Leeds Utd: creditors were satisfied, not a Liquidator’s Charter

1227

I see Leeds United are being held up as a model for Rangers to liquidate and emerge as a new club.  Leeds United’s circumstances are highly unlikely to bear any relationship with those at Rangers unless Duff and Phelps can agree a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement.

Leeds United AFC Ltd entered administration in the control of KPMG Restructuring on 4 May 2007 and on the same day were sold to a new company Leeds United Football Club Ltd subject to a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) being agreed.  Both Leeds United AFC Ltd and Leeds United FC Ltd were controlled by Ken Bates.

A CVA requires 75% of creditors (by value) to vote to accept a reduced percentage of the money they are owed.  The company was forced to act as HMRC, who were owed in excess of £6m, had issued a winding up petition which was due to expire on 25 June 2007.

Before creditors voted on the CVA several other bidders came forward with offers for the club, however, the vote, on 1 June 2007, returned 75.02% of creditors accepting the CVA offer (75.20% after a recount).

Creditors can challenge a CVA within 28 days of the vote.  On the 28th day, 3 July 2007, HMRC challenged.  With the CVA subject to a challenge, KPMG asked for further offers for the company to be submitted by 9 July 2007.  Despite the extended offer period, the administrators still accepted the offer from Ken Bates Leeds United FC Ltd.

With a CVA agreed, subject to challenge, the Football League transferred Leeds United AFC’s league share to Leeds United FC Ltd under its “exceptional circumstances” provision.  The League imposed a 15 point penalty on the club for the 2007-08 season for failing to satisfy the outstanding legal challenge in time, necessitating the ‘exceptional circumstances’ rule.

HMRC withdrew their objection to the CVA the following month.  Leeds United subsequently appealed against their 15 point penalty citing a CVA had been agreed and that the league programme does not allow time for spurious challenges to be dealt with.  The Football League refused the appeal.

Believing Football League procedures were at fault, not their own behaviour, Leeds United served the League with a High Court writ to challenge the points deduction, however, both parties agreed to abide by the findings of an arbitration panel hearing.

The arbitration panel found against Leeds United citing the following two reasons:

A director of Leeds United FC signed an earlier agreement not to commence any proceedings against the League.

Leeds United waited 7 months before commencing the action, which brought unnecessary sporting consequences on other promotion chasing clubs, specifically Doncaster Rovers, who would no longer be in an automatic promotion spot if Leeds’ 15 points were restored.

In summary:

Leeds United AFC Ltd’s administrators achieved  the necessary 75% support for a CVA.

They withstood the challenge from HMRC, paid creditors and concluded the transfer of assets, including League share, to Leeds United FC Ltd, according to the terms of the CVA before winding up the old company. No loose ends were left.

This is not a Liquidator’s Charter.  Provisions in football only exist to transfer a League share from one company to another if creditors are satisfied, either by being paid in full or, as with Leeds United, with 75% agreeing to accept a diminished amount.

Click here to read CQN Magazine.

Thanks to everyone who has bought a hard copy of issue 7.  Order your copy for delivery by clicking on the link below for news and views from Celtic supporters.

Pay by card or Paypal.


Ship to:




Click Here for Comments >
Share.

About Author

1,227 Comments
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. ...
  4. 7
  5. 8
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. 12
  10. 13
  11. ...
  12. 33

  1. tomthelennytim on

    Auldheid – you cannot seriously say that no-one should be judging Kojo by his comments? Josh Thompson is crap!!

  2. Poordeadking on

    merseycelt lmfao as the big house door slams shut on 4 April, 2012 at 16:49 said:

     

     

    ———————

     

     

    Hah! Not whataboutery, the latter is definitely the lesser of the two evils, but neither is satisfying my craving for hun ridicule at the moment.

  3. traditionalist88 – I did notice that yesterday. I have also been loads of other folk with Twitter links. Since the blog format changed that wee tooltip thing has been going mental. I did bring it to our hosts attention

     

     

    Let me confirm, I am not Declan.

     

     

    I am not clever enough :)

  4. fergus slayed the blues on

    Auldheid

     

    did you catch the link on yesterday regards ragers being told they would not get a Euro licence ,it revealed some dates that had been missed and info on taxes due

     

     

    hail hail

  5. themightyquinn on

    Do not submit bogus claims as this may (unlikely but may) dilite the position of a creditor who hold more than 25% of the huns debt thus making CVA possible.

     

     

    Don’t do it!

  6. merseycelt lmfao as the big house door slams shut on

    Poordeadking

     

     

    I seem to have been in or around this debate most of the day so I guess I’m to blame!

     

     

    Are the huns not dead yet?

     

     

    HH

  7. Auld Neil Lennon heid on

    tomthelennytim on 4 April, 2012 at 16:53 said:

     

     

     

    Auldheid – you cannot seriously say that no-one should be judging Kojo by his comments? Josh Thompson is crap!!

     

    ======================

     

    :) Indeed. Life did not take long to sort that one out.

  8. traditionalist88 – sorry to disappoint you.

     

     

    I think the Social site plugin has changed as you can’t unlink a Twitter or Facebook anymore from the control panel too.

     

     

    Teething issues. The new format is much better all round IMO

  9. Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo on

    traditionalist88

     

     

    I dont believe him !!!

     

     

    Hail HAil

  10. ibleedgreenandwhite1 on

    Rieperman on 4 April, 2012 at 16:57 said:

     

    Ever get the feeling that the only one enjoying today’s discussion is Kojo?

     

     

    Rieperman,,do what the rest of us do and starve the attention seeker of the attention he’s looking for!!

     

     

    Hail hail

  11. traditionalist88 on

    Rogue Leader

     

     

    I’ll get over it;) Teething problems to be expected!

     

     

    HH

  12. Debates about Politics, Religion or Race is bad…for your skin.

     

     

    You will all break out soon like plukey kybers.

     

     

    If that does not work on your Vanity then nothing will.

     

     

    Sorry to those who have spots out there…am I being Spotist?

  13. merseycelt lmfao as the big house door slams shut on

    Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo

     

     

    I spot a diversionary tactic!

     

     

    HH

  14. Silver City Neil Lennon on

    Headtheball on 4 April, 2012 at 16:46 said:

     

    I see the Rangers website has a ‘proof of debt’ form which is to be filled in by creditors and dispatched to Duff and Phelps.

     

    It would be outrageous and totally irresponsible if people were to submit bogus claims.

     

    Bogus??? I’m off to claim for all the money I spent watching a bent game. I also wonder what my shares would be worth if we got all the trips to Europe we should have.

  15. tomthelennytim on

    That last “pip” on 5Live’s 5pm notification sounded a lot like a hospital flatline. Hehehe – stupid dead huns.

  16. Georgios Samaras could score his 50th Celtic goal where it all started in his Celtic career, at Rugby Park.

     

     

    * Remember he floated in from the right wing, kept going, and going and slotted it in, with his left foot?*

  17. Silver City Neil Lennon on 4 April, 2012 at 17:00 said:

     

     

    ”I see the Rangers website has a ‘proof of debt’ form which is to be filled in by creditors and dispatched to Duff and Phelps.”

     

     

     

    I suppose we could ask D&P to confirm whether or not the huns players had two contracts, on the basis that if they did we’d want our ticket money refunded for any game in which they fielded ineligible players.

  18. bournesouprecipe on 4 April, 2012 at 17:03 said:

     

     

    What do you call a Rangers Supporter at an SPL game next season?

     

     

    Referee

     

     

    The match commander :)

  19. Gene's a Bhoys name on

    Headtheball on 4 April, 2012 at 16:46 said:

     

    I see the Rangers website has a ‘proof of debt’ form which is to be filled in by creditors and dispatched to Duff and Phelps.

     

     

    Nestle have submitted a substantial claim as they haven’t been paid for the Shreddies

     

     

    I never read Kojo’s comments – too much like hard work

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. ...
  4. 7
  5. 8
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. 12
  10. 13
  11. ...
  12. 33