Presumably as part of due diligence TS’ representatives would have seen all company bank statements and accounts for the period in question and would have seen any money being put in and questioned where it came from. I would also think as part of the sale Southal would have had to sign some kind of agreement along the lines of everything related to financial matters had been disclosed. I am no corporate lawyer, but that would just seem like basic common sense in these matters. If so presumably TS will know of the validity of the claim and either be expecting it or will be able to tell him to fuck off and that he will claim for any legal expenses he occurs in dealing with the matter.

Also why has this taken a year or more to reach this point? If you are owed a sizeable sum wouldn't this be pursued expediently and you would seek a winding up order much sooner.

Unless of course there has been 'to & fro' between all parties throughout this period and this is the final action to conclude it once and for all.

PragueAddick said:

AFKABartram said:

It despairs me there is not one decent journalist, paper or TV programme prepared to do something in exposing these absolute parasites for what they are

Indeed. That is why we created the Dossier, and we will take the opportunity to deploy it on this matter.

However it would seem some people on this thread can't be arsed to actually read in detail what we know about Bassini and this claim, even when it is suggested to them. For those who really,really  can't be arsed, here is a cut and paste of the pop-up summary. It basically tells you all you need to know

Bassini’s name was familiar to fans mainly thanks to his controversial ownership of Watford. He was briefly reported by the media to be interested in a bid for Charlton in May 2020. However documents subsequently emerged which showed that Bassini was claiming to be owed £1.25m by Charlton as a “finder’s fee” for his supposed involvement in assisting ESI’s purchase. This claim appears to have been dismissed by the club. Lee Amis has asserted that he (Amis) was the person who introduced ESI to Richard Murray, so he says Bassini’s supposed role is a bogus claim. Certainly such an amount for a finder’s fee would be highly excessive, and Bassini’s lawyers produced no contract to support the claim.

Is there really the need to act so combative?

I know what’s in the dossier, I’ve been following Charlton’s ownership saga for some time now. He wants a settlement and it wouldn’t surprise me if he got one just to shut him up. 

Addickhead86 said:

It saddens me that I have the same initials and first name as Laurence Bassini, but not his good-looks unfortunately...

Good that Lee Bowyer himself is still on this forum! How's Brum babes? Edit: Just seen you're called Laurence, I must try harder...

eaststandmike said:

Almost the exact amount of money we got for Burstow, coincidence?

And also almost the exact amount of money that Mouthall was trying to sell his house for! Coincidence?

Will we ever be free from these parasite scumbags ? not that I think there is a chance in hell of anything coming of this but why on earth do they keep thinking they can come back and have a go ????

The usual nonsense from Bassini and his ilk. In addition to the extract from the dossier quoted by Prague, I'm struggling to see how Southall could retrospectively "transfer on to the club" a finder's fee.

It's noteworthy that Bassini didn't take his sabre-rattling story to a more mainstream publication or, if he did, that they declined to cover it. He's doubtless hoping for some coverage from parasitical, clickbait websites.

Any winding up petition that he issues at the expiration of the statutory 21 day period would undoubtedly be struck out as an abuse of the process of the court. The alleged debt is clearly disputed and, at the risk of understatement, there would be no difficulty whatsoever in satisfying the relatively low threshold for a strike out, namely, that there is a triable issue - in fact, there are probably more triable issues than you can shake a stick at.

Owing to the fact that spurious winding up petitions can give rise to problems for companies, it is possible to apply to the court for an injunction to restrain the would-be or actual petitioner from presenting, pursuing and/or advertising it under the Insolvency Rules. I suspect that Thomas may instruct Freshfields to threaten injunctive relief or, alternatively, to simply warn Bassini that an immediate strike out will be sought if a petition is issued.

It's a minor, unnecessary distraction but I give this story about as much credence as the famous Welsh accountant and specialist in dental practices, who acquired the ESI shell and then demanded that Thomas hand over the club.

Seriously hope TS engages some top notch lawyers to fuck Bassini over and bill him for time wasting. Would love to see the scammers scammed.

PragueAddick said:

ElliotCAFC said:

PragueAddick said:

AFKABartram said:

It despairs me there is not one decent journalist, paper or TV programme prepared to do something in exposing these absolute parasites for what they are

Indeed. That is why we created the Dossier, and we will take the opportunity to deploy it on this matter.

However it would seem some people on this thread can't be arsed to actually read in detail what we know about Bassini and this claim, even when it is suggested to them. For those who really,really  can't be arsed, here is a cut and paste of the pop-up summary. It basically tells you all you need to know

Bassini’s name was familiar to fans mainly thanks to his controversial ownership of Watford. He was briefly reported by the media to be interested in a bid for Charlton in May 2020. However documents subsequently emerged which showed that Bassini was claiming to be owed £1.25m by Charlton as a “finder’s fee” for his supposed involvement in assisting ESI’s purchase. This claim appears to have been dismissed by the club. Lee Amis has asserted that he (Amis) was the person who introduced ESI to Richard Murray, so he says Bassini’s supposed role is a bogus claim. Certainly such an amount for a finder’s fee would be highly excessive, and Bassini’s lawyers produced no contract to support the claim.

Is there really the need to act so combative?

I know what’s in the dossier, I’ve been following Charlton’s ownership saga for some time now. He wants a settlement and it wouldn’t surprise me if he got one just to shut him up. 

It also wouldn’t surprise me if this is a non-story that won’t see past the weekend. 

Sweet Jesus. If you've read the file on him, then please explain to me, please explain to all of us, settlement for what exactly? 
 
 

Spare me the patronising tone, it doesn’t make it easy to communicate with you.

It seems to me that’s the game these chancers play, threaten a bunch of legal action with flimsy evidence  in the hope of a small pay-off outside of the courtroom. I’m not saying he deserves a settlement or has any legal precedent - just that TS may pay him a nominal fee to crawl back into his hole.

I don’t see that being unfathomable, happy to be informed otherwise. 

I almost admire these parasites for their incredibly thick skin and the fact they try this bollocks time and again.

I'm desperate for karma to pay the likes of Southall and Bassini a really horrible visit but life doesn't seem to work that way.

PragueAddick said:

AFKABartram said:

It despairs me there is not one decent journalist, paper or TV programme prepared to do something in exposing these absolute parasites for what they are

Indeed. That is why we created the Dossier, and we will take the opportunity to deploy it on this matter.

However it would seem some people on this thread can't be arsed to actually read in detail what we know about Bassini and this claim, even when it is suggested to them. For those who really,really  can't be arsed, here is a cut and paste of the pop-up summary. It basically tells you all you need to know

Bassini’s name was familiar to fans mainly thanks to his controversial ownership of Watford. He was briefly reported by the media to be interested in a bid for Charlton in May 2020. However documents subsequently emerged which showed that Bassini was claiming to be owed £1.25m by Charlton as a “finder’s fee” for his supposed involvement in assisting ESI’s purchase. This claim appears to have been dismissed by the club. Lee Amis has asserted that he (Amis) was the person who introduced ESI to Richard Murray, so he says Bassini’s supposed role is a bogus claim. Certainly such an amount for a finder’s fee would be highly excessive, and Bassini’s lawyers produced no contract to support the claim.

So he disappeared for well over a year and returned after adding on an extra 450k, excellent stuff.

If he had a legitimate claim why the fuck would he wait all this time?

The guys got no chance of seeing a single penny, Sandgaard's lawyers will laugh at him.