Rick - any thoughts or insights to the news in the Sunday Times yesterday (Business section P.3) that some creditors believe they have found a "major flaw in the vote that backed Bates' proposal to buy back the club"
"Creditors challenging the Bates deal now believe Astor could legally vote only respect of the £13m it was owed." "Ahead of the creditors' meeting, Astor lodged a proxy backing Bates' takeover. It said it spoke for around £18m of debt - the money owed to Forward Sport and Krato as well as to Astor itself." "Forward Sport and Krato should have lodged their own proxies because they had not assigned the debt before the May administration" ta Stotty ----- Original Message ----- From: "RickD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "leedslist" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [LU] So let me guess ... > ----- 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
