----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Humphries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >I assumed that if a challenge came in after day 1, for example, then it > could be actioned immediately? > So, are you saying that it wouldn't have mattered if a challenge came in > on > day one, KPMG would have waited for the 1 month period before dealing with > them (all)? > Also put this question into context - I see ANY challenge to the CVA > as a disruption for the club.
AFAIK it does not work on the first challenger gets preference basis. Maybe an early challenge could begin to be dealt with immediately but the 28 day window would remain open for any other challenges that might be made. Just like you, I also regard any challenge as disruption for the club but I think it should be remembered that the 28 day period was known about beforehand and so was inevitably part of the Bates/Taylor plan right from the outset. I think where we differ in our views is that I regard the way in which this has all been done as the reason and the cause for any challenges especially when you put it in the contect of Bates' business history and the nature of the investor creditors. The investor creditors spent their money in order to "own" LUFC. As they still appear to "own" LUFC then they also appear to have lost nothing except the costs of the administration. As far as HMRC are concerned I don't know but have been told that they usually wait until the deadline in order to allow maximum time for investigation and also to see what else turns up during the window. _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
