What is it? That Covid is the force majeure event or that the actions of the ******** owner are? The test is as follows: [a club can appeal] only on the ground that the relevant Insolvency Event(s) arose solely as a result of a Force Majeure event... For the purposes of this Regulation 12.3, a ‘Force Majeure’ event shall be an event that, having regard to all of the circumstances, was caused by and resulted directly from circumstances, other than normal business risks, over which the Club and/or Group Undertaking (as the case may be) could not reasonably be expected to have control and its Officials had used all due diligence to avoid the happening of that event. Whichever their argument is it seems bound to fail to me. Surely the Club cannot, in any sane world, be classed as not having control and having used all diligence to avoid the insolvency. The club was purchased on June 4, so it is not as if Covid has come out of the blue to the owner. There is a clear and obvious failure to do all due diligence (note all, not reasonable - a very high threshold) if the incoming purchaser is unable to carry the club through an issue which already exists and is known to all parties at the time of purchase. If they're trying to say him acting like a dick is force majeure then that's nonsense - he is the Club or at least one of its Officials.
They are claiming that “acting like a dick” is the force majeure event. I think they were going down the COVID route until everyone pointed out the *pandemic* didn’t just affect Wigan.
Basically one of the only rules pertaining to club ownership is showing a cash number that is enough to run the club for a year. did they do that ? i "presume" they must have done there is something incredibly odd here. same owners are thought to have bought the club although impossible to really know who owns or is funding the club behind all the secret offshore company's. did the 40 million actually exist or change hands. Rick parry said they did not miss one bill of any kind. has a company ever gone under without missing any bills of any kind. is that even legal when you are not owing anybody any money to go into administration why would you buy something for 40 million only to lose it all less than 30 days later wouldn't have been the obvious thing to do ,get a loan to cover rest of season stay up sell players/ let players go for nominal fees even a penny just to get them off the books use the 6 million to reset start again and hope for the best
The EFL says one club in five is in financial trouble and 10 to 15 clubs administration is imminent. if a slew of clubs went into admin wonder if that would put a different slant on things. to play devils advocate if those 10 or 15 clubs were in the championship and they went into admin they would deduct 12 points of all of them ? or have to come up with a workable solution wonder if we can make the play offs he he
If they are trying to say the 'Force majeure' is the fact that the new owners were not what they seemed then surely that's just tough luck ! The EFL have openly admitted that they need to review their 'fit and proper' process but I am sure that the existing process at the very least includes a step that involves proving that funds are in place to cover the operating costs for the foreseeable future. If in Wigan's case the evidence of funds was in fact false then surely that can't be a case for getting the 12 point penalty overturned. They have been conned by the new owners plain and simple. If the money wasn't there to pay wages and creditors then that's why administration was required and that then comes with the EFL points deduction as a penalty.
The other argument they seem to be bringing up now is the betting scam again it seems like clutching at straws to me because their relegation depended on so many events conspiring to relegate them that simply weren't in their control unless several other clubs their players referees etc were in on it too. As one excuse for the admin is debunked they come up with an increasingley outlandish one to replace it.
Then they're bang to rights. ‘Official’ means any Relevant Person, employee (other than a Player) or duly authorised (express or implied) agent (other than an Intermediary) of a Club. ‘Relevant Person’ means in respect of any Club any individual Person (and not any Entity) operating the powers that are usually associated with the powers of a director of a company incorporated under the 2006 Act (as a Company limited by shares or by guarantee). Further, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following individuals shall in any event be deemed to qualify as a Relevant Person Relevant Person: (a) a director as defined by Section 250 of the 2006 Act; He's an Official, and therefore in order for force majeure to be made out must have used all due diligence to avoid the event happening, which obviously can't be the case.
Article linked via a post following that link is pretty good, if not long! Basically the owners didn't have enough money (or at least didn't want to spend anymore money) and citing covid is a handy excuse but,in the authors view, won't have any traction in an appeal. https://www.footballlaw.co.uk/articles/wigan-athletic-fc-takeover-to-administration
To me it seems nothing more than a selling point to prospective buyers 'We know they have had a 12 point deduction and been relegated but dont worry we are fighting it, just buy the club it will be fine'
That’s correct. I think the secret hope is that, as this is another nail in the coffin of the Fit and Proper Persons Test, this should be a source of embarrassment to the EFL. Effectively they’ve been failed by the regulator overseeing the penalty, ergo it’s not fair.
It seems as if Wigan should be pursuing an action against the EFL for damages resulting from its failures in administering the test rather than an appeal against the penalty.
I could be wrong, but sure I read somewhere that the original buyer also owned the new company and after it had gone through this guy ‘bought’ the company. Which if right says to me that they did it deliberately to push the ownership through. It also raises the question when ownership of the holding company changes hands surely the new owner should have to go through the fit and proper test. Wonder if they just found a loophole.
That’s the road they should be going down imo and not enticing fans to goad fans of clubs who could finish third bottom which happened to be us but could have been one from five . The Club and some of its fans should take a lesson from it class manager Paul Cook , they don’t deserve him imo and if Struber decides to leave I hope we show some interest in him .
Good read that which thankfully points to them not being able to wriggle out of it. How complex is their ownership? Bloody hell, it looks like it's a money laundering set up to me with registration in the Cayman islands.
