Rangers: Walter Smith says sense of bitterness remains over past

[aweebluesoandso 290]

... and could come down on those who voted them out of the SPl out of spite and hatred and the like. What could they do though? Sue the SFA and SPL/SPFL? Two essentially broke institutions? Who will claim that they acted in the best faith and according to the info that was available at the time?

 

I WOULD hope that Rangers tell them in no uncertain words that taking them to court is still an option (and if we take them through the courts to the highest one, it will probably ruin the SFA and SPFL alike) ... SHOULD anyone within these organization even whisper about title stripping etc., no matter the outcome of the EBT case.

 

As a bare minimal the club should demand the resignation of Regan, Doncaster and Liewell. Plus any SFA and SPFL various boards members, who with their club had any hand in our being put out the SPL, fines or punishments. Not forgetting the sacking of the low level paper gatherers, who were the then Celtic lawyers but are conveniently now the SFA lawyers.

[craig 5,199]

To : colinstein, re post #29 - please consider adjusting your post.

 

All, lets be VERY CAREFUL with the accusations. Until a court of law gives a verdict this is all ALLEGED at this stage.

 

Please make sure to provide caveats to statements, particularly when you are making an absolute statement as above.

 

Neither Frankie, Gersnet or indeed any of our members should be looking for a chap at the door or a lawyers letter.

 

Thanks

Edited April 12, 2016 by craig

[boabie 230]

Wasn't the repayment to LBG a condition of the takeover though?

And what are the implications for LBG if Whyte is found guilty?

Did they have no responsibility to find out where he'd got the money from?

 

The repayment to LBG was the same as the undertaking to implement £5 million of repairs and maintenance inside the stadium, as you say, a condition. The actual cost of transfer of ownership/control was only £1 though. When things started to go south, Murray had a clause in the sale contract where he could have taken Rangers back. I suspect we all know that wasn't the endgame that Murray or LBG wanted.

If Whyte is found guilty then there is no comeback on Whyte. The allegation is that the fraud was committed against Ticketus, not LBG.

As we understand it, Whyte had a solicitor who backed up the story that Whyte had personal wealth to repay LBG.

[boabie 230]

I think you're wrong. The takeover WAS fraudulent. Duff and Phelps restricted the takeover to Sevco 5088 and no other bidder.. No one else was allowed to bid after that stage. In the event Rangers were sold to Sevco Scotland with no other bidders allowed. Clear fraud

 

That is a different point colin. What I was discussing was Whytes takeover. Not Greens.

[RANGERRAB 3,307]

The repayment to LBG was the same as the undertaking to implement £5 million of repairs and maintenance inside the stadium, as you say, a condition. The actual cost of transfer of ownership/control was only £1 though. When things started to go south, Murray had a clause in the sale contract where he could have taken Rangers back. I suspect we all know that wasn't the endgame that Murray or LBG wanted.

If Whyte is found guilty then there is no comeback on Whyte. The allegation is that the fraud was committed against Ticketus, not LBG.

As we understand it, Whyte had a solicitor who backed up the story that Whyte had personal wealth to repay LBG.

 

The biggest mystery of all is why Ticketus gave Whyte all this money.

They must surely have known Rangers had a massive potential EBT tax bill which could have put them out of business so why were they giving Whyte all this money?

Edited April 12, 2016 by RANGERRAB

[boabie 230]

The biggest mystery of all is why Ticketus gave Whyte all this money.

They must surely have known Rangers had a massive potential EBT tax bill which could have put them out of business so why were they giving Whyte all this money?

 

I really hope that the criminal trial shines some light on questions like that Rab.

[RANGERRAB 3,307]

I really hope that the criminal trial shines some light on questions like that Rab.

 

In the days before SSB was taken over by yahoos I remember Daryll King asking this very question.

[craig 5,199]

The biggest mystery of all is why Ticketus gave Whyte all this money.

They must surely have known Rangers had a massive potential EBT tax bill which could have put them out of business so why were they giving Whyte all this money?

 

They were getting a sizeable return on their "investment", and they believed that it was guaranteed as it was secured on two seasons (I think) of ST monies. Ticketus didn't realise the difference between Scots Law and English Law though...

 

They would have been well aware that in the event RFC lost the EBT case that it would be appealed and that process takes years... They would have long since had their cash back and sailed into the sunset. They would have had no idea of Whyte's alleged nefarious plans to rn us into administration anyway.

[limeburner 0]

The old quick cash buck syndrome got the better of them-----top of the bill, i love it.

[RANGERRAB 3,307]

They were getting a sizeable return on their "investment", and they believed that it was guaranteed as it was secured on two seasons (I think) of ST monies. Ticketus didn't realise the difference between Scots Law and English Law though...

 

They would have been well aware that in the event RFC lost the EBT case that it would be appealed and that process takes years... They would have long since had their cash back and sailed into the sunset. They would have had no idea of Whyte's alleged nefarious plans to rn us into administration anyway.

 

But ticketus must have known administration was a possibility at any point surely ?

Had the FTTT reported during Whyte's reign and found in favour of HMRC then he'd have filed for admin immediately IMO. As a result it didnt & he ran out of money & filed for administration anyway and ticketus lost their money