CVA Shambles

[flammableBen]

it wouldn't be you they'd try to prosecute.

This.

Easy on the nothing but abuse posts. Everybody thinks it, but it's not constructive and all it will achieve is to get Barry hassle. Which wouldn't be nice after he's made the forum all nice and shiny for us.

[magicroundabout]

i do agree Ben but shouting "you fat greek cunt" in my office gives me some funny looks so it's easier to type it here, as to you guys it actually means something.

[Phil_S]

The way I've read it the club have paid all the money agreed under the CVA to the administrator (AA of Hacker Young). The club have therefore complied with said CVA. It is up to the administrator to then dole the money out to the creditors. One of those creditors has suddenly remembered that there share is £750,000 rather than £11,000. Hence the pot of £1,300,000 could be shared out differently.  It's not up to the club to stump up any more cash, it would just mean the other creduitors would recieve less than they were expecting.
What I find incredible, is that Dunwoody run by the self confessed financial genius that also arranged the CVA should "Suddenly remember" debts of £739,000.
What is a concern is that the Football league may take the view that the CVA has not completed the CVA, even of we have competed our side of the deal. What is also a concern is that AA is/has beeen kept very busy for years sorting out said "Financial Genius's " various cva's, administrations & liquidations. They obviusly know each other well.
Is this an attempt by our esteemed ex-general manager to fulfill his promise made in December 2006 ? The phrase used if I remember correctly was "I will take the club down with me"

[Panda Paws]

My e-mail would be more like an appreciative beg to keep the faith.

Oooh you fancy show off!

[Rich Pullen]

Oooh you fancy show off!

I know, I know.

[ahounsell]

And there's also another spurious claim from a company called International Sports Management. Could this be the Portugeezers?

Any debts covered by the CVA would have to have been prior to early 2002.

I'm sure there was money owed to some of the people behind Best holdings but that would have been a separate mess to this one, and would have been one of the things sorted out by Fitton and Co.

[@MacPhlea]

Let's not ring the alarm bells unnecessarily here - take note of the first line...


LONG-suffering Swindon Town creditors are fearing further financial misery amid warnings the CVA saga could drag on for the foreseeable future.

This is about the creditors, not the fans.

Hacker Young are the administrators, and they are responsible for sorting this mess out, not the club.  We have met our obligation in paying them (Hacker Young) the required amount and as such it is of no concern to us how that money is distributed. Yes, we may have to wait for the certificate but this does not mean that the club faces a bigger bill it means the creditors are facing a drawn out affair waiting for payment.

It is however a sad fact that the greek is continuing to screw over creditors of the club even though he is no longer here

[ahounsell]

  I supppose the bottom line is can the Board be bothered to sort it....or will they wash their hands and cut their losses.

I dont think there is anything the club can do to sort this. They have paid the money as agreed in the CVA (albeit a year late) it is up to Hacker Young to sort this out.

In the CVA proposal it does state :-

The Unconnected Unsecured Creditors are estimated at £1.6million. Based on current projections the Unconnected Unsecured Creditors should receive an estimated dividend of 24p in the £. The dividend rate is estimated for illustration purposes and may vary depending on the amount of the agreed claims of the CVA creditors, the actual costs of the CVA and the payment of all of the annual Contributions. The dividend rate may also be affected by the receipt of bank deposit interest on funds held from time to time by the Supervisors.

So it was always the case that the 24p in the £ could vary, though you would like to think it wouldnt vary by too much.

The following clause is likely to be fairly central to all this :-

The Supervisors may at their absolute discretion exclude from any distribution any claims (or any part thereof) in respect of which a Proof of Debt form has not been lodged with the Supervisors on or before the expiry of 30th September 2002 by the relevant Creditor.

So Hacker Young should have been aware of any increase in claims by 30th Sep 2002, if any claims were received after that date they would be within their rights to exclude them.

It would seem that they have either allowed an increased claim a long time after the deadline, or that they have known about this for nearly 6 years but kept the creditors in the dark.

The CVA proposal from 2002 can be downloaded from the Trust web site if anyone is interested in wading through the legalise.

 http://www.truststfc.co.uk/cva.php

[Samdy Gray]

Just throwing this out there, but technically we're still in a CVA because although all the payments have been made, it's not been officially completed.

The long and the short of it is piss-poor management of the CVA by Andronicunt.

[Simon Pieman]

Do creditors have to agree new terms if their dividend from the CVA money is cut? Or is it automatic?

[pauld]

While understandably a lot of people's ire is directed to Diamandis it's worth noting he is not the root cause of the issue here. He's quite entitled to put in whatever invoices he sees fit, it's down to the CVA supervisor to accept or reject them. And that's where the problem lies - Andronikou's continued prevarication at actually settling this.

The original CVA document stated that all claims had to be made by Sept 2002 and that any claim submitted after that would only be accepted at the supervisor's discretion. In other words, if these extra claims were submitted after that Andronikou could simply have said "No, you're too late". If they were submitted prior to that, then why were the other creditors at least not informed that the anticipated 24p in the £ payout that was in the CVA proposal they were asked to vote on in accepting the CVA was now in tatters?

Then there's the question of the million quid not paid to HMRC - why not? A big chunk of that only came in in the final bullet payment which was made May 31st so that's perhaps understandable. But the rest of it is apparently composed of the annual payments the club have been making on the CVA and these were supposed to be handed straight over by the supervisor.

The delay in closing down the CVA appears to be because of a legal action taken by the former administrators (ie the ones before Hacker Young) for £60,000 and it's probably correct to say that until that is resolved, no payout can be made to the remaining creditors. But that doesn't stop you adjudicating on the extra million quid or so of additional claims that apparently weren't in the original CVA (ie Diamandis, ISM plus various other bits and pieces) so at least creditors will have a rough idea of where they are, give or take £60k. The point being that £60k makes little difference to the original claim amount of £1.6m. Another million makes a huge difference.

And then where does this leave the club? Andrew Fitton has made all the payments required, in good faith, but the club still aren't able to get the CVA monkey off their back (and the potential for further League sanctions as a result), because Hacker Young, for whatever reason, seem to be dragging their feet in sorting out the final settlement.

Which leads to the biggest question of all really - why is Andronikou dragging this out? This should be sorted by now, with creditors simply awaiting their final payment in Aug/Sept.

[glos_robin]

So with all his businesses failing he's again trying to use STFC as his way of bailing himself is he, what a shock he just can't keep away. Lets face it Diamandis and Andronikou are mates, if Diamandis wants more money then I'm sure Andronikou will do all he can to get it for him.

What gets me is how can Ben Lambert show up to work with all this going on now, he should do the honourable thing and walk as like it or not he is related to the slimy Greek one and he should have no involvment or access to the club.............it is now a massive conflict of interests.

[horlock07]

It is also interesting that the quote from Hacker Young is not from Andonikou, has he disappeared or is he still handling it.

Actually little appears to have changed as the Administrator still doesnt seem to be working form the small creditors, and still seems to be trying to avoid any meeting or contact.

[Barry Scott]

So with all his businesses failing he's again trying to use STFC as his way of bailing himself is he, what a shock he just can't keep away. Lets face it Diamandis and Andronikou are mates, if Diamandis wants more money then I'm sure Andronikou will do all he can to get it for him.

What gets me is how can Ben Lambert show up to work with all this going on now, he should do the honourable thing and walk as like it or not he is related to the slimy Greek one and he should have no involvment or access to the club.............it is now a massive conflict of interests.

Just because Ben Lambert was/is with his daughter doesn't mean he can directly affect the state of STFC's finances, he's merely marketing bloke. He works for the club, it's hardly fair that someone should be told to leave a job because they're dating the daughter of the one everyone loves to hate. I can see where you are coming from, but i can't see how he can influence anything enough to create any tangable conflict.

[Simon Pieman]

So with all his businesses failing he's again trying to use STFC as his way of bailing himself is he, what a shock he just can't keep away. Lets face it Diamandis and Andronikou are mates, if Diamandis wants more money then I'm sure Andronikou will do all he can to get it for him.

What gets me is how can Ben Lambert show up to work with all this going on now, he should do the honourable thing and walk as like it or not he is related to the slimy Greek one and he should have no involvment or access to the club.............it is now a massive conflict of interests.

In what respect? He doesn't make any executive decisions and even if he did it's the club which employs him. If those running the club felt this was so then maybe they should offer him redundancy.

I can't see a conflict of interest. Ben would have no influence on the decisions and this is not something which has happened due to some form of 'inside knowledge' he has.