DC can find money when he wants

27 minutes ago, SheffWed said:

The regulator isn’t going to come in and kick him out instantly, it’s naive to think that will happen.

 

It will take time, he will fight it, delay it, red tape etc.

 

People need to stop relying on the regulator.

 

 

I don’t think anyone is naive enough to think the regulator will come in and get rid of him within a matter of weeks.

Realistically most fans know the idiot won’t let the club go without a fight but legislation has been changed and we already know they’re going to be given the power to remove him (which they will).

My own personal feeling is they’ll probably get rid of him by the Spring which given as I’ve already written this season off anyway, I’m ok with that. As long as a new owner has chance to come in and start the rebuild in good time ahead of our League 1 campaign I’ll be ok with it.

Powers of the IFR 

The IFR has a range of escalating powers it can use against unsuitable owners: 

Removal Directions: 

The IFR can direct an unsuitable owner or director to take steps to be removed from their position by a specified date. 

Ownership Removal Orders: 

If a person fails to comply with a removal direction, the IFR can issue an order forcing their removal. 

Disqualification Orders: 

The IFR can disqualify an individual from being an owner or director of any regulated club for a set or indefinite period. 

Appointment of Trustees: 

In the most extreme cases, where an owner fails to comply with removal orders, the IFR can appoint trustees to act on behalf of the owner and sell the club. 

Past statements from Chansiri say that he doesn’t play games etc and it’s all genuine… 

People need to engage their brains a bit.

If there was any litigation, then it would be around his suitability to run a football club.

You can't really argue that you're suitable during litigation as you refuse to put any money into the thing you are arguing for suitable ownership over. 

"So, your client maintains that he is suitable to run this football club as playing and non playing staff go unpaid and we find ourselves here..."

4 minutes ago, SiJ said:

People need to engage their brains a bit.

 

If there was any litigation, then it would be around his suitability to run a football club.

 

You can't really argue that you're suitable during litigation as you refuse to put any money into the thing you are arguing for suitable ownership over. 

Exactly. How can you argue you're a fit owner when you're paying £100,00's for legal representation and not paying staff, bills, HMRC etc? 

1 minute ago, chorleyowl said:

Exactly. How can you argue you're a fit owner when you're paying £100,00's for legal representation and not paying staff, bills, HMRC etc? 

Quite.

He'd have lost before he started. Throw in all the other stuff too.

My point is and it’s said in the SWFC trust site, the IFR can’t simply remove an owner on demand.

They have to notify him, give him a chance to respond/appeal.
 

DC will appeal we know that, he’s appealed everything chucked at him.

I just think it won’t be as quick as people think, he will go eventually but he will fight it.

We all know DC isn’t fit and proper, but he thinks he’s above it all. He will fight it.

You always have a right to appeal and he will, we know that. He will go fighting.

1 minute ago, SheffWed said:

My point is and it’s said in the SWFC trust site, the IFR can’t simply remove an owner on demand.

 

They have to notify him, give him a chance to respond/appeal.
 

DC will appeal we know that, he’s appealed everything chucked at him.

 

I just think it won’t be as quick as people think, he will go eventually but he will fight it.

We all know DC isn’t fit and proper, but he thinks he’s above it all. He will fight it.

 

You always have a right to appeal and he will, we know that. He will go fighting.

 

He may do, but he'll lose.

6 minutes ago, SiJ said:

He may do, but he'll lose.

Like he always does.

Of course he's got money. He always manages to pay wages mid way through the month so that he can keep his grubby little claws on the club.

So why does he not pay the players on time? My view is that he wants to give the players the reason for tearing up their contracts, the higher paid ones that is, so they'll leave in January thus reducing his costs again so that he can keep control. He's a spiteful little dictator IMO.

1 minute ago, Beauchief Owl said:

He always manages to pay wages mid way through the month

He’s said before he ‘invests’ his money

Whatever that means 

Maybe he’s drawing on his pension or something

It’s all so toxic 

All the owners we could’ve had 

3 minutes ago, Beauchief Owl said:

Of course he's got money. He always manages to pay wages mid way through the month so that he can keep his grubby little claws on the club.

So why does he not pay the players on time? My view is that he wants to give the players the reason for tearing up their contracts, the higher paid ones that is, so they'll leave in January thus reducing his costs again so that he can keep control. He's a spiteful little dictator IMO.

It’s the £450k EFL basic award money that pays, it is due on or around the 15th of the month

1 hour ago, royalowlisback said:

He will find the money for the best legal minds going when the Regulator comes up against him.

What about when the tax man takes him to court for unpaid bills?.......but more clear cut that one. 

Well given the attendance today and the ridiculous POTG charges the take from the Coventry fans ought to be enough for wages to be paid this week.

1 minute ago, Prutton Away said:

What about when the tax man takes him to court for unpaid bills?.......but more clear cut that one. 

True. You might get away with paying staff/players late for a while.

But the Tax Man & VAT Man are two parties you really don't want to get on the wrong side of.