PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Didsbury Dave]

Can someone enlighten me on this point please. If we have irrefutable evidence (and I am confident we do), why did we just not present that during the investigation? Yes it may be commercially sensitive material, and the premier league were probably overreaching their jurisdiction, but the immense damage this has done the club and we could end up paying millions for some non-cooperation bull shit charge. Doesn’t make sense to me.

BEcause everybody in a legal battle calims to have "irrefutable evidence". It's just posturing.

 

[cookster]

Also he wears multiple hats

Magic hats?
Think I've found the source ;)

 

[Scaring Europe to Death]

Can someone enlighten me on this point please. If we have irrefutable evidence (and I am confident we do), why did we just not present that during the investigation? Yes it may be commercially sensitive material, and the premier league were probably overreaching their jurisdiction, but the immense damage this has done the club and we could end up paying millions for some non-cooperation bull shit charge. Doesn’t make sense to me.

I asked something similar 5-6 months ago and was told by somebody who knows far than me, that essentially the irrefutable evidence is our accounts.
It's up to the PL to prove that they are seriously fraudulent and not the other way round

 

[mancboy]

I asked something similar 5-6 months ago and was told by somebody who knows far than me, that essentially the irrefutable evidence is our accounts.
It's up to the PL to prove that they are seriously fraudulent and not the other way round

Have said all along until i see HMRC knocking on the door i aint worried, like you just said they are accusing a member of the abu dhabi royal family, one of the biggest investment vehicles in the world, a country and scores of pre eminent business man of lying and fraudulent behaviour not to mention one of the worlds top accountancy firms of not being able to audit our accounts properly, as we are a registered company this would be considered a criminal offence yet oddly none of the witnesses have been spoken to as noted by the people involved and nothing passed over to the serious fraud team.

 

[KS55]

Have said all along until i see HMRC knocking on the door i aint worried, like you just said they are accusing a member of the abu dhabi royal family, one of the biggest investment vehicles in the world, a country and scores of pre eminent business man of lying and fraudulent behaviour not to mention one of the worlds top accountancy firms of not being able to audit our accounts properly, as we are a registered company this would be considered a criminal offence yet oddly none of the witnesses have been spoken to as noted by the people involved and nothing passed over to the serious fraud team.

The authorities will wait for the outcome as the hearing may provide evidence.

 

[Pontypool Blue]

I don't think you can infer from that we treated equity funding as sponsorship revenue. It clearly separates partner funding from equity funding but makes the point that some sponsorship revenue would be offset against monies due to or from ADUG.

The Etisalat sponsorship is a case in point. ADUG paid that initially and reclaimed that from Etisalat later on. So the monies due to us from Etisalat were offset against the money they owed to ADUG. You can see that there's £15m due from Etisalat and £15m going from us to ADUG effectively meaning Etisalat repaid the money they owed ADUG.

In my younger days, when I lived at home, I'd be going out and need some cash. My brother would lend me £20 but he'd also borrowed £30 from our dad the week before. So I'd repay the £20 I owed my brother direct to my dad.

Did your Dad ever get back the tenner he was owed?

 

[mike1923]

Can someone enlighten me on this point please. If we have irrefutable evidence (and I am confident we do), why did we just not present that during the investigation? Yes it may be commercially sensitive material, and the premier league were probably overreaching their jurisdiction, but the immense damage this has done the club and at we could end up paying millions for some non-cooperation bull shit charge.

The authorities will wait for the outcome as the hearing may provide evidence.

If there was evidence presented at the hearing of fraud, that evidence has been provided by either City or the PL, and I would assume the CPS, HMRC etc can just demand to see it? I can’t see that they would be behind the premier league in a queue to take action

 

[KS55]

If there was evidence presented at the hearing of fraud, that evidence has been provided by either City or the PL, and I would assume the CPS, HMRC etc can just demand to see it? I can’t see that they would be behind the premier league in a queue to take action

You don’t have to answer if they are making a potential criminal enquiry.
I always say: No comment.

 

[Cobwebcat]

I wonder if the HMRC would even be interested given that we are accused of putting more money into the club rather than hiding it. If anything we would be paying more tax by stating our turnover is bigger than it actually is. I’m not an expert in this field as you may tell.

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

The way Leicester highlighted the Premier League’s interpretation of wordings on its own rules to make them look silly. Also that these charges are a deeper dive rehash of the CAS hearing with other things bolted on as hit and hopes in image rights and manager renumeration, leads me to believe that when this is done we will be asking the same questions of the Premier League that were highlighted with Uefa as to what led them believe they could land what was being alleged.

Yes, they dropped the cup and grass charges pretty sharpish.