|
|
Post by Hugo Admin on Aug 26, 2014 16:57:25 GMT
Just how many court cases can BRFC afford to run at once? We've the delivery times Appeal, the Sainsbury's writ, claims against the FA/Wycombe plus possible further action against Sainsbury's should they pull out of the deal. Meanwhile on the playing side we seem to have become nothing more than a mid table Conference club. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk yeah it does have the semblance of scrabbling around in the dark trying to get a grip on something, anything. Deary me. Still, football was better wasn't it so that's something. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:03:03 GMT
I have just read the writ and it seems clear to me that Sainsbury's want out and have for some time. They have tried to bully there way out of it by submitting a sub-standard acoustic report to ensure a "store onerous condition" prevails. Rovers to their credit have seen this and had their own report done that a respected planning expert believes has a greater than 60% chance of succeeding in getting Sainsbury's the hours they want. Rovers have offered to pay for the appeal, report and the extra £40,000 needed to carry out acoustic modifications to the site to ensure the project goes ahead. Sainsbury's have delayed and tried to force the store onerous condition. Rovers claim hinges on the clause relating to Sainsbury's acting in good faith and that their behaviour over the appeals process is a breach of that clause. This only the beginning as the claim is only for damages and costs to date. It doesn't cover the cost to Rovers of a full Sainsbury's withdrawal. This is a threat from Rovers to try and force Sainsbury's to stay in. If they pull out, which seems likely and Rovers are successful with the initial writ then a much larger breach of contract case will surely follow? At last some sanity and an intelligent analysis of where we are. Sainsburys want out that's clear. They can only pull out if they don't get acceptable planning permission. They are therefore not trying to get it which is in clear breach of the reasonable endeavours clause. This is just a shot across Sainsburys bows to say you aren't going to bully us. If we win this Sainsburys will still not want to proceed but it's puts us in a very much stronger legal position. We have to follow due legal process. Those suggesting Higgs should step aside now are INSANE, who is going to fight the fight if he goes. We may as well rollover and let Sainsburys shaft us from behind He could step aside to fight this and this only this allowing someone else to deal with the FC. It's not in anyway close to insane. It makes sense. He cannot reasonably be expected to do it all and I don't think there would be a better time to step aside and take a role within the club that allows him the time and space to battle this without the added pressure of overseeing the club on the pitch. Thing is I don't see him being at all magnanimous enough to concede that he needs help let alone get someone on to do just that. Would you agree ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:06:22 GMT
How can they do this KP? Surely once it's been to the high court they only get 1 appeal after then both sides have to live with the outcome? The High Court are part of the Establishment, it's all corrupt my friend, a little word in someones ear and its a done deal. Nick higgs says everything is fine, chill out :-) |
|
|
|
Post by beaver132 on Aug 26, 2014 17:07:22 GMT
The problem Jon is not that we held hands with the devil, but that we now have to hold hands with barristers. Any compensation will quickly be outstripped by legal fees, they will see to that. I have it on good authority that sainsburys have more money than brfc and they will simply bleed us dry. An eminent QC once told me that you have to find a one handed counsel, that way you can't be told "on one hand this but on the other hand....." Mr Higgs and brfc please be very very careful. I don't envy them this position one bit. There are more wrong ways than right ones. God have mercy on us all.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:20:11 GMT
But they can carry on with technicalities into infinity......... And beyond. How can they do this KP? Surely once it's been to the high court they only get 1 appeal after then both sides have to live with the outcome? They can just continue to delay with a huge array of possible reasons if they so wish. We are talking about a huge corporation Vs BRFC & our, by comparison, piggy bank savings. I think the best we can hope for, the cleanest break if you will, is an out of court settlement and to try and move on. A protracted battle with Sainsbury will only serve to kill the club off. They have kept Southend on their proverbial hook for 5 years now and have others like it. What now galls me most is that we all even helped these horrible bastards because we did not see them for what they are and JTS has already put that better than I could. There is no new stadium now and we need to somehow work out how to keep the club alive. We do not have the means not the monied acquaintances to even engage these types on a protracted battle. They don't want the Mem and no one can force it. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo Admin on Aug 26, 2014 17:21:26 GMT
We are in essence completely marooned. We need support now more than ever. Or, I fear, else.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 26, 2014 17:23:05 GMT
At last some sanity and an intelligent analysis of where we are. Sainsburys want out that's clear. They can only pull out if they don't get acceptable planning permission. They are therefore not trying to get it which is in clear breach of the reasonable endeavours clause. This is just a shot across Sainsburys bows to say you aren't going to bully us. If we win this Sainsburys will still not want to proceed but it's puts us in a very much stronger legal position. We have to follow due legal process. Those suggesting Higgs should step aside now are INSANE, who is going to fight the fight if he goes. We may as well rollover and let Sainsburys shaft us from behind He could step aside to fight this and this only this allowing someone else to deal with the FC. It's not in anyway close to insane. It makes sense. He cannot reasonably be expected to do it all and I don't think there would be a better time to step aside and take a role within the club that allows him the time and space to battle this without the added pressure of overseeing the club on the pitch. Thing is I don't see him being at all magnanimous enough to concede that he needs help let alone get someone on to do just that. Would you agree ? Isn't Chris Jeff in charge of the playing side now anyway? Although up until yesterday I'm not sure if he'd attended a competitive match this season Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:28:57 GMT
He could step aside to fight this and this only this allowing someone else to deal with the FC. It's not in anyway close to insane. It makes sense. He cannot reasonably be expected to do it all and I don't think there would be a better time to step aside and take a role within the club that allows him the time and space to battle this without the added pressure of overseeing the club on the pitch. Thing is I don't see him being at all magnanimous enough to concede that he needs help let alone get someone on to do just that. Would you agree ? Isn't Chris Jeff in charge of the playing side now anyway? Although up until yesterday I'm not sure if he'd attended a competitive match this season Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk I can't answer that mucker. No one really knows who does what as the supposed review has not been publicised, well, apart from we never scored enough goals. Anyway. It's ALL John Wards fault, right ? Sorry but I have to laugh or I would genuinely cry right now. I bloody told those on my FB not to gloat about the stadium. Those of us older fans know it is NEVER how it seems at Rovers. In honesty I think many of is felt this would not happen but we allowed ourselves to dream. Jeez, why does it always rain on me  ?? |
|
|
|
Post by philbemmygas on Aug 26, 2014 17:30:33 GMT
Feck it, let's just abandon any hope of progress if we have any hope of getting the supermarket it surely isn't by hiding & hoping they will go away. A contract is exactly what it says it is, I don't care how big they are it is them reneging on the deal not little old Bristol Rovers
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:42:19 GMT
Feck it, let's just abandon any hope of progress if we have any hope of getting the supermarket it surely isn't by hiding & hoping they will go away. A contract is exactly what it says it is, I don't care how big they are it is them reneging on the deal not little old Bristol Rovers Agreed Phil but do we have the funds to fight them ? Thing is that even if we win, maybe a good chance of thst, they can carry on filibustering, if you will, until the end of time. They can just keep this up in one form or another. This is not about giving up but about coming to the best possible outcome given that Sainsbury are clear that they do not want the place. That is the crux of it, it's not about the lack of fight but fighting where a good outcome is possible. There is nothing to be gained in a fight we cannot win and then using resources that the football club need, now more than ever. That's how I see it anyway mate. It's not about bravery or giving up, it's about the end result. |
|
|
|
Post by bs10er on Aug 26, 2014 17:42:23 GMT
Am not too sure extended delivery hours would be granted,lots of stores are limited. Tesco at Golden Hill for instance and many others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:46:32 GMT
Am not too sure extended delivery hours would be granted,lots of stores are limited. Tesco at Golden Hill for instance and many others. But they never had the MP's and the prime minister behind them. I think that could sway BCC in this case. |
|
|
|
Post by malmersgas on Aug 26, 2014 17:46:28 GMT
Twerton Spirit, here we come!
Its us against the world again! So bring it!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:51:14 GMT
Am not too sure extended delivery hours would be granted,lots of stores are limited. Tesco at Golden Hill for instance and many others. Is it really just delivery hours preventing them building it though? Personally I think that's bollocks. Delivery hours do not affect their ability to buy the land, build the store and operate it, otherwise they'd close down all the existing stores which haven't had extended hours granted. I think that excuse is a bit of an elaborate ruse, hope not though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 17:53:45 GMT
Am not too sure extended delivery hours would be granted,lots of stores are limited. Tesco at Golden Hill for instance and many others. Is it really just delivery hours preventing them building it though? Personally I think that's bollocks. Delivery hours do not affect their ability to buy the land, build the store and operate it, otherwise they'd close down all the existing stores which haven't had extended hours granted. I think that excuse is a bit of an elaborate ruse, hope not though. It's a bloody spiteful one if so though eh. |
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Aug 26, 2014 17:59:08 GMT
Sainsburys aren't going to build its now all about whether they are forced to buy the land for the agreed price.
We can settle down for another year of battles this time with our former partner and if we win the battle we could end up celebrating with our former enemy with us having the land sale we need and no supermarket for TRASH.
As Jon the Stripe says we have been dancing with the devil but maybe at the end of all this it will be only the devil that is left suffering?
|
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Aug 26, 2014 18:01:48 GMT
Am not too sure extended delivery hours would be granted,lots of stores are limited. Tesco at Golden Hill for instance and many others. Is it really just delivery hours preventing them building it though? Personally I think that's bollocks. Delivery hours do not affect their ability to buy the land, build the store and operate it, otherwise they'd close down all the existing stores which haven't had extended hours granted. I think that excuse is a bit of an elaborate ruse, hope not though. No its not preventing them they are using the restriction to say that suitable planning permission has not been achieved thus allowing them to pull out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 18:10:10 GMT
What we need is for Banksy to mysteriously put a load of his graffiti on the Mem and we would have a shed load of people queuing up to buy it and keep it in the area for the future generations.
See, it's called thinking outside the box.
Now, where did I put his number ??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 18:17:34 GMT
Is it really just delivery hours preventing them building it though? Personally I think that's bollocks. Delivery hours do not affect their ability to buy the land, build the store and operate it, otherwise they'd close down all the existing stores which haven't had extended hours granted. I think that excuse is a bit of an elaborate ruse, hope not though. It's a bloody spiteful one if so though eh. Oh yes, but I can only echo Jon the Stripe's earlier sentiments on that front  Is it really just delivery hours preventing them building it though? Personally I think that's bollocks. Delivery hours do not affect their ability to buy the land, build the store and operate it, otherwise they'd close down all the existing stores which haven't had extended hours granted. I think that excuse is a bit of an elaborate ruse, hope not though. No its not preventing them they are using the restriction to say that suitable planning permission has not been achieved thus allowing them to pull out. It's awful stuff from Sainsbury's. In a logical, fair world, a court of justice would realise that regardless of the delivery hours, they have suitable planning permission. That has been proved by the amount of stores they operate which already have the same delivery hours. |
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Aug 26, 2014 18:20:07 GMT
One of our strengths was MP Charlotte Leslie.
The question is, as i asked months ago, Was she in it for Bristol and Bristol Rovers or Sainsburys? At the time, she could take the side of both gaining publicity for herself and knocking her political opponents at the same time.
Her next move will be interesting.
|
|
??
