PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

The Stockport Iniesta said:
Why would you follow him? Doesn't make sense to me. You called yourself an idiot, and I won't disagree with that, but without people like you, following moron's like him, they wouldn't have a platform to spout their bile in the first place.

Sorry for the rant, but I can't stand the ****.
Click to expand...
Fair question.

Part of it is I haven't cleaned up my follows in a long time. Part of it is I kind of like rubber necking and seeing what the crackpot has to say.

I get what you are saying though. Adding to his follower count isn't helpful
 
Scaley said:
Believe it or not that was more or less my explanation to some Scousers at work today, all I got back was “brown envelopes” but they couldn’t explain why these same envelopes didn’t stop the PL taking the action they have. The mask has really slipped with some of the Scousers I know both blue and red.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the time a minority shareholder took control of the company I was working for, that had a habit of paying cash bonuses. And I am talking equivalent to an annual salary. They wanted an end to what they called "brown envelopes". The Finance Director told them in a Board Meeting that there definitely would be no payments in brown envelopes. The truth was we never used brown envelopes. We always used, and continued to use, white envelopes.

Incidentally, the bonuses were paid out of a Panama company, something else the new owner didn't like. So the FD assuaged their fears by saying all our companies fully complied with all local accounting requirements. What he didn't tell them was that, in Panama, the requirement was just to keep books of account. They didn't have to be accurate at all.

Those were the days. :)
 
Stoned Rose said:
Alleged breaches, not charges.


Doubtful.

If there was any suspicion of criminality the PL would be duty bound to pass it to the dibble.
Click to expand...

No they wouldn't. At least, not yet.
This is one of the myths that has developed on here the last few weeks. There is no requirement to report fraud to the relevant authorities at any particular time.

Also, the authorities aren't going to swoop into City's offices on the off chance the PL has some evidence. I am sure they are watching, though. And probably laughing ....

To be clear, the alleged breaches include providing the PL with accounts that don't give a true and fair view and acting in bad faith towards the PL. We are also assuming the substance of the alleged breaches is the same as CAS considered in the UEFA case. There is no direct mention of fraud.

Where fraud comes into this case is that the alleged breaches, taken together, effectively constitute fraud, so the IP will be required by the defence to take into account a higher level of cogency of evidence into their considerations than they would, say, for a simple PSR monetary breach.

All imho, of course, and I am happy to be blasted (again) by our legal guys if I have got it all wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.