Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ESI 1 v ESI 2 - Initial Hearing 01-02/09/2020, Court of Appeal 17/09/2020 (p127)
Comments
-
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....0 -
well Lauren Kreamer didn't dispute it ....carly burn said:
So Elliott putting money in was stated so it must be true?stonemuse said:
If there was, it would have been stated in court. Therefore it doesn’t exist.carly burn said:Can someone please remind me if any paperwork has ever been produced that is signed by both parties, lex dominus and panorama magic detailing the transfer of shares from PM to LD?
I know there was apparently an email where Mihail had said it had happened but is there any signed paperwork with full details of the requirements for the transaction?
Should the judge not have asked to see evidence of these very crucial details when it was at court.
I can't get my head around that there is hardly any if zero evidence that this took place and still it drags on!0 -
The EFL may have already told Elliott the conclusion of his appeal. It was lodged on an individual basis so I guess they have no plans to put it out to the public.
They said f*** all when Nimer failed it.1 -
I thought a letter on Charlton letter headed paper from MM saying the shares had been transferred was referred to on the first day and LK retaliated by saying the pound hadn't been paid. Could well be confused though.stonemuse said:
If there was, it would have been stated in court. Therefore it doesn’t exist.carly burn said:Can someone please remind me if any paperwork has ever been produced that is signed by both parties, lex dominus and panorama magic detailing the transfer of shares from PM to LD?
I know there was apparently an email where Mihail had said it had happened but is there any signed paperwork with full details of the requirements for the transaction?0 -
LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
0 -
Nimer didnt fail it... He passed the ODAT which is why he remains a Director of the clubcarly burn said:The EFL may have already told Elliott the conclusion of his appeal. It was lodged on an individual basis so I guess they have no plans to put it out to the public.
They said f*** all when Nimer failed it.
He simply couldnt provide the Source of Funds which is what stopped the takeover from being approved by the EFL and is what put us in the embargo5 -
Exactly. The irony is that Elliott may well have more credibility than Nimer (A very low bar) but in effect,and due to the shortage of time we are all backing Nimer.LargeAddick said:
well Lauren Kreamer didn't dispute it ....carly burn said:
So Elliott putting money in was stated so it must be true?stonemuse said:
If there was, it would have been stated in court. Therefore it doesn’t exist.carly burn said:Can someone please remind me if any paperwork has ever been produced that is signed by both parties, lex dominus and panorama magic detailing the transfer of shares from PM to LD?
I know there was apparently an email where Mihail had said it had happened but is there any signed paperwork with full details of the requirements for the transaction?
Should the judge not have asked to see evidence of these very crucial details when it was at court.
I can't get my head around that there is hardly any if zero evidence that this took place and still it drags on!
This is so f***d up.3 -
Regardless. On both counts the EFL said nothing in public wouldn't you agree?ForeverAddickted said:
Nimer didnt fail it... He passed the ODAT which is why he remains a Director of the clubcarly burn said:The EFL may have already told Elliott the conclusion of his appeal. It was lodged on an individual basis so I guess they have no plans to put it out to the public.
They said f*** all when Nimer failed it.
He simply couldnt provide the Source of Funds which is what stopped the takeover from being approved by the EFL and is what put us in the embargo1 -
The EFL made a public statement that they had failed 3 people's OADT applications, I gather that to fail is extremely rare and presumably that's why they make it public. Might also have something to do with the pressure they were under at the time to be more transparent about what was happening.0
-
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
I find it so delicious that Elliott has put money into something he doesn’t own and will probably lose it.19
-
Elliot categorically does not own the club.Clarky said:
I thought a letter on Charlton letter headed paper from MM saying the shares had been transferred was referred to on the first day and LK retaliated by saying the pound hadn't been paid. Could well be confused though.stonemuse said:
If there was, it would have been stated in court. Therefore it doesn’t exist.carly burn said:Can someone please remind me if any paperwork has ever been produced that is signed by both parties, lex dominus and panorama magic detailing the transfer of shares from PM to LD?
I know there was apparently an email where Mihail had said it had happened but is there any signed paperwork with full details of the requirements for the transaction?
Farnell confirmed it in the Companies House case, and also confirmed it yesterday, albeit with Elliot signing the letter.4 -
Certainly gets my juices flowingJ BLOCK said:I find it so delicious that Elliott has put money into something he doesn’t own and will probably lose it.3 -
Elliotttt probably has put money into the club. The question is whose money is it and what might happen to him should they decide they want it back...0
-
LeaburnForEngland said:
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.5.2 The Appeal:
(a) must be filed with the company secretary within 14 days of receipt of notice of The League's decision;
I wonder if that would mean Chris Parkes?
0 -
I suppose you have to ask yourself, if it's proved he or others did put cash in, what would've happened if they hadn't?AdTheAddicK said:
Certainly gets my juices flowingJ BLOCK said:I find it so delicious that Elliott has put money into something he doesn’t own and will probably lose it.1 -
Whoever lodged it, it would be under the orders of MM, I never really understood his reasons for going ahead with the appeal. The whole excuse of it not being fair that Elliot would then banned from ever being a director of a an EFL football club, makes little sense, especially as it would be great news for the whole of football.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.5.2 The Appeal:
(a) must be filed with the company secretary within 14 days of receipt of notice of The League's decision;
I wonder if that would mean Chris Parkes?2 -
I'd the club refused to submit the appeal I suspect that would have ended in front of a beek as well.Shrew said:
Whoever lodged it, it would be under the orders of MM, I never really understood his reasons for going ahead with the appeal. The whole excuse of it not being fair that Elliot would then banned from ever being a director of a an EFL football club, makes little sense, especially as it would be great news for the whole of football.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.5.2 The Appeal:
(a) must be filed with the company secretary within 14 days of receipt of notice of The League's decision;
I wonder if that would mean Chris Parkes?1 -
I thought the appeals had to go through the Club?LeaburnForEngland said:
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.0 -
Elliott is appealing individually. The club have nothing to do with it.LargeAddick said:
I thought the appeals had to go through the Club?LeaburnForEngland said:
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.
This is so he can get his grubby mitts in somewhere else.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
It means the appeal must be lodged with the Company Secretary of the EFL not the club secretary of Charlton, however the club would be notiifed if the second attempts fail since they would have to take any necessary action to remove the applicant from any position of management within the club. All the club have to do is announce that on second application an un-named individual passed or failed the test.Shrew said:
Whoever lodged it, it would be under the orders of MM, I never really understood his reasons for going ahead with the appeal. The whole excuse of it not being fair that Elliot would then banned from ever being a director of a an EFL football club, makes little sense, especially as it would be great news for the whole of football.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.5.2 The Appeal:
(a) must be filed with the company secretary within 14 days of receipt of notice of The League's decision;
I wonder if that would mean Chris Parkes?
4 -
Do we know for sure he has then? Is there proof of it?carly burn said:
I suppose you have to ask yourself, if it's proved he or others did put cash in, what would've happened if they hadn't?AdTheAddicK said:
Certainly gets my juices flowingJ BLOCK said:I find it so delicious that Elliott has put money into something he doesn’t own and will probably lose it.0 -
If he has passed I hope the EFL keep it to themselves until after the injunction and the sale have happened.0
-
So the OADT has to be submitted/ go through a club? Can an individual not take this test without a club?0
-
I see little benefit to CAFC for the EFL to carry out Elliot's appeal before the 7 days are up.
As it stands he has failed, which benefits us (Panorama).
If they passed him on appeal on Monday, it can't possibly help our case.
Even if it has little or no bearing to the outcome of the appeal.2 -
4 weeks ago today.Shrew said:
posted by the EFL on the 7th August
Appeal put in the following week. So that's 3 weeks now. Not like is not urgent is it. Like Bumble often says......"get on with the game".1 -
It is not urgent at all. Best they shut up until all this is over.golfaddick said:
4 weeks ago today.Shrew said:posted by the EFL on the 7th August
Appeal put in the following week. So that's 3 weeks now. Not like is not urgent is it. Like Bumble often says......"get on with the game".2 -
This is completely wrong. Chris is the league’s point of contact with the club on virtually all matters and the club’s point of advice about the rules. We used to joke that he actually worked for them rather than the club because of it. It’s why, for example, he was even part of the meeting the EFL had with disgruntled employees about staff bonuses, even though he didn’t support them.Scratchingvalleycat said:
Don't buy thatAddickted said:
Surely it would be down to the Club Secretary to advise MM on the appeal process and what was required and by whom?Gary Poole said:
The thing about this, is it truly exposes how slap dash and amateur MM is. The details about the OADT and appeals process are clear in the EFL regulations published on their website. I guess though that does mean you have to bother to look if you’re not sure.mendonca said:MM messing up the details about the Oadt test meant that it was an area that we could not expose in the trial.
There were so many holes in that area which we could not pursue with questioning. So much so that better questions have been posed on the board.
Lot of animosity being shown to MM over this. Happy to be proved wrong, but I would have thought CP was partially responsible for the lack of clarity.
Chris Parkes is the football secretary not the company secretary of CAFC Limited. Even if he were a fully fledged qualified Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (Now known as the Chartered Governance Institute) and appointed under the Companies Act to be the Company Secretary of CAFC Limited he would not be in a position to give advice to Panorama Magic which is the company for whom MM works. So no responsibility in this could fall at CPs door.
His suspension by Southall apparently came about because he submitted papers for Nimer to the EFL. He is the person who responded to the EFL request for assurance that Elliott was not involved with the running of the club and he is the person who submitted the Aussies’ documents way back when. It is exactly what he does.12 -
FWIW........I reckon the COA wont hear/read the appeal until Wednesday afternoon & some old doddery fart will look at his watch and mutter.. " oh dear, the injunction runs out in an hour & I can't possibly give an answer in that time. Judge Pearce says that the case isn't until November so extending the injunction by a few weeks won't do any harm". And with that the injunction will be extended past the transfer deadline & with it goes our season.
1 -
I know he is appealing but I thought the appeal had to be submitted through the Club?carly burn said:
Elliott is appealing individually. The club have nothing to do with it.LargeAddick said:
I thought the appeals had to go through the Club?LeaburnForEngland said:
The club did "remove" them as that's why they're no longer posting their bollocks on the OS or making appearances at games.CL_Phantom said:LeaburnForEngland said:
Is there a chance that Elliot(t) has already been told that his OADT appeal has failed, and as it was appealed as an individual the club didn't get informed? As if that's the case then surely he would just sit on the information while the current court case is ongoing?CL_Phantom said:Chizz said:
But the club might not be given the information, since the appellant isn't an owner or employee of the club.Shrew said:
Though remember it will not be the EFL who announce this, its up to the club (whoever they are) to make it public.Miserableoldgit said:
Ask the EFL.carly burn said:
Not unless you count Bowyer not being allowed to get bodies in before the season starts?MuttleyCAFC said:Ultimately, another week shouldn't be a big deal. Given the decision has been made, the chances of undermining the authority of the judge via the appeal has very little chance of success from what I can gather. So rather than us having to wait until November, we have to wait until Wednesday. And of course, the club still has to be sold. If it is sold say on Thursday or Friday next week, the delay surely hasn't even been a delay.
This is already having an effect. Elliott will be doing all he can to slow things down now. Expect this appeal to be lodged at the last possible moment. That gives him more time for the fan base to give him pelters and improve his chances.
He told us he lodged his appeal to the EFL within hours of being rejected. Why the delay now?
Below Taken from the EFL OADT. The EFL will notify the club itself in regards to the outcome. I imagine it's to keep reputable businessmen like Elliott out...
(c) requires each Club not to permit any person who is subject to a Disqualifying Condition either become a Relevant Person or (if he was already a Relevant Person before the Disqualifying Condition arose) to continue to be a Relevant Person for the Club, for so long as the Disqualifying Condition subsists.3 Decision
3.1 Where The League decides (whether based on a Declaration or otherwise) that a person who is or wishes to become a Relevant Person is subject to a Disqualifying Condition, The League shall notify the person and his Club in writing of that decision (with reasons).
You'd like to think the EFL would make a statement but....
Reading through, it didn't mention anything about individuals as such, it's all communicated alongside the club, after all if Elliot pretends he's passed when he hasn't and buys the club, the club will suffer for allowing a person of interest thats failed OADT to act in an official capacity. So would think that the club would be informed still.
I believe the EFL instructed staff to make sure Elliot and Farnell were removed in a statement at the time?
In terms of the appeal MM said that he was wrong in saying the club would not allowing PE and CF to appeal as they could do so as individuals due to potentially wanting to be involved with other clubs in the future - so I took it to mean that the appeal had gone directly from PE rather than through CAFC.
This is so he can get his grubby mitts in somewhere else.0
This discussion has been closed.
