Winding Up Order

[Don Rogers Shop]

If that is the case, why the fuck is this thread called "winding up order"?

I checked the original article and its not really clear about where things are.

Because the article said we had been issued with one maybe?

[ahounsell]

2009 Accounts now on the club web site. The bit relating to this loan states :-

"Included within Creditors: amounts due within one year, there is an amount of £1,475,000 (2008: £1,475,000) owed to Shaw Park Developments Limited, a company that at the time the advance is said to have been made was 50% owned by the former parent company, Swindon Town FC Limited. Under the terms of the loan agreement, this liability was originally due to be repaid on 30th August 2008 however, by mutual agreement this repayment date was deferred until 30th August 2009. At the date of this report, and following a review of all documentation relating to the loan, the Company is in dispute with Shaw Park Developments Limited and has taken advice from its legal advisors in respect of this matter."

(my emphasis)

So it seems that there is some doubt over how much of this money actually found its way into the club.

[Nemo]

But really, where else could it possibly have gone?

[Fred Elliot]

Because the article said we had been issued with one maybe?

But it didnt did it

[Ardiles]

The thread is called 'Winding Up Order' because that's what I called it on Sunday evening when I started the thread.  The Guardian link on the first post opens with the following paragraph...

'Swindon Town, the League One football club, faces a winding-up order from the quoted property company St Modwen tomorrow over the non-repayment of a £2.45m loan dating back to 2005.'

That's why I chose the title 'Winding Up Order'.

[Fred Elliot]

Like I said..it is heavy handed posturing trying to force our position.

A few simple facts ;

It is a disputed debt, you cannot by law be wound up over a disputed debt.

A petitioner, by law, cannot advertise the serving of a WUP for a 14 day period, only then is it published in the London Gazzette.

AF and Co have had this on the radar for quite some time and I am sure have responded to the SD in the correct way.

I trust them, and as with the BP/PE situation it will be resolved in the correct way.

Like I said, its all heavy handed threats based on fragile ground

[RJack]

I have full faith in the Fitton & the board and prett sure this will be resolved in due course.

The only thing that worries me is whehter the Football League will intervene and put an embargo on the club re transfer matters.  I would hope not you just never know

[Batch]

I have full faith in the Fitton & the board and prett sure this will be resolved in due course.

The only thing that worries me is whehter the Football League will intervene and put an embargo on the club re transfer matters.  I would hope not you just never know

Don't see why they would, it's a disputed debt and not a debt to another football club. Don't see them being interested.

[jonny72]

Worth pointing out that statutory demands are more often than not, worth less than a sheet of toilet paper. Anyone can serve one and they are often used purely to fire a shot across the bow, with no intent of taking things any further. Issuing one is a prerequisite for filing a winding up order though.

[Power to people]

I have full faith in the Fitton & the board and prett sure this will be resolved in due course.

The only thing that worries me is whehter the Football League will intervene and put an embargo on the club re transfer matters.  I would hope not you just never know

There is no need for the FL to get involved as there is no WUP or court action looming, just STM trying to get a bit of press on this to put it into the public realm to try and hurry stfc into paying the owed debt

[wheretherealredsare]

I have full faith in the Fitton & the board and prett sure this will be resolved in due course.

The only thing that worries me is whehter the Football League will intervene and put an embargo on the club re transfer matters.  I would hope not you just never know

They'll probably hit us with a ban on appealing against sending offs.

[otanswell]

Those prats at the Sun has said in today's paper that we will have to go into Admin for a third time.

i saw this too

[STFC Bart]

As the debt is disputed all we need to do is apply to have the statutory demand set aside. Then they cannot proceed with a winding up.

[Talk Talk]

As the debt is disputed all we need to do is apply to have the statutory demand set aside. Then they cannot proceed with a winding up.

I find Bart talking about winding up particularly amusing.

[STFC_Gazza]

Good to see the adver trying to unsettle the players by asking them what they think of the winding up order (that doesn't exist) etc........ Wankers