PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

halfcenturyup said:
That is nothing to do with why the allegations won't stick, imo. The PL simply won't have the evidence to prove any of their more serious allegations. They don't have access to where any incriminating evidence would be maintained and, even if they had a whistleblower, which I can't imagine they do, he would have to have, for example, contracts signed by the various parties which show the conspiracy that is alleged, otherwise it is one man's word against the club's "irrefutable evidence". No one with access to that level of information will be welching on Mansour, even if the club/owner/sponsors did what is alleged, which I can't imagine for one moment they did.

I have my own theory about the PL's actions. the club's actions, the pressure from other clubs and Masters' weakness and the likely outcome of the panel and it all points to exoneration on everything except, maybe some missed disclosures.

All imho, of course.
Click to expand...
The majority are pinning there hopes on time barred evidence being fraudulent which is just hilarious
 
Just before I went to sleep last night I read a tweet laughing over a post from 4-4-2 magazine saying we were about to be found out guilty, I never read the 4-4-2 article.

Anybody else seen it or read it?
 
Chappie said:
They may not use the word fraud,but that is what the allegations imply,however you wish to dress it up.
Bar the non compliance allegation, which of the allegations will not be considered a fraudulent action by the club if they are found to be true ?
Click to expand...

You missed the point. Read it again.
 
halfcenturyup said:
So I am ignoring your first response as it completely missed the point, other than to say:

Research for yourself the requirement to report fraud rather than ask me to justify it. I freely admit I may be wrong about anything, but you think I am wrong, show me why.

Imho, the SFO isn't going to get involved if there is an ongoing civil case which will determine if there has been a fraud or not. Why would they? They can wait until it's finished, review the evidence presented in the report and then decide whether or not to proceed on the basis of a higher level of proof. I doubt they have the time or resources just to open cases based on what is in the press.

And now your second response.

They haven't "chickened" out of using the word fraud. There is no need to. They have followed their procedure and simply referred to the IC a list of rules they allege have been breached.

And the reason it's taking so long? Every legal person in here said it would take 2, 3, 4 years and that is what is happening. Simply put, the PL has brought forward a complicated case.

Also, I never said I thought the PL themselves think they will prove these allegations. My hypothesis is that the club put them in a position where they had to shit or get off the can. And they chose to shit.
Click to expand...
This is the bit I can't get my head round if it isn't fraud a good lump of the allegations (not charges) fall on a time bar so surely fraud has to be proved before their case can continue?
 
Prophet of Doom said:
you are a legal man - are you telling me that PL would have proceeded the way they have even if they were advised their case wasn’t strong enough ?

Four years to build a case and they went ahead even if advised what they have is not strong enough ?
Click to expand...

No, I am telling you that they may have done. it depends on what is motivating them.

It is not unprecedented for a claim to be zealously pursued (or defended) even though the prospects of success are not great.
 
KS55 said:
Actually, if the SFO or others discovered a fraud that the PL clearly knew about but did nothing, the PL would get a public kicking. To protect themselves they should always report a suspected fraud irrespective of the legal duty.
Click to expand...
Possibly, but the PL aren't at the stage where they can determine that a fraud has effectively taken place because they haven't been presented with the irrefutable evidence yet. The time to officially report it would be at the end of the process, surely? Or would you have expected the PL to have reported it already? You have a better background in this than I do, I think. Interested in your opinion.
 
ganganvince said:
This is the bit I can't get my head round if it isn't fraud a good lump of the allegations (not charges) fall on a time bar so surely fraud has to be proved before their case can continue?
Click to expand...
I never got an understandable answer on that either. It's a bit horse and cart. Time barred if not fraud, so have to look at fraud to check if you have to look at it. I think, and @Chris in London is good at blasting me if I am wrong, that the PL will have to show the club deliberately concealed the events in order for the limitation to start in 2018 and make them active. So maybe a quick review to check each allegation on that basis before looking in detail?
 
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.