0
    0

    Comment on Bad Money? by OttoKaiser.

    Intersting, from the 2011-12 UEFA Regs.:

    Article 3 Integrity of the competition 3.01 To ensure the integrity of the UEFA club competitions, the following criteria apply: a) no club participating in a UEFA club competition may, either directly or indirectly: i) hold or deal in the securities or shares of any other club participating in a UEFA club competition,

    https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/competitions/Regulations/01/63/02/44/1630244_DOWNLOAD.pdf

    Now, when did the bold Craig sell those shares!?

    Seems the rule was in place prior to 2011/12 season also so on that basis, old incarnation would seem to fall afoul of that rule as Arsenal were in CL alongside them in 2010-11 and 11-12 and would have been in contravention every other year the rule was in force and both played in UEFA competition.

     

    OttoKaiser Also Commented

    Bad Money?
    Timtim @25th July 2019 at 22:52

    It's a good point you raise – presumably it wasnt a small value the Close Bros. loan, otherwise you would think that the directors themselves would likely have covered it off  – insofar as they seem to be able to pull together between £1m-£5m at various times.

    On that premise you would think it's got to be over £5m and would likely attract a rate that would reflect that commercial risk i.e. above 10% and possibly more based on the credit rating of the borrower

    Unfortunately with the available RIFC accounts only being up to June 18 all that is visible will be the first lot of finance charges (I am assuming they are booking it under that of course) covering Feb 18-June 18.

    The next set of accounts will give greater insight as to what the rates are based on the  second tranche of charges and the remaining initial charge.


    Bad Money?
    Timtim@ 12:40

    That's correct – the judgement confirms under para.20 ("Termination of the IPLA"):

    SDIR issued a derivative claim on 4 August 2016 on behalf of RRL in which it sought declaratory and injunctive relief the effect of which was to maintain the IPLA in place and to claim damages for breach of contract from Rangers and compensation from Mr King and another director, Mr Murray. The application was heard by Richard Millett QC in March 2017. He gave judgement on 6 April 2017 SDI Retail Services Limited v David King & Ors [2017] EWHC 737. SDIR was given permission to continue its claim as a derivative claim.

    Very nice of Glib and Murray (named directors of RRL) to eschew personal liability by paying out £3m of TRFC Ltd's  money, agree a further onerous contract making TRFC Ltd liable and claim victory over the bad guy's in the process.


    Bad Money?
    Interesting looking at the outstanding charges on the assets, it appears a few have been secured more than once – presumably they didnt take full value in the first instance and went back to leverage more.

    Looking at the finance costs in the accounts lease finance agreement to June 18 were £54k, I am assuming that's the two initial charges registered in Feb 18 – so £13.5k month potentially financing on a loan of??????

    SC42 5159 0013 (18th Feb, 2018) – Outstanding

    Assets Secured:

    Stadium Catering Outlets

    Stadium PA System

    Stadium Bowl Screens

    Stadium WiFi (whatever happened to the court case on that!)

    Albion Car Park

    Edmiston House

    SC42 5159 0014  (20th Feb, 2019) – Outstanding

    Assets Secured:

    Stadium Catering Outlets

    Stadium PA System

    Stadium Bowl Screens

    Stadium WiFi 

    Albion Car Park

    Edmiston House

    SC42 5159 0015 (20th Feb, 2019) – Outstanding

    Secured Assets:

    Albion Car Park

    Edmiston House


    Recent Comments by OttoKaiser

    Accountability via Transparency.
    IIRC the case between Orlit Enterprises and TRFC Ltd. was scheduled for the Sheriff Court the week before last over the disputed £200k "finders fee".

    Anyone know if it in fact took place?

     

    Seems to have dragged on since 2013!


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Just on a quick skim read it seems that all of the arguments put forward by Rangers failed and that, quelle suprise, they are looking to go to the Court of Appeal 


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Judgement published:

    http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2019/1419.html


    Accountability via Transparency.
    John Clark 29th April 2019 at 17:26

    bordersdon 29th April 2019 at 20:52

    ————————————————-

    Not sure if the judgements drop elsewhere quicker but they are usually uploaded here eventually:

    https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2019/

    The previous judgements are up there in Feb/March.

    Purely going by the general trend between hearing and judgement being handed down it looks to be 3-4 weeks, so might be a few weeks yet before anything is heard.

     


    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2019/207.html

     

    For those interested in the most recent round of litigation (SDI vs. RFC Ltd.)