|
Post by peterpirate on Jan 21, 2016 11:01:16 GMT
Nothing wrong with a portaloo
|
|
|
Post by lpgas on Jan 21, 2016 11:36:24 GMT
Exactly They've already had to build a temporary car park that we were supposed to build cause we've dilly dallied ! They've been patient but they won't wait forever and there's just a small chance someone else who has got cash to burn and puts money into sport might just snatch the place and build something! UWE have the project planning team in place for the rest of the site.... and I take it they have the money too. Is the stadium part of this project? Are UWE the Consortium?
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Jan 21, 2016 11:39:28 GMT
UWE have the project planning team in place for the rest of the site.... and I take it they have the money too. Is the stadium part of this project? Are UWE the Consortium?or are the UWE Part of the " Consortium " i wonder ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 11:42:11 GMT
and I take it they have the money too. Is the stadium part of this project? Are UWE the Consortium?or are the UWE Part of the " Consortium " i wonder ? Donald J Trump......I'm just saying........
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Jan 21, 2016 11:44:43 GMT
or are the UWE Part of the " Consortium " i wonder ? Donald J Trump......I'm just saying........ Fit right in...
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Jan 21, 2016 12:01:16 GMT
Once the court case is done the club will know exactly where they stand and plan a,b,c etc etc will have to be revealed and anyone who has an interest will need to reveal themselves and their plans/intentions cause UWE and south glos won't wait forever and in my opinion a plot with pp may takes years to come up again. Time for the club and/or a n other to come out of the shadows and start getting things done cause the Sainsburys excuse/hold up will soon be over. Time the fans got to see some proof in the pudding. Purely my opinion of course. I used to work for a local building contractor/developer. They used to commence work on a very small aspect of a project which already had planning permission granted, such as a small section of foundation's, then leave it for a while until the market became more buoyant. The reason for this was if construction work was deemed to have started, this safeguarded against pp lapsing. If the fear is losing pp, I would have thought this loophole could have been exploited in the case of the UWE
I spoke to NH about this point at Barnet and he said that this was an old rule and no longer applied.
You now have to start some substantial work, agreed with the Planning Authority, to show the work has started. He also confirmed that the Planning Permission at UWE does not expired until January 2018 as was confirmed by TW a week earlier. So nothing to panic about there.
However, how long UWE are prepared for this to go on for is a totally different question. I assume they are also interested in the outcome of next weeks Court case, especially as I gather there is no actual Contract between BRFC and UWE to build the stadium. UWE could pull out at any time and BRFC would look a "bit foolish".
Even more reason for BRFC to START meaningful discussions with investors if we lose the forthcoming Court case.
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Jan 21, 2016 12:16:48 GMT
Once the court case is done the club will know exactly where they stand and plan a,b,c etc etc will have to be revealed and anyone who has an interest will need to reveal themselves and their plans/intentions cause UWE and south glos won't wait forever and in my opinion a plot with pp may takes years to come up again. Time for the club and/or a n other to come out of the shadows and start getting things done cause the Sainsburys excuse/hold up will soon be over. Time the fans got to see some proof in the pudding. Purely my opinion of course. Unfortunately, surely that will only be the case if we lose? As if we win then unless Sainsbury's immediately conceded defeat and confirm they buy the Mem for £30m we'll, at best, have another fight over compensation or, at worse, have a wait until we see if they intend Appealing, then seeing if they get leave to Appeal and if they do then it could be years longer waiting for the outcome of the Appeal. Surely winning (or losing) the appeal is like a switch...either the original contract is valid or is isn't....so we either get the original amount or we get nothing...also, sure I read before this is the last stage in any appeal process?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 21, 2016 13:47:25 GMT
Unfortunately, surely that will only be the case if we lose? As if we win then unless Sainsbury's immediately conceded defeat and confirm they buy the Mem for £30m we'll, at best, have another fight over compensation or, at worse, have a wait until we see if they intend Appealing, then seeing if they get leave to Appeal and if they do then it could be years longer waiting for the outcome of the Appeal. Surely winning (or losing) the appeal is like a switch...either the original contract is valid or is isn't....so we either get the original amount or we get nothing...also, sure I read before this is the last stage in any appeal process? I maybe wrong but I'm sure NH suggested this was the first stage and if we win then we have to agree on compensation, don't forget NH will say buidling costs have risen and that's down to Sainsbury's delaying tactics. You certainly haven't read that anywhere as the Supreme Court make the final decision if leave is granted, and who is going to turn down Sainsbury's?
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Jan 21, 2016 14:00:44 GMT
Surely winning (or losing) the appeal is like a switch...either the original contract is valid or is isn't....so we either get the original amount or we get nothing...also, sure I read before this is the last stage in any appeal process? I maybe wrong but I'm sure NH suggested this was the first stage and if we win then we have to agree on compensation, don't forget NH will say buidling costs have risen and that's down to Sainsbury's delaying tactics. You certainly haven't read that anywhere as the Supreme Court make the final decision if leave is granted, and who is going to turn down Sainsbury's? Why does this "compensation" line continue to get repeated.. The court case is to decide whether or not the contract to sell is still valid or has lapsed. It's £30m or zip.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 21, 2016 14:02:30 GMT
I maybe wrong but I'm sure NH suggested this was the first stage and if we win then we have to agree on compensation, don't forget NH will say buidling costs have risen and that's down to Sainsbury's delaying tactics. You certainly haven't read that anywhere as the Supreme Court make the final decision if leave is granted, and who is going to turn down Sainsbury's? Why does this "compensation" line continue to get repeated.. The court case is to decide whether or not the contract to sell is still valid or has lapsed. It's £30m or zip. Unless Sainsbury offers us compensation for dropping the case. They may not wish to risk losing.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Jan 21, 2016 14:19:58 GMT
Why does this "compensation" line continue to get repeated.. The court case is to decide whether or not the contract to sell is still valid or has lapsed. It's £30m or zip. Unless Sainsbury offers us compensation for dropping the case. They may not wish to risk losing..... with the prescient it will set for cases to follow as well
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 14:25:19 GMT
Why does this "compensation" line continue to get repeated.. The court case is to decide whether or not the contract to sell is still valid or has lapsed. It's £30m or zip. Unless Sainsbury offers us compensation for dropping the case. They may not wish to risk losing. Then it wouldn't be compensation, it would be a settlement
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 21, 2016 15:00:20 GMT
Unless Sainsbury offers us compensation for dropping the case. They may not wish to risk losing. Then it wouldn't be compensation, it would be a settlement Yes, but I think that's what people are referring to was my point. Pedant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 15:04:15 GMT
Then it wouldn't be compensation, it would be a settlement Yes, but I think that's what people are referring to was my point. Pedant. Don't you dare call me that. They were all over age !
|
|
|
Post by garystash on Jan 21, 2016 20:05:45 GMT
It's a good point mate. But we can't play on foundations and we haven't built a bloody permanent stand since the tote end in the 50''s and supporters like me are gettin sick of it as well as running out of time to watch football in the thing. I honestly feel that next month some of us should start applying some pressure. No offence meant to anybody. If, after the appeal, no plan is communicated by the board with regard to the UWE, then let's apply some pressure. The question I have is how?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 20:16:33 GMT
I used to work for a local building contractor/developer. They used to commence work on a very small aspect of a project which already had planning permission granted, such as a small section of foundation's, then leave it for a while until the market became more buoyant. The reason for this was if construction work was deemed to have started, this safeguarded against pp lapsing. If the fear is losing pp, I would have thought this loophole could have been exploited in the case of the UWE
I spoke to NH about this point at Barnet and he said that this was an old rule and no longer applied.
You now have to start some substantial work, agreed with the Planning Authority, to show the work has started. He also confirmed that the Planning Permission at UWE does not expired until January 2018 as was confirmed by TW a week earlier. So nothing to panic about there.
However, how long UWE are prepared for this to go on for is a totally different question. I assume they are also interested in the outcome of next weeks Court case, especially as I gather there is no actual Contract between BRFC and UWE to build the stadium. UWE could pull out at any time and BRFC would look a "bit foolish".
Even more reason for BRFC to START meaningful discussions with investors if we lose the forthcoming Court case.
I thought we've been in discussions for over a month now?(gasincider has been saying for over a month we will hear something any day now!) What do you mean start now?
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Jan 21, 2016 21:52:44 GMT
I spoke to NH about this point at Barnet and he said that this was an old rule and no longer applied.
You now have to start some substantial work, agreed with the Planning Authority, to show the work has started. He also confirmed that the Planning Permission at UWE does not expired until January 2018 as was confirmed by TW a week earlier. So nothing to panic about there.
However, how long UWE are prepared for this to go on for is a totally different question. I assume they are also interested in the outcome of next weeks Court case, especially as I gather there is no actual Contract between BRFC and UWE to build the stadium. UWE could pull out at any time and BRFC would look a "bit foolish".
Even more reason for BRFC to START meaningful discussions with investors if we lose the forthcoming Court case.
I thought we've been in discussions for over a month now?(gasincider has been saying for over a month we will hear something any day now!) What do you mean start now? Bit worried now. "Conclude discussions" might have been fine. "Start discussions" is not fine.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 21, 2016 22:32:44 GMT
I spoke to NH about this point at Barnet and he said that this was an old rule and no longer applied.
You now have to start some substantial work, agreed with the Planning Authority, to show the work has started. He also confirmed that the Planning Permission at UWE does not expired until January 2018 as was confirmed by TW a week earlier. So nothing to panic about there.
However, how long UWE are prepared for this to go on for is a totally different question. I assume they are also interested in the outcome of next weeks Court case, especially as I gather there is no actual Contract between BRFC and UWE to build the stadium. UWE could pull out at any time and BRFC would look a "bit foolish".
Even more reason for BRFC to START meaningful discussions with investors if we lose the forthcoming Court case.
I thought we've been in discussions for over a month now?(gasincider has been saying for over a month we will hear something any day now!) What do you mean start now? You couldn't make it up last week JTS was getting excited because he thought a deal was done with the consortium, then he announced he understood a deal had been done but it wasn't with the consortium, now we're being told no meaningful discussions have even taken place with the consortium. Why don't the three of them just own up it was all a wind up to boost forum users on Gaschat?
|
|
|
Post by Thatslife on Jan 21, 2016 23:00:42 GMT
I thought we've been in discussions for over a month now?(gasincider has been saying for over a month we will hear something any day now!) What do you mean start now? You couldn't make it up last week JTS was getting excited because he thought a deal was done with the consortium, then he announced he understood a deal had been done but it wasn't with the consortium, now we're being told no meaningful discussions have even taken place with the consortium. Why don't the three of them just own up it was all a wind up to boost forum users on Gaschat? Because it wasn't a wind up, ..................simples
|
|
|
Post by upupandahay12 on Jan 21, 2016 23:38:38 GMT
Just heard the city manager is Neil Warnock have a bit of 12/1 solid info someone heard lansdowne junior talking over dinner in a restaurant fill your boots fellow gas will announce either tomorrow or Monday
|
|