Club statement regarding Barry Bennell's conviction

[asahartford1]

At the time I played alongside Roger Palmer and regularly against Peter Coyne. There was nothing like the obsession with comparisons that exists today but, if ever one lad was destined to succeed it was the hat-trick scoring, England schoolboy from Burnage not the skinny lad from Gt Western St.

I played with Dave and his brother Gary for a team called Ashford after Whitehill was shut down mid season because of Broome. The club (City) dealt with me brilliantly from the beginning of the survivors scheme.

I don't like to say anything too negative against those guys who lost the case but the level of award they would have recieved from City would have been quite handsome.
I was a Bedes boy so would have played Wilbraham high I think.
Dave is still a man about town I believe and likes a scoop.

 

[Bozzie]

I played with Dave and his brother Gary for a team called Ashford after Whitehill was shut down mid season because of Broome. The club (City) dealt with me brilliantly from the beginning of the survivors scheme.

I don't like to say anything too negative against those guys who lost the case but the level of award they would have recieved from City would have been quite handsome.
I was a Bedes boy so would have played Wilbraham high I think.
Dave is still a man about town I believe and likes a scoop.

Think you were a bit too posh for us Wilbraham lads! Pleased the club dealt with you as it should. David White spoke very movingly about his own experiences at our supporters club pre lock down. Roger lives in Sale I think and became a bit of a recluse from what I hear. We had some cracking players at Wilbraham around that time: Nigel Hart (Johnny Harts youngest) and a lad called Colin Johnson who everyone thought would make it, they were followed by Alex Williams, Eric Nixon and then Clive Wilson.

 

[Mid Wales blue]

The judge summed up that the abuse took place after B's association with city, even though the association not being employment could be argued as a technicality, the timing is a cast iron fact.

Paragraph 571 suggests an appeal would be hopeless, and probably bluster to try and get something from the redress scheme.

The Plaintiffs knew the risks of going to court to get more money, and the decision to do so was theirs alone.

This is how I read it.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Having read through the reports. It seems that these individuals have tried to claim Bennell, was associated with City, from 1980-1985.
This was proved to be wrong, as City, ended all connections with Bennell, 1978-1979, following internal investigations that sadly were kept quite, and swept under the carpet.

It is correct, that following the charges and subsequent convictions of Bennell, City set up an internal investigation along side a victim compensation package.
However it seems these claimants, don’t fall inside the time period that Bennell, had connections to the club.

I have to say, I am a child of the 80s and I saw that **** Bennell regularly when I trained every week on the astro at Platt Lane, him wearing City tracksuit.

If nothing else, how the twat was allowed such easy access even through the 80s, is mystifying.

You can certainly see why young children would just assume he was a bonafide City rep.

 

[oddfellows]

I know several acquaintances and friends who were abused by that excuse for a human, still haunted and living with the trauma of their abuse.

 

[the blue panther]

Firstly, I am sorry to anyone who had the misfortune of encountering this piece of shit.

City offered compensation through a redress scheme which seemingly was declined because the lawyers got greedy.

The insurance company called Bennell, and as far as I understand city were not consulted in any capacity.

The media are not reporting the facts but instead look for a slanderous headline.

This case is based on an individual’s reprehensible actions Not Manchester City who at best have loose links as to actually being his employer.

As I say, I am sorry for those that are suffering but it is not down to the employer. City did not facilitate his behaviour.

Bloodsucking lawyers using the pain and suffering against those who have been abused to make a few pound. The court ruled we as a club are not to blame.

Getting off on a Technicality is bull.

It's not just a question of blood sucking lawyers; the question for the claimants now is in regard to whether they were advised to forego the club's ex gratia payments offered under their compensation scheme, on the basis that they had a strong case at court. It transpired that the Judge says they had no case against the club. Once the claimant's rejected the compensation scheme, the claims were left to their insurer to deal with. The insurer then decides everything about how the case is run - and who knows whether further offers may have been made to the claimants during the court action - that will emerge when costs are being decided.
Whilst the claimants case has failed miserably, both for being "out of time" and on the legal point regarding the liability of the club for Bennell's actions, the claimants may now go against their own lawyers, who it seems may well have advised them badly. Of course, they would say that they'll appeal; but, that sounds like a very strong judgment in favour of the club's insurers and it'll take some overturning.
The claimants won't lose in costs. Bolt Burden are renowned as "no win no fee" solicitors. I'm sure that they'll have taken out insurance against defeat - which is what they always do, so as to protect their clients from the costs of defeat. Bolt Burden will have a hell of a wasted costs bill though.
Sad day all round for many involved but insurers are hard faced bastards at the best of times and, if they have any chance to defend a claim, they nearly always take it.

 

[Centurions]

It's not just a question of blood sucking lawyers; the question for the claimants now is in regard to whether they were advised to forego the club's ex gratia payments offered under their compensation scheme, on the basis that they had a strong case at court. It transpired that the Judge says they had no case against the club. Once the claimant's rejected the compensation scheme, the claims were left to their insurer to deal with. The insurer then decides everything about how the case is run - and who knows whether further offers may have been made to the claimants during the court action - that will emerge when costs are being decided.
Whilst the claimants case has failed miserably, both for being "out of time" and on the legal point regarding the liability of the club for Bennell's actions, the claimants may now go against their own lawyers, who it seems may well have advised them badly. Of course, they would say that they'll appeal; but, that sounds like a very strong judgment in favour of the club's insurers and it'll take some overturning.
The claimants won't lose in costs. Bolt Burden are renowned as "no win no fee" solicitors. I'm sure that they'll have taken out insurance against defeat - which is what they always do, so as to protect their clients from the costs of defeat. Bolt Burden will have a hell of a wasted costs bill though.
Sad day all round for many involved but insurers are hard faced bastards at the best of times and, if they have any chance to defend a claim, they nearly always take it.

I saw someone else mention insurance being taken out by the solicitors earlier, that's not something I've ever heard of or considered. Sounds weird on the face of it.

 

[ctwrd]

The judge summed up that the abuse took place after B's association with city, even though the association not being employment could be argued as a technicality, the timing is a cast iron fact.

Paragraph 571 suggests an appeal would be hopeless, and probably bluster to try and get something from the redress scheme.

The Plaintiffs knew the risks of going to court to get more money, and the decision to do so was theirs alone.

It does say that even if he was an employee the club couldnt be liable so I’m not sure how it is a “technicality”. I’m not sure the individuals involved have been well advised.

 

[eyalluvitt]

What with him and Roper prowling the touch lines , Manchester youth football must have been a minefield back then. Remember as a kid our Cub Scout leader leaving very suddenly and my parents being coy about why. Googled it years later and it was very similar to the Youth football goings on. Horrific.

 

[WRicko]

I listen to LBC a lot for politics to my surprise they carried this story on there and even interviewed the 8s lawyer.

Was able to paint City in a terrible light
saying how we didn’t apologize accept anything used Barry in our defense etc