Court case for Accrington Stanley - Page 8

Darwenred1968 · 28-10-2009, 21:46

The deadline for the £308,000 unpaid tax bill to HM Revenue and Customs was originally today/wed but after declaring a significant shortfall, the League Two club were granted an additional seven days by the High Court.

Mr Registrar Simmonds allowed the extension but warned there would be no more leeway for Stanley.
"Having regard to the number of adjournments I will give you seven days, that is November 4, and mark it absolutely final. The petition debt must be paid in full," Simmonds told the court.

Stanley claimed on Tuesday that £200,000 of the debt had been repaid but the club's lawyer indicated just £96,000 had been sent to HMRC.

With the directors pledging to put in £100,000 towards the debt, Khan has offered to service the remaining amount but wants the club to become transparent and allow him to help.

"I am very grateful the judge adopted a lenient attitude with regards to the case but I am also shocked at the amount on top of what we already know about that remains outstanding," he told Press Association Sport.

Khan was not invited to the court as part of Accrington's official party but turned up of his own accord.
From The Daily Telegraph.co.uk!!

simon · 28-10-2009, 21:47

lancsdave · 28-10-2009, 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

By the way, does anyone have a rough transcript of what Ilyas said this evening?

Dan is going to get it on 2BR link, not sure if it will be tonight or in the morning

Phil Whalley · 28-10-2009, 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

I'm still trying to sort all this out, Valairian. Where is this £100k coming from?

Is it from the directors?

Or is it the £100k from the PFA? Is this money from the PFA a gift or a loan?

I recall it being said that we already owe money to the PFA. Is this correct?

Rev - I would concur with Tealeaf and Whalley Red. My understanding is that the 100k is a renewed loan from the PFA, renewed because the money owed to the PFA from the earlier arrangement that you attest to was settled using the installment of Football League money that Stanley have just received. Unfortunately, this loan had not been fully processed by 10.30, so the only cash that the barrister could actually point to as a means of defending the club was the 96k paid from the SOS fund. Whether the 100k was received by HMRC by 5pm today will presumably emerge in due course.

This is what I gathered from being there this morning, and would happily be corrected if any of this is inaccurate. The eye-opener for me was the additional 125k of debt that has seemingly been accrued since. Ilyas told me he was still convinced that, run carefully, prudently and professionally, Stanley could survive and prosper as a Football League club. However, we are clearly a long way from that state of affairs.

CLAYTON RED · 28-10-2009, 21:54

This should of been settled today, they lied, they took th P**S out of us all, its time for them to go.

Tealeaf · 28-10-2009, 21:59

Maybe I should get a job as a Court Reporter. Anyway, just going off thread for a moment, the funniest statement I have ever heard in a Law Court happened just before Messrs O'Neil and co came into the courtroom.

The place was already jam packed - there must have been at least 30 wigs on the benches and all the public seats were taken up. The Clerk then stood up and announced in a very loud voice that it was time for everyone to switch off their mobiles, because - I quote "...if the Judge hears your mobile going off he will come down and bite yer head off....."

So much for Judge Simmons; so much for the Royal Courts of Justice.

Wynonie Harris · 28-10-2009, 22:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

"...if the Judge hears your mobile going off he will come down and bite yer head off....."

Don't you just wish O'Neill's mobile had gone off!

Revived Red · 28-10-2009, 22:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Whalley

Rev - I would concur with Tealeaf and Whalley Red. My understanding is that the 100k is a renewed loan from the PFA, renewed because the money owed to the PFA from the earlier arrangement that you attest to was settled using the installment of Football League money that Stanley have just received. Unfortunately, this loan had not been fully processed by 10.30, so the only cash that the barrister could actually point to as a means of defending the club was the 96k paid from the SOS fund. Whether the 100k was received by HMRC by 5pm today will presumably emerge in due course.

This is what I gathered from being there this morning, and would happily be corrected if any of this is inaccurate. The eye-opener for me was the additional 125k of debt that has seemingly been accrued since. Ilyas told me he was still convinced that, run carefully, prudently and professionally, Stanley could survive and prosper as a Football League club. However, we are clearly a long way from that state of affairs.

Many thanks, Phil. Yes, I agree with that assessment by Ilyas - and with your final sentence. There is little doubt that we must look to the future with a club being led by men and women of vision and integrity who have the ability to harness the immense goodwill which many people have towards the club and which has been jeopardised by the current management.

simon · 28-10-2009, 22:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Whalley

Ilyas told me he was still convinced that, run carefully, prudently and professionally, Stanley could survive and prosper as a Football League club. However, we are clearly a long way from that state of affairs.

That little Statement gives me great hope

Because that is the bottom line for the future...

Sparkologist · 28-10-2009, 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

"...if the Judge hears your mobile going off he will come down and bite yer head off....."

Good evening, Mr T, Sir. Thank you for your insight from within our judicial system. It is good to hear that the spirit of Judge Jefferies lives on, although I think that the Bloody Assizes would be too good for the collective muppet show, both previous and present, that has been claiming to steer our rudderless ship.
A libation is in order on your return to the Glorious North.

cashman · 28-10-2009, 22:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Whalley

The eye-opener for me was the additional 125k of debt that has seemingly been accrued since. Ilyas told me he was still convinced that, run carefully, prudently and professionally, Stanley could survive and prosper as a Football League club. However, we are clearly a long way from that state of affairs.

in a nutshell, the LIES N DECEIT must stop NOW. the transparency promised never materialised, NOW it MUST.

CLAYTON RED · 28-10-2009, 22:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

in a nutshell, the LIES N DECEIT must stop NOW. the transparency promised never materialised, NOW it MUST.

Do you think that will happen with them clowns in charge it has took me 8 weeks to wake up, it's like being re born, do not like to say this but K.S.H was right, hope it doe's not see this.

Tealeaf · 28-10-2009, 23:22

OK folks....maybe now it is time to say my piece, other than report on today's events. I stopped commenting on the financial predicament about a week or ten days ago because it became pretty obvious by then that there were serious underlying problems with what HMRC or accountants would term the "ongoing viability of a company". in other words, can the company(club) break even or reach profitability in the medium/long term? The answer, with ASFC under the current ownership -is, in my opinion, no.

The game was given away when the club announced the B share issue...the last grasp of the drowning man. No voting rights...almost certainly no dividend...just possibly a capital gain to be made should the said share, togeather with tickets and shirt - still in their presentation box - be sold on ebay as a collectors item in a few years time. That of course, rests on the assumtion that a kit manufacturer would be prepared to supply ASFC on terms other than cash up front. Knowing Stanley's status under winding-up petition, would any sensible company even prepare to supply ASFC? I think not.

Anyway, thats it for me tonight...too much excitement for one day.

Redraine · 28-10-2009, 23:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whalley Red

In terms of the PFA, they paid at least half of the players wages last month. Not sure about this month.

Ilyas said tonight he had offered to pay the players wages for both September and October and was told at various times by the club that his money was a) not needed but b), he could send it to the club for them to pay the players (!). We know the wages were paid (late) for September from where we do not know but, with the shortfall from the SOS fund and the 96k, we can hazard a guess. Nobody seems to know if the players have been paid for October and Ilyas is concerned for this to be ascertained as a matter of priority. Does anyone know?

cashman · 28-10-2009, 23:53

Probably only the players n those in close proximity know.

these lads along with coley n bell, deserve a medal fer performances during this fiasco IMHO.