Liquidators

[blackdog]

I think you need to re-read some of the posts because your coming up with your own conclusion. I want everyone who has done and can be proved anything untoward to be brought to account, be it directors, managers, players or the tea lady.

 

I personally think Adams was naive and was used by the Bratt Pack to facilitate the destruction of the club. Thankfully the fans got their wishes, new owners and a new league, something that wouldn't have happened under the old regime.

 

There is no witch hunt whatsoever and there is nothing libelous, people just want justice served to anyone found to be the wrong side of the law.

 

Seconded........................

[grebovale]

I bet ADAMS loves his name been brought up in this thread .. NOT ..

[Jacko51]

What law as he broke ? Look back at how he was made a director, he never said he bought shares,so there is a witch hunt

 

He said he was considering investing £50,000 of his own money. I'm pretty sure he never had any intention of doing that - why would he? He was used by Lloyd, Bratt and Oliver to make the Board quorate. He was warned what he was getting into and why what he was doing could end in tears but he took no notice. Why would he not do what the Board asked - he had just been given his job back at Vale at a much increased salary when he had failed pretty miserably at Sheffield United. He was naive certainly, whether he was anything more than that is for Young and Currie to find out. He's a decent football manager but he appears to be a poor politician.

[blackdog]

I bet ADAMS loves his name been brought up in this thread .. NOT ..

 

Bet he loves you for bringing it up on Facebook

[Edge81]

With adams in the mix its a tricky situation

 

I don't think MA would have had official board responsibilities. I'm pretty sure that he was officially elected so legally that had the minimum number of 4 to con us so they could keep running the club. Ihave no beef with Adams

[bookworm]

a few posters on here who love to put a dampener on proceedings are in danger of either being strangled by their own halo's or choking on the dust which is being raked up from these old ashes, just my opinion of course.

[Andyregs]

So you want him sacked ? Which company laws as he broke ?

 

No one has mentioned that apart from yourself who tries to force it into any conversation about Adams and create the discussion when it didn't exist in the first place. Anyone would think you wanted people to say it just so you could have a moan.

[geosname]

Provided your facts are correct ......

agreed

 

Why shouldn't he go scott free? You've just stated that from a legal point of view he didn't do anything wrong.

 

We dont know that

 

Promotion to League 1?

 

That is more than can be said for the starve em out crew.

 

If it wasnt for the SeO protests etc I doubt he would have had the opportunity to guide the club to promotion

 

What law as he broke ? Look back at how he was made a director, he never said he bought shares,so there is a witch hunt

 

He was offered a seat, sponsored and he accepted... thats how he became a director... once he took that role he took on the responsibilities of a director, the consequences of being a director and the liabilities of being a director.

No one has suggested he be sacked

[geosname]

I don't think MA would have had official board responsibilities.

If you mean he wasnt told everything or fully informed of decisions I think you are correct

I'm pretty sure that he was officially elected so legally that had the minimum number of 4 to con us so they could keep running the club.

Is that in itself an offence? Is accepting, knowing that, an offence? I think adams was used to make up the numbers to keep the board quorate, I think he was probably told that at the time, perhaps not by the other three, it was mentioned on here and other places at the time by numerous people. He stated at the time it was only for football matters and it was pointed out that it was not possible to do that because all matters needed 4 board members. The board meeting notes and attendance should make very interesting reading if they still exist.

Ihave no beef with Adams

 

Neither have I

 

It could be suggested that he joined the board to safeguard his position [ who wouldnt want to keep a lucrative job?] but how many [not self employed] would sign as guarantor to their employers overdraft and/or financial responsibilities?

[geosname]

If 4 board members make a decision to allow shares to be distributed without payment and that distribution is an offence them all 4 are responsible for the consequences of that decision.

 

If I remember correctly from the articles.... a director does not have to be physically present at a board meeting to take part or make the meeting quorate.

[Aussie Rules]

For me MOLD remain the prime 'Liquidators' target, not MA. Micky has, in my opinion. well and truly redeemed himself :)

[geosname]

I dont think its about redemption Barry.... I dont think he needs it.

I think it all rests on whether the selling of nil paid shares or the buying of nil paid shares is the issue... there may be a crossover if there was some sort of conspiracy in the purchase... there may be no case to answer for anyone.... if there is it has to be decided if MOLD or BOLA [pre purchase] or both committed any offence and what that offence was.

If the sale of nil paid shares is the issue I cant see how adams or his part in it can be ignored... if he knew or should have reasonably known about the issue he is a party to it.

I dont see how MOLD [apart from conspiricy] could be accountable for the sale of the shares, only for the purchase... and subsequent actions [eg the loan]..... which gets confusing because OL were a party to both pre and post sale boards.

If the nil paid shares or BOLA is not an issue then adams is clear.....

Put simply..... If its post share sale MOLD are in the frame.... if its pre share sale BOLA are in the frame.... yes it does/can get complicated at the point of sale.

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

Is it me or as a witch hunt started against ADAMS by his dislikers again, sad bunch if this is the case and its not needed

 

You really have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. This thread is about former directors of Port Vale being investigated. Adams is one of those. That is fact and whatever is said on this message board has little or nothing to do with it.

[fairportnick]

Is it me or as a witch hunt started against ADAMS by his dislikers again, sad bunch if this is the case and its not needed

 

I suggest you (re) read posts 89, 103 and 97 VERY carefully.

[fairportnick]

I don't think MA would have had official board responsibilities. I'm pretty sure that he was officially elected so legally that had the minimum number of 4 to con us so they could keep running the club. Ihave no beef with Adams

 

You cannot be a director without having the responsibilities of a director. It would be in simple terms like driving without insurance.