Jump to content

 

 

Rangers fail to pay £35k law firm bill


Recommended Posts

RANGERS Football Club will face fresh embarrassment in court today after failing to settle a £35,000 bill with one of Scotlandâ??s top law firms.

 

Counsel for Glasgow-based Levy & McRae are expected to apply for a decree in the Court of Session to award the firm all it is owed from the Ibrox club.

 

It comes after Levy & McRae claimed Rangers had indicated they would pay the full sums being sued over yesterday, but failed to do so. No explanation was given, the firm said.

 

Initial court proceedings had already taken place between Rangers and Levy & McRae over the unpaid legal bills which arose out of advice given on how to handle the Uefa investigation into sectarian singing at Europa League games against Dutch side PSV Eindhoven.

 

Rangers were fined �40,000 (£35,652) by Uefa in March and its fans banned from the next away European game for sectarian singing at the match in Holland. The club also received a suspended ban on its fans for a second away game, for a probationary period of three years.

 

It is understood that if the decree is granted Rangers will be given several days to pay, after which the debt will be handed to a messenger-at-arms who is authorised to enforce civil judgments.

 

Solicitor advocate Peter Watson, of Levy & McRae, said yesterday: â??We were advised yesterday [Wednesday] that solicitors for RFC had indicated that they would pay the full sums sued for, interest and expenses. This was to be paid by bank transfer during the course of today [Thursday] to Balfour and Manson, the solicitors representing this firm.

 

â??Payment has not been made and no explanation for this failure has been given to those representing us. We can do no more than bring all of this before the court at the earliest opportunity, which will be tomorrow. Those representing RFC can then no doubt explain to the court what they failed to explain to those representing this firm.â?

 

Former Rangers owner Sir David Murray has made it clear his successor, Craig Whyte, was â??fully awareâ? of an outstanding tax liability of £2.8 million before the purchase in May.

 

A preliminary hearing in the Levy & McRae case was heard at the Court of Session a week ago as Rangers had £2.8m seized after an arrest order was issued to the clubâ??s bank over an unpaid tax bill.

 

The order was delivered on Thursday following an application by Her Majestyâ??s Revenue and Customs (HMRC). The clubâ??s bank put the money into a holding account.

 

A Rangers spokesman said: â??Agreement has been reached on this matter and it seems extraordinary and unnecessary that any form of action is being taken at this stage.â?

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-fail-to-pay-35k-law-firm-bill-1.1122669

Link to post
Share on other sites

:sad:

does anyone know when we will likely know outcome of todays events ?

 

or will it just be printed in every rag tomorrow as another negative Rangers story

 

No matter how you hear it it remains pretty negative

Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't be a case of when will we hear about it......it should be more WHY are we hearing about it!!!

 

IMHO, this is a matter for behind closed doors, yet again though, it has found its way into the public domain. This isn't a matter for fans to debate/discuss etc.....it should be a matter of day-to-day dealing for the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't be a case of when will we hear about it......it should be more WHY are we hearing about it!!!

 

IMHO, this is a matter for behind closed doors, yet again though, it has found its way into the public domain. This isn't a matter for fans to debate/discuss etc.....it should be a matter of day-to-day dealing for the club.

 

Newspaper Journalists scan the court agenda there is no way you can keep a court appearance secret. There are also some journalists working full time in the court. A court is public domain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A real concern about solvency.

 

Says some lawyer who acted against us. Well well.

 

A little bit above that it is actually stated that Whyte wanted to double check on the issue ere paying anything. Since he's been quite busy of late - I mean, he's not just owning us, but has other things to run as well - not least with HMRC, there were bound to be delays. IMHO just a new attempt at shyte-stirring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.