Niggling thought re BFC finance

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board' started by Brian Mahoneys Waist, Jan 14, 2022 at 3:35 PM.

  1. Bri

    Brian Mahoneys Waist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    6,165
    Likes Received:
    3,111
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I hope Sheriff or Archefield can put some light on this question.
    A while back I read on here that any repayments on the purchase of BFC had to come from the owners own funds.If thats right would that have been made legal?
    Because the money came out of BFC funds would or should James and Jean refused the payment and stuck to the prior agreement.
    If the payment had have been refused the majority owners would then have had to pay out of there own pockets or at least take it out of Pacific Media Group.Maybe if that had been done that would the owners have come over in a different light.?
     
  2. Deafening Silence

    Deafening Silence Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2021
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    2,484
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Barnsley
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I don't think anywhere anyone said it HAD to come out of their own fund, just that they had said they wouldn't take any money out of the club.
    In my opinion the Crynes/previous ownership model shouldn't have accepted this payment, unless they were happy with where the money had come from, and I don't think there is any implication that it was done in an underhand way, except that BFC paid Oakwell Holdings with it's own money, when the 80% owners had said they would not use money in this way.
     
  3. Arc

    Archerfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,217
    Likes Received:
    2,639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Archerfield, Scotland
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    The way the payment was made was that Barnsley Football Club made the payment to Oakwell Holdings on behalf BFC Investments. A debt was then created whereby BFC investments owed Barnsley Football Club £750k but the debt was subsequently written off.

    By doing it this way, although the money came from the Football Club, it would in effect be a payment from BFC investments.

    Doing it this way could potentially circumvent an agreement that monies could not come from the club. Basically using a simple accounting approach to possibly get round the sale agreement. This last part is conjecture but may explain why there is a legal dispute, not just on the payment, but the source of funds.
     
    Sheriff likes this.
  4. Bri

    Brian Mahoneys Waist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    6,165
    Likes Received:
    3,111
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Would it have been more clearer if the payment had been refused then the majority owners would have had to fund it themselves.
     
  5. Arc

    Archerfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,217
    Likes Received:
    2,639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Archerfield, Scotland
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    They could have dividened it out to BFC investments and then paid it across. All really semantics, if they decided the club was going to fund the purchase it would take a very restrictive sale agreement to stop it. The agreement was probably made with a spirit of agreement that is hard to enforce if the parties are no longer aligned.

    I don’t think it’s any coincidence that the deferred payments over and above that of the loan outstanding to Patrick were broadly equal to the cash on the balance sheet.
     
  6. Bri

    Brian Mahoneys Waist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    6,165
    Likes Received:
    3,111
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Thank you for your reply.
     
    Archerfield likes this.
  7. She

    Sheriff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,971
    Likes Received:
    2,692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Just to add to what Archerfield has already said, it's entirely feasible that the Cryne's wouldn't have known what the source of the funds were when originally paid into Oakwell Holdings, so wouldn't have been in a position to refuse it at the time, even if that would have been an appropriate action to take. Even if it was obvious that it had come from the football club account, they could have been given an assurance that this was simply intended as a loan to the Investment company to avoid complications of a Hong Kong bank account being used at the time (i.e. to avoid currency issues). The subsequent write-off was a separate transaction within BFC's books, and could have occurred well after the payment.

    Even in the event that the Crynes felt that returning the money would have been an option for them, this may well have caused complications with their ongoing dispute with PMG over the outstanding payments (i.e. along the lines of them not accepting payments made against the disputed amount).

    We can only speculate here, but I certainly don't think the onus was ever on the Crynes, as recipients, to police the source of the funds paid to them for legitimate debts owed. Although James has a day to day involvement in BFC, there's a good chance he only became aware of the full picture when the accounts were being approved prior to filing, as you'd need to be close to the finance function to have known how the day to day transactional operations were being managed, which isn't likely to fall within his remit.
     
    Redhelen and Archerfield like this.
  8. Redhelen

    Redhelen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2018
    Messages:
    25,118
    Likes Received:
    27,981
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Surely if you're owed money but refuse to accept it , then the person who owes you it isn't obliged to pay another way. So I owe you money, write you a cheque and you don't cash it, then the onus is on you?
     
  9. Deafening Silence

    Deafening Silence Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2021
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    2,484
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Barnsley
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    It's not how they receive it, but where it comes from.
    If I pay you out of my account that's fine, but if I've stolen it from the charity box it's a bit different.
     
  10. Redhelen

    Redhelen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2018
    Messages:
    25,118
    Likes Received:
    27,981
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    But would the onus be on me to know that?
     
    Archerfield likes this.
  11. Deafening Silence

    Deafening Silence Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2021
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    2,484
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Barnsley
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Not usually, but I assume that as a board member James Cryne would have known? Maybe I'm wrong.
     
    Redhelen likes this.
  12. TitusMagee

    TitusMagee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2018
    Messages:
    6,385
    Likes Received:
    9,235
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Silkstone Common
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    The way i have interpreted it as being morally wrong would be like if i owed a mate say £20 but instead of paying it out of my bank account I took it out of mine and my mate's kitty for our next night out.

    That's why it is wrong and also that they wouldn't take a penny out yet have done exactly that.
     
    Archerfield and Redhelen like this.

Share This Page