’s family.”

Blues reached a settlement with Stewarts Law at the start of the week.

And they have now done the same with PG Sites who loaned the club money to ensure wages could be paid.

“The debt to us was made up of loans to the club whilst we were the main sponsors on New Year’s Eve 2022,” explained Goodger.

“My FD Matt Day and myself spent most of the day working with Tom Lawrence putting together a loan agreement of £200k to pay staff and players’ wages.

“Had we not done so the club would have probably ended then.”

However, the club’s chairman Ron Martin has been unable to repay their loan and that led to PG Site Services pursuing legal action.

Goodger added: “Unfortunately Ron Martin, through no direct fault of his own, was unable to raise the funding to refinance the club.

“The unfortunate circumstances of us then having to take action against the club sadly made it impossible for us to continue as sponsors.”

But Goodger did agree to today’s dismissal.

“We could have continued with our legal action against SUFC and no doubt it would have forced COSU to pay us off in full on completion expected this Friday,” explained Goodger.

“But in the interest of the club’s future we agreed a reduction and have trusted them to keep to the payment plan agreed.”
 
“We could have continued with our legal action against SUFC and no doubt it would have forced COSU to pay us off in full on completion expected this Friday,” explained Goodger.

“But in the interest of the club’s future we agreed a reduction and have trusted them to keep to the payment plan agreed.”
Have PG inadvertently given us the timeline?
 
Back
Top