It's the covenant...

That would be the short double headed overhang.

 

There was a change in director in I think December 19

 

Not read everything on here so apologies if I'm repeating - but when Sean Lewis & his pals were involved circa 2002/3, as we were attempting to exit administration I was informed by someone quite senior at BMBC that the land formerly wholly owned by BFC, had a restrictive covenant on it to the extent that there could be no development other than to support the football club - but only whilst the football club occupied Oakwell.

I'm led to believe that it has also frustrated previous incumbents who wished to develop the land around the football ground, but will happily stand correcting on that.

 

"Sweating the assets" ?

 

Pleading the Vth.

But more than one alledgedly

 

So to recap...there is a covenant placed on the stadium by the Senior Family (female line) taking claim to the covenant. This is being challenged. There is also a mineral rights issue as somebody has claimed a strip of ground between the North Stand and the 18 yard line for diamond mining. This has been in place since around the time Cryne separated the two entities.

 

This would make sense.

The 80% Mob I'm sure would have wanted to utilise the land better around Oakwell (its basically a huge commercial opportunity and one they would have thought was available to them when they agreed to buy the ground). You could imagine them wanting to build housing/hotels/bars etc on that land but due to poor due diligence the opportunity isn't available to them which in their eyes means Oakwell isn't worth anything or is not viable to develop.

 

Is the carpark land not covered by the covenant if not what was going off here....

https://www.barnsleychronicle.com/article/3830/housing-plan-for-oakwell-car-park

 

Due to these restrictions and the ownership setup the only way the club can move forward without leaving Oakwell is if the club is sold to a billionaire sugar daddy. Talk about hamstrung.

 

The covenant is well known and should have been spotted prior to any agreement to purchase and I can't see it being the issue unless it is just being used as an excuse not to pay. The mineral rights however, I can see from the timing of their divorce from the land, that might be an issue. Its not that anyone thinks there's gold under the west stand, it's just that no-one could put a spade into the ground without trespassing against those rights. Injunction to stop will follow and then a payout to buy the rights if anybody wants to develop the ground, including a new west stand.

 

So how did John Dennis manage to develop the ground to what it is today without these cropping up......

 

My mistake,

I thought I remembered Pete D talking about developing.

And the chronicle link, shows PC/Others putting in an application

 

The mineral rights issue cropped up at the same time Cryne sold half of the ground to the council. After Dennis had departed.

 

The courts have discretion to award damages in lieu of an injunction, which goes some way to guard against rights which are otherwise of little value being used to frustrate development for a disproportionate ransom payment.

 

I just get wary cos back in the day I think some BBS members were warned off/made aware/had initial letters regarding legal action when discussing BFC & associated shenanigans

 

Yeah a certain mayor seems to have been expunged from history as a result.

 

That would tie in with what the Cryne's and the Council are saying about the covenant being of little consequence.

 

The good old days of the BBS. The upside of it was that there were various acronyms that cropped up so as not to refer to certain people by name, from which some genius came up with P. Turdoyl, which would have looked fabulous in a Tommy Tyke Sez column.

 

Going back to the mineral rights, and Hardrof Ltd, who now own them; This was the previous owner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_Miller,_Countess_of_Mértola and it was following her death that the current lord of the manors (not named on the Hardrof Website) transferred them to Hardrof Ltd. Not sure if this adds anything to the debate or not, but it seems possible that perhaps prior to 2013 she was not interested in protecting her manorial rights, but perhaps Hardrof Ltd is using it as a means to generate funds.

 

Perhaps that's what this site needs - a good old legal rumble regarding BFC ownership. Lift the malaise.