covenant

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board' started by 1887 RED, Sep 17, 2020.

  1. 1887 RED

    1887 RED Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2013
    Messages:
    257
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1994/nov/22/barnsley-football-club


    A wholly exceptional circumstance for Barnsley football club is a covenant on the playing surface at the ground. The family which gave the club the ground—it originally owned the brewery that adjoined the ground—placed a covenant on the land when it was given to the club. The covenant provided that the land could be used only as a football pitch. That meant that if the club wanted to dispose of the ground it had to face the covenant on the pitch. That meant, in turn, that the club could not relocate to another ground without substantial problems in disposing of the playing area. Relocation was not really an option for the club. I suggest that that is an exceptional circumstance.
     
  2. Tarntyke

    Tarntyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,954
    Likes Received:
    11,857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Stairfoot, b4 famous rahnderbart
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    A bit of a read but thanks for posting it.
     
    Stephen Dawson likes this.
  3. She

    Sheriff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,957
    Likes Received:
    5,290
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Great find!

    It's also a painful reminder of the season where we were forced to endure the Taylor report impact in full, with only the East Stand and Upper West being seated, and then spent season after season visiting other teams who continued to be allowed to use open terracing without issue.
     
  4. Bak

    Baka Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2014
    Messages:
    5,622
    Likes Received:
    5,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Nice work!
     
  5. BarnsleyReds

    BarnsleyReds Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2013
    Messages:
    11,341
    Likes Received:
    13,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    XenForo - Xenith Reds
    Glad there’s another thread on the subject
     
  6. Redhelen

    Redhelen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2018
    Messages:
    35,081
    Likes Received:
    41,171
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Fascinating read.
     
  7. nezbfc

    nezbfc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,495
    Likes Received:
    5,888
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    That's 1 covenant, when apparently maybe 3 exists
     
    Stephen Dawson likes this.
  8. TonyTyke

    TonyTyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2005
    Messages:
    5,897
    Likes Received:
    3,097
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    No, there really needed to be. I'm not ploughing through mega threads when this is to the point and tell us what we need to know.
     
  9. Brush

    Brush Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    15,456
    Likes Received:
    14,052
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Ex-IT professional
    Location:
    Swadlincote, South Derbyshire
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Can't accuse the Crynes for not divulging information which was clearly in the public domain at the time of the takeover.
     
  10. troff

    troff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,210
    Likes Received:
    12,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    donny
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    The thing is, it doesn’t.

    That’s not the only covenant and it isn’t the one which is the issue.
     
    BarnsleyReds and nezbfc like this.
  11. Stephen Dawson

    Stephen Dawson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2018
    Messages:
    31,409
    Likes Received:
    27,453
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    What a lovely person.
     
  12. BarnsleyReds

    BarnsleyReds Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2013
    Messages:
    11,341
    Likes Received:
    13,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    XenForo - Xenith Reds
    The covenant in question is 100 years old. This is from 1994.
     
  13. matoakwell

    matoakwell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2014
    Messages:
    1,700
    Likes Received:
    2,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    The report is from 1994.
     
  14. troff

    troff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,210
    Likes Received:
    12,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    donny
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Who?
     
  15. BarnsleyReds

    BarnsleyReds Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2013
    Messages:
    11,341
    Likes Received:
    13,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    XenForo - Xenith Reds
    My apologies, of course you’re right. Not sure what I was thinking to be honest.
     
  16. Stephen Dawson

    Stephen Dawson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2018
    Messages:
    31,409
    Likes Received:
    27,453
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I've been reading tykesmad and one of the best posters Roma says that one of the covenants runs ten yards straight across the pitch and was put in place by a property owner due to line of sight. This is between the West Stand and the North Stand. This also explains the larger gap between the two stands.
     
  17. Dar

    Darfield138 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2018
    Messages:
    2,104
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Read this in conjunction with my thread on the land registry. The owners would have been well aware of this and I don't think this is the problem. I think it is the separate title being created for mineral rights at the time of the sale of the club in December 2017 that has caused the problem.
     
  18. Redhelen

    Redhelen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2018
    Messages:
    35,081
    Likes Received:
    41,171
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Do you think the Crynes would have known about it at the time?
     
  19. Stephen Dawson

    Stephen Dawson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2018
    Messages:
    31,409
    Likes Received:
    27,453
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Helen, I think they all knew about the job lot and the stuff coming to light is skulduggery.
     
    Redhelen likes this.
  20. Dar

    Darfield138 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2018
    Messages:
    2,104
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Hi Helen,
    Without knowing some further facts it is hard to tell. Particularly as asserting that they did and concealed it would not only be wrong if they didnt, it could be contempt of the court proceedings and slandering their character so I would urge caution to all. However, I can see how the land either in or immediately around Oakwell could become "blighted" by the existence of separate mineral rights and it fits in with the owners saying "some hitherto unknown third party has emerged and are seeking to exercise their rights". Consider this, in theory Lee and co wished to build a new stand incorporating a hotel/casino etc and the mineral rights owner said "hang on, I want to dig just there for iron ore/diamonds" etc. If this is indeed the case it would be an impediment to developing oakwell. It is possible the only value to owning the mineral rights is a nuisance factor to induce the land owners to buy them out. The new owners are possibly calling someone's bluff by saying the club (which they own) don't even have to play there at all.
     

Share This Page