Council Leader refuses to comment

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

He of course meant the conservative opposition leader:rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

Now that makes sense! ;)

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

I agree, but they have no chance of getting a bean back if we are wound up.

 

Yes they do, they get the ground as a secured creditor so they are safe either way.

[osprey]

Mo has given an interview on RS they played a little of it just after 5 and he said he was still interested in the club so maybe they will talk to him to see what can be rescued

 

Wonder if Mo could ''loan'' the money to get the club into admin.If he then buys the club he can get his ''loan' back over time

[PVFC_4_EVA]

I'm not sure what the councils options are to be honest. What happens if the council decide not to give us the money? Would that mean we can't go into administration?

[CambridgeDon]

It's in the Council's own interests to help the club out of this mess, not only financially (because they have a fiduciary duty to recover the monies owed to them) but also reputationally (because, otherwise, they will go down as the people who did nothing to save 130 years of sporting history, not to mention the economy of Burslem). They have the power to do this in law, so it's a political calculation they have to make. Their options are to get the club into administration, or to let it fold. In my view, they have only one realistic course of action but this is politics.

[Grumpy Old Man]

Agreed.The pubs in Burslem are really struggling .I know of two whose takings are considerably down on matchdays. Burslem needs Port Vale!!

[Warren]

The Council will have to go through its own due processes. In considering the loan, actions will be informed by the financial regulations and procedures for handling doubtful debts. But if there are coherent proposals that might be of mutual benefit to the Council and the club worked out it seems to me they need to go via the relevant Cabinet Portfolio Holder to the Cabinet for discussion, approval or rejection. It depends on the scheme of delegation in place as to who can make a decision and how long a decision might take. An officer report will be needed in any event from the Section 151 Officer - Director of Finance and also the Monitoring Officer - Head of Legal Services.

 

To me the Council has to have something significant in return for its cooperation and especially if it is to give a further loan. To just give a further loan without bringing about change that would potentially lead to a viable club / business going forward or which is recklessly negligent about the scope for the Council to get back its money is not acceptable and probably a decision on that basis would be unlawful one way or another - wednesbury principles, ultra vires etc.

 

It is right that the representatives of the Council don't comment at this stage. If a decision is needed at Cabinet it will be interesting to see if they put it in Part 2 - public excluded - or not.

[werstayinup]

Could Mo arrange to pay the money needed for admin and the council help to just put us in admin,as long as he was then allowed to takeover when in admin?

[Fosse69]

Could Mo arrange to pay the money needed for admin and the council help to just put us in admin,as long as he was then allowed to takeover when in admin?

 

The administrator decides who takes over, it could be a big gamble for MC, also nobody has seen the books yet.

[Warren]

Could Mo arrange to pay the money needed for admin and the council help to just put us in admin,as long as he was then allowed to takeover when in admin?

 

The problems here have some logistics. At the moment the board are empowered (I think!) to represent the corporate entity - the club / company. The Council has its representatives. Those and other creditors, especially HMRC, are the interested parties. Mo Chaudry therefore has no role at all unless it trasnpired somehow that he is a creditor as well.

 

They have to get past this stage with a plan, probably going in to administration, before someone like Mo Chaudry could take an interest in my view if he wanted to of course. I can't see how an outside takeover is likely in the current circumstances because the investment is unlikely to be viable and administratively due diligence and negotiations couldn't easily take place.

[Warren]

The administrator decides who takes over, it could be a big gamble for MC, also nobody has seen the books yet.

 

The Council must do due diligence in my view if they are to cooperate with the club. It would be gross professional negligence on the part of the Section 151 Officer not to do so.

[werstayinup]

I just wonder where we turn next if the council say no,would that certainly be bye bye?

[CambridgeDon]

The Council will have to go through its own due processes. In considering the loan, actions will be informed by the financial regulations and procedures for handling doubtful debts. But if there are coherent proposals that might be of mutual benefit to the Council and the club worked out it seems to me they need to go via the relevant Cabinet Portfolio Holder to the Cabinet for discussion, approval or rejection. It depends on the scheme of delegation in place as to who can make a decision and how long a decision might take. An officer report will be needed in any event from the Section 151 Officer - Director of Finance and also the Monitoring Officer - Head of Legal Services.

 

To me the Council has to have something significant in return for its cooperation and especially if it is to give a further loan. To just give a further loan without bringing about change that would potentially lead to a viable club / business going forward or which is recklessly negligent about the scope for the Council to get back its money is not acceptable and probably a decision on that basis would be unlawful one way or another - wednesbury principles, ultra vires etc.

 

It is right that the representatives of the Council don't comment at this stage. If a decision is needed at Cabinet it will be interesting to see if they put it in Part 2 - public excluded - or not.

 

I agree with all this Warren. In my long experience of working either for councils or, more recently, as a contractor, in the end the Members will make a political calculation as to what's in their best interests, provided that it's both legal and meets all the necessary tests of financial probity. In my view, they have every incentive to get the Vale into administration but this is politics and you never know. Cynical, I know, but realistic. Let's hope they do the right thing.

[Warren]

I just wonder where we turn next if the council say no,would that certainly be bye bye?

 

The board would have to find the resources on its own to stop the Statutory Demand or Winding Up Order. The same tactics are available, including trying to get to administration, but without the largest creditor onside the situation would seem very desperate indeed.

 

In general I have confidence in the sensibleness of Local Government Councillors and Officers. They are bound by the statutory remit of the Council, but I believe they will bust a gut to save Port Vale if they can, which is more than most lenders would do.

 

Off to the Boat House in Parkgate now for a meal.

[George is here]

The Council will have to go through its own due processes. In considering the loan, actions will be informed by the financial regulations and procedures for handling doubtful debts. But if there are coherent proposals that might be of mutual benefit to the Council and the club worked out it seems to me they need to go via the relevant Cabinet Portfolio Holder to the Cabinet for discussion, approval or rejection. It depends on the scheme of delegation in place as to how long a decision might take.

 

To me the Council has to have something significant in return for its cooperation and especially if it is to give a further loan. To just give a further loan without bringing about change that would potentially lead to a viable club / business going forward or which is recklessly negligent about the scope for the Council to get back its money is not acceptable and probably a decision on that basis would be unlawful one way or another - wednesbury principles, ultra vires etc.

 

It is right that the representatives of the Council don't comment at this stage. If a decision is needed as Cabinet it will be interesting to see if they put it in Part 2 - public excluded - or not.

 

Good sensible points Warren.

 

The situation is akin to two sides in dispute at somewhere like ACAS where in the end the ideal is that both sides (give or take a little) are happy overall with the decision. Overall I am certain because of some of the reasons given in this thread that the Council do want to help Vale. The problem is balancing this with trying to appease the non Vale supporting Stoke-on-Trent Council Tax payers. Just how difficult this is for them I found out today when a lady work colleague voiced her outrage clearly at the prospect of the Council giving another penny to Port Vale. For good measure there were others with less vocal but similar views.

 

IMO we must give the Council as much time as we can to work something out because the situation is a delicate one for them.