Hear hear. The club staff have ALWAYS been the unsung heroes, particularly at times such as this. The club absolutely relies on their goodwill to keep the ship afloat.
HMRC?
- Thread starter RATC
- Start date
pooshooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 2,203
If football clubs don't pay their paye over on 19th of month following pay run then they are effectively using HMRC as short term loan. HMRC know this so why do they seek to wind up clubs who if not trading would never pay them back?
Paul Cannell
Well-known member
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 7,445
@Navegante
Agreed. But I don't think they have to commit to investing any sum to be a director, and let's face it - neither the UK nor football is central to any of their businesses.
Agreed. But I don't think they have to commit to investing any sum to be a director, and let's face it - neither the UK nor football is central to any of their businesses.
Eh? A couple of points here. Firstly, I doubt very much that HMRC go for the nuclear option at the earliest opportunity. In fact, the unusually long delay between the petition being lodged and published in the Gazette suggests that they have cut the club significant slack here.
Secondly, if the debt relates to PAYE, as I believe it does, it’s not even the club’s money to play around with. It’s the individual employees’ money which the club are collecting on HMRC’s behalf.
Let’s not try and shift the blame into HMRC. This lies squarely at the door of the club.
bazzer9461
God like member
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 40,573
My main concern is that it makes OUFC look immature, incompetent my unprofessional. Yesterday someone on here claimed the bill has been paid ( I can’t be arsed to go back and find it and post it ) today there still seems to be a lot of uncertainty about whether it has or has not been paid. We have had one winding up order already this year, it was sorted as it was apparently an oversight during the transfer of ownership butfor t to happen twice in the same year whether we t be the same financial or just the same year (2018) that to me is unprofessional and would like to see this HMRC thingy sorted once and forever so the club can go on and be professional again.
Myles, what’s the situation if the club have now paid this bill as Ox Bible suggests?
OK. When it comes to court on 19th December, HMRC can withdraw the petition.
However, now that the petition has been published in the Gazette, any other creditor can now piggyback onto it. So, if has been suggested by some on here, there are other businesses which have not been paid by the club, they could take the petition on, seeking to get their debts paid. This, along with the fact that bank accounts get frozen, is one of the main reasons it was particularly stupid to allow the situation to reach this point.
I'll also add that the above is from the best of my understanding - I am in no way an expert on these matters!
Witney Wag
Active member
- Joined
- 23 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 202
Could Kassam piggy back on this for non payment of contractual payments outstanding?
Yep.
sadoldsod1778
Active member
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 133
Not sure about that myles as its in arbitration.
I would think very doubtful re the monies in arbitration as this is in dispute.
Any rent not paid then yes.
If it has been paid then undoubtedly that is a good thing and the petition should be withdrawn by HMRC.
There are Clearly other questions raised by this whole sorry story though.
Sorry, I should’ve been clearer on that. Absolutely, the amounts which are disputed and under arbitration are unlikely to be added. The sums are clearly in legitimate dispute and that is one of the things which would prevent a court from issuing an order.
Anything else, however, could well be thrown into the mix.
Essexyellows
Well-known member
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 17,249
Myles, thank you for the update. So as long as this bill has been paid and potential others creditors don’t start shouting and or we’re able to settle with them, then the club avoids going into administration?
I agree that it should never have got this far, and begs the question that there appears to be finance issues, hence the concern. And I guess changes the trust for all relationships going forward?
RyanioBirdio
Well-known member
- Joined
- 1 May 2018
- Messages
- 8,775
As a side note, a question on a point that was raised earlier on in this thread:
If the head of the EFL was involved in bringing parties together in terms of our sale, and our current owner going on to purchase the club, and if that person has passed the league’s fit and proper test before two separate winding up petitions have been issued in one calendar year, the second of which has made it all the way to the Gazette... how can that be? If we were to ever end up in administration due to the actions of a man who had not only passed a fit and proper test, but in fact been brought to the table in the first place by the very man at the top of the league administration, what would that say? If we were to be punished by the league when a top official had been involved in putting us in that position in the first place by bringing the culprit into the pig pen? That would really be something, being punished on the back of the league’s own advice, essentially. That would be a whole new level of irony and incompetence. But I’ll bet that were we to end up being punished that those individuals within the league would have nothing what so ever to defend themselves. I’m sure they’d just shrug and go “Well we weren’t to know, were we?”
That the powers that be have declined to comment again as recently as last night is truly staggering, but I’m glad that the local media is at least starting to ask questions and then publicly relay that those questions are being dodged or ignored.
If the head of the EFL was involved in bringing parties together in terms of our sale, and our current owner going on to purchase the club, and if that person has passed the league’s fit and proper test before two separate winding up petitions have been issued in one calendar year, the second of which has made it all the way to the Gazette... how can that be? If we were to ever end up in administration due to the actions of a man who had not only passed a fit and proper test, but in fact been brought to the table in the first place by the very man at the top of the league administration, what would that say? If we were to be punished by the league when a top official had been involved in putting us in that position in the first place by bringing the culprit into the pig pen? That would really be something, being punished on the back of the league’s own advice, essentially. That would be a whole new level of irony and incompetence. But I’ll bet that were we to end up being punished that those individuals within the league would have nothing what so ever to defend themselves. I’m sure they’d just shrug and go “Well we weren’t to know, were we?”
That the powers that be have declined to comment again as recently as last night is truly staggering, but I’m glad that the local media is at least starting to ask questions and then publicly relay that those questions are being dodged or ignored.
