Livingston - all the threads merged

[AND180Y]

There is no winding up notice in the Edinburgh Gazette so far. When a winding up petition is put to court, after the court issues whats called first deliverance, the petition has to be advertised in a local newspaper, probably the Scotsman and in the Edinburgh Gazette. The Gazette comes out on a Tuesday and Friday and it has not been in so far.

If the council are going for a winding up I would expect it to be in by this Friday if there solicitors are in any way efficient. I'll watch with interest and report on here.

After advertisment, the court allows 8 days for interested parties to lodge answers. If answers are lodged, a date for a hearing will be set, or the court might just think there is enough evidence of insolvency to make the winding up order there and then. If no answers are lodged, a winding up order will be made, usually within a day or two of the expiry of the 8 days.

The absence of a winding up advert might mean the council has something else in mind, maybe an eviction or maybe an admin order although, as I have previously said, the latter is less likely.

The SO only issued a demand for rent arrears though and the 14 days is the time allowed by statue for payment to be made. It is only on the 15th day that they can raise legal actions?

[Allstars #9]

Selective quoting/numbering and we've been round the block on this already - I'll PM you to save boring everyone else.

There is a god

[Tonsilitis]

The SO only issued a demand for rent arrears though and the 14 days is the time allowed by statue for payment to be made. It is only on the 15th day that they can raise legal actions?

I assumed that they already had a decree or an expired statutory demand! If not then you are correct and the whole process will take longer so that a winding up order might easily be a few weeks away.

[Guest]

The LiviTrust Statement today:

The board of the LiviforLife Supporters Trust wish to send the following message to all supporters of Livingston FC -

The last few months have been extremely difficult for fans, players and staff of our club, and there have been long periods of uncertainty, confusion, anger and sadness. We are all concerned at the very real possibility that we may not have a club to follow, as the threat of administration or even liquidation looms large. Throughout these past months the Trust board have worked hard to develop a business plan for a community club and firmly believe this is the only viable way forward for LFC. We wish to assure everyone that we will continue to make every effort to secure the survival of Livingston FC for the supporters of the club and for the West Lothian community as a whole.

The numerous ongoing discussions on these forums suggest that fans are confused about the best options for saving the club, and what they themselves can do to help. For some there seems to be no hope, whilst for others there seems to be a choice to be made between the different businessmen who are seeking to take up the reins at the club.

Previous Trust statements have voiced our support for Gordon McDougall as the best option for a financially secure, sustainable Livingston FC, and we wish to reiterate that support. The Trust board met with Gordon some weeks ago and we have been in regular discussion with him since. Gordon and the Trust share a vision for the club that puts emphasis on youth development, the local community and supporters’ involvement. We also share the view that Livingston FC can be a viable and successful football team within the Scottish leagues, through a policy of income matching expenditure. In other words, the club will no longer spend its way into debt simply to seek success on the football stage.

We have excellent fans groups who have supported the club in a range of ways through away travel, social functions, bringing banners and noise to the game and representing the club in supporter's team leagues. These are all a vital part of the life and community of Livi FC and the club itself must continue to support them. In addition to these fans organisations, we have the LiviforLife Trust. Supporters need to recognise that the Trust exists as their own shareholding business vehicle, providing genuine democratic supporter representation, and allowing every member the chance to ensure the club is run honestly and for the benefit of the community.

We will be resuming our fundraising activities, which have taken a backseat recently. We, and the club, need your input and we hope that you, the support, will help with these events in whatever way you can. We are also renewing our applications for a range of grants for investment in specific youth and community projects at the club. Furthermore we will be seeking to establish a “Fighting Fund” of contributions from fans, sponsors and local businesses to help the Trust with the work required.

Whatever occurs over the next few weeks it is essential that the supporters continue to show a unity of purpose, as this will be one of the most important factors in ensuring the club survives.

The LFL Trust board therefore calls on all supporters of the club to unite under the auspices of the Trust and work with us and Gordon McDougall to secure the club’s future. A united support with a shared vision for the club will send a strong message to the SFL, West Lothian Council, club creditors, local businesses and sponsors, and all other interested parties that we have a club worth saving.

Strong on rhetoric, but like the rest, it completely sidesteps any commitment to pay what it owes. Every single option to date has completely avoided settling the club's debts in full. Same old same old I'm afraid to say. I think the Trust option is the way for Livingston to have a football club to be proud of. Unfortunately, Livingston FC isn't that club.

The "strong message" that has been coming out of Livingston for years and years is that we don't honour our debts. Given that MacDougall has already stated that he isn't interested in taking on Livvy with over a million pounds worth of debt, it is therefore certain that he will only take them over once they are in administration. The grand statement by the Trust has therefore aligned itself to the same ideal.........they'll seek to take the club over once an administrator has bumped the creditors.

Basically, "the one strong message to the SFL and the creditors" is "tough tittie, you ain't getting paid".

The one honourable path is to say "Guys, we are sorry. No-one is going to pay your debts, so it's only right we wind this business up, and we'll start afresh with different values, checks and balances in place".

Instead, all we get is various groups who are happy enough for no-one to be paid. If that's the case today, it'll be the case next time too.

Edited July 8, 2009 by Guest

[AND180Y]

I assumed that they already had a decree or an expired statutory demand! If not then you are correct and the whole process will take longer so that a winding up order might easily be a few weeks away.

As I understand the process, they need to serve papers notifying the breach of terms and giving 14 days so that it may be remedied, after the expiration of that period they can formally terminate the lease, although they still need to go to court to get a decree and enforce removal (Massone says he will fight this) so you are right it's gonna be a few weeks before the debt becomes absolute and enforcable.

Of course at any point he could apply for a CVA moratorium and get another month (did I read it is getting increased to 3 months?)

Edited July 8, 2009 by AND180Y

[speckled tangerine]

Obviously the general populace in West Lothian haven't shown a great deal of enthusiasm to the Livingston cause. If i were a council tax payer through there i'd be asking what the f**k WLC were doing allowing tax payers cash to go up the swanney like that!!

[qpsnapper]

Airdrie were kicked out of the League, don't forget, and it was another year before the "new" Airdrie got back in. And if the club goes into administration or liquidation it will lose all its players anyway: they become assets that the administrator will try to sell. Don't kid yourselves - administration is the hard option, not the soft one. Anyone trying to sell that course of action toi you as the sensible one is pulling wool over your eyes.

Another hole to pick in your statement - if a club goes into liquidation, don't the players' registrations become the property of the SFL?

[mcjimbob_dfc]

As I understand the process, they need to serve papers notifying the breach of terms and giving 14 days so that it may be remedied, after the expiration of that period they can formally terminate the lease, although they still need to go to court to get a decree and enforce removal (Massone says he will fight this) so you are right it's gonna be a few weeks before the debt becomes absolute and enforcable.

Of course at any point he could apply for a CVA moratorium and get another month (did I read it is getting increased to 3 months?)

If this is the case, is it not about time the Massone and the club answer to the shockingly silent SFL regarding all of this? Massone will obviously stall any moves towards enforcing removal, but if the ball has been set rolling by the relative creditors surely that will be the last chance for the SFL to take some kind of action and somehow prevent what is bound to be Scottish football farce number 12,200,000?

I don't really want to see Livy go down the pan but for the sake of this division and with all the uncertainty surrounding their very survival, surely the correct thing to do is take action now. What should that action be? Relegation to the 3rd, meaning less money in gates lost from the league as a whole should they go bust?

[Ivo den Bieman]

edited due to being a complete fuckwit

Edited July 8, 2009 by Ivo den Bieman

[Ivo den Bieman]

I don't really want to see Livy go down the pan but for the sake of this division and with all the uncertainty surrounding their very survival, surely the correct thing to do is take action now. What should that action be? Relegation to the 3rd, meaning less money in gates lost from the league as a whole should they go bust?

don't hold your breath on that one. The SFL are still hiding away in a darkened room, hoping that this somehow all goes away.

one thing- if Livingston *start* the season then the whole situation becomes much more high profile- if you're going to close a club down best do it in the close season when no other party is involved. Once they start, this may strengthen the hands of those on the council who are half hearted at best at this liquidation action.

The possible legal shilly-shallying that could still happen over the liquidation, outlined by Tonsilitis, means that although they are down on their luck at present, Massone and chums are far from finished- and neither is the club.

[Guest penelope pitstop]

The SFL had a perfect opportunity to take action when Livingston's accounts were provided either in an unacceptable format or not at all. Most likely they were not audited as required by the SFL rules.

Instead of setting a firm deadline by which time if not complied with the club wuld be relegated they allowed Livi until the end of Sept to provide the accounts and gave them a suspended fine.

As by that time there were already serious concerns over Livingston with players being paid late and managers being fired/suspended apparently to avoid paying them the SFL could have taken a firm line and at least ensured that the club had been properly run up to date. Instead they simply ducked the issue and made things more difficult for everyone.

[HibeeJibee]

As I've said before, and will say again - when we speak of "the SFL" we're talking about an empty husk, a paper tiger. The SFL is David Longmuir and gaggle of secretarial staff with next to no cash and certainly no expertise to investigate, uncover or impose anything... The SFL is controlled by a Management Committee - not a board, not by directors, not by any functioning executive - which is 30 reps who assemble in a room 4-5 times a year. We shouldn't imagine the SFL will do anything.

Edited July 8, 2009 by HibeeJibee

[Guest]

As I've said before, and will say again - when we speak of "the SFL" we're talking about an empty husk, a paper tiger. The SFL is David Longmuir and gaggle of secretarial staff with next to no cash and certainly no expertise to investigate, uncover or impose anything... The SFL is controlled by a Management Committee - not a board, not by directors, not by any functioning executive - which is 30 reps who assemble in a room 4-5 times a year. We shouldn't imagine the SFL will do anything.

..........and there's the rub. Livingston have operated as they pleased because the governance of everything they do is completely neutered. A coucil that has (up to now) being too scared to utter a negative word for fear of upsetting the Livi loving public............its almost as if they have just realized that 98% of the local population don't actually give a toss. In the SFL, Livingston know full well that the governing body consists of one guy and a couple or three teenage assistants.........they simply don't want to deal with anything difficult like unethical members.

By flitting from "community asset" mode with the council, to "limited company" for the legal eagles, company law has allowed them to make their creditors melt away like snow in June.

Life is good for badly run clubs like Livingston. Make sure you have no assets and lots and lots of debt, and the skies the limit.

Budget correctly, and live within your means, and you are rewarded by getting to live in SFL2 or SFL3.

It stinks.

Edited July 8, 2009 by Guest

[southview]

As I've said before, and will say again - when we speak of "the SFL" we're talking about an empty husk, a paper tiger. The SFL is David Longmuir and gaggle of secretarial staff with next to no cash and certainly no expertise to investigate, uncover or impose anything... The SFL is controlled by a Management Committee - not a board, not by directors, not by any functioning executive - which is 30 reps who assemble in a room 4-5 times a year. We shouldn't imagine the SFL will do anything.

Fair enough, but clubs should still not be allowed to carry on in this manner and to have behaved the way Livingston did over the course of last season.

Massone has broken promise after promise and lied through his teeth for as long as he has been at the club. Surely the way he has conducted his affairs and led Livi deserves some sort of sanction?

I know I sound like a scratched record, but where is their transfer embargo? Until they can prove they can pay players/staff on time every month and sort their off-field affairs out, they shouldn't be allowed to sign any new players.

Of course, a player would have to be off his head to sign for Livi, but this is about a point of principle.

[ObserverFromAfar]

Fair enough, but clubs should still not be allowed to carry on in this manner and to have behaved the way Livingston did over the course of last season.

Massone has broken promise after promise and lied through his teeth for as long as he has been at the club. Surely the way he has conducted his affairs and led Livi deserves some sort of sanction?

I know I sound like a scratched record, but where is their transfer embargo? Until they can prove they can pay players/staff on time every month and sort their off-field affairs out, they shouldn't be allowed to sign any new players.

Of course, a player would have to be off his head to sign for Livi, but this is about a point of principle.

But there's another bit of genius - and I think one the SPFA must want to do but be scared of the consequences for, which I don't blame them for.

Unless the players and the Union make a whole hearted attempt at complaining about being late etc, I don't think there is much the SFL can do.

Will the Union and players go for it big style, complain or go on strike? Well. If the outcome was for LIvi to go closer to the wall, I doubt it. Who else would be prepared to offer them a full time football employment contract at the moment? The players will be aware there would be little to no chance of getting paid as well as their contracts say, and probably fear that the chances of getting paid at some point are higher at Livi than they would be if Livi weren't there. They will take their chances whilst they can.

In a different economic environment it may be different.

[Ivo den Bieman]

The SO only issued a demand for rent arrears though and the 14 days is the time allowed by statue for payment to be made. It is only on the 15th day that they can raise legal actions?

is this true? i thought it was reported at the time that it was a notice of intention to appoint an interim liquidator.

If you're right, then Livingston will scrape through again for sure, with the creditors burned and the SFL doing nothing, and the council's "tough stance" being nothing more than hot air designed to placate angry ratepayers.

[AND180Y]

is this true? i thought it was reported at the time that it was a notice of intention to appoint an interim liquidator.

If you're right, then Livingston will scrape through again for sure, with the creditors burned and the SFL doing nothing, and the council's "tough stance" being nothing more than hot air designed to placate angry ratepayers.

Once a winding up petition is presented a provisional liquidator can be appointed till the petition is granted, then an interim liquidator is appointed until the 1st meeting of creditors where he/she or A.N.Other is appointed as liquidator.

In any even the debt has to be absolute in other words a statutory demand that has expired without challenge or dispute or a decree having been granted and the resulting charge having duly expired. (unless the creditor holds a bond or floating charge).

The council will have to follow procedure very strictly, the procedure starts with a request to remedy the breach, then they have to go to court to get a decree and the lease irritancy upheld/rubber stamped.

At every step Massone can defend the action and drag things out for ages and for the smallest of things, just a penny out on the amounts claimed on the date stated is enough.

[SNECKSTAGGIE]

The SFL had a perfect opportunity to take action when Livingston's accounts were provided either in an unacceptable format or not at all. Most likely they were not audited as required by the SFL rules.

Instead of setting a firm deadline by which time if not complied with the club wuld be relegated they allowed Livi until the end of Sept to provide the accounts and gave them a suspended fine.

As by that time there were already serious concerns over Livingston with players being paid late and managers being fired/suspended apparently to avoid paying them the SFL could have taken a firm line and at least ensured that the club had been properly run up to date. Instead they simply ducked the issue and made things more difficult for everyone.

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/ho...icle2509779.ece

It was the SFA, not the SFL, who gave them a suspended fine for not providing accounts.

Even if this shower manage to survive the council's action, how are they going to operate? Surely no one would be daft enough to give them any kind of tick? Apart from the optimistic season ticket buyers of course! They will have to pay up front for everything and given the lack of cash flow, how are they going to be able to operate? They have a substantial electricity bill that has to be cleared, as well as a healthy advance and reconnection charge that will have to be paid and, without electricity and whatever the other problems are that led to the withdrawal of the safety certificate, they will be unable to host any matches. As a few on here have already pointed out, no club will allow them to ground share, unless they pay up front.

If they were a dog they would have been put to sleep weeks ago.

[AND180Y]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/ho...icle2509779.ece

It was the SFA, not the SFL, who gave them a suspended fine for not providing accounts.

Even if this shower manage to survive the council's action, how are they going to operate? Surely no one would be daft enough to give them any kind of tick? Apart from the optimistic season ticket buyers of course! They will have to pay up front for everything and given the lack of cash flow, how are they going to be able to operate? They have a substantial electricity bill that has to be cleared, as well as a healthy advance and reconnection charge that will have to be paid and, without electricity and whatever the other problems are that led to the withdrawal of the safety certificate, they will be unable to host any matches. As a few on here have already pointed out, no club will allow them to ground share, unless they pay up front.

If they were a dog they would have been put to sleep weeks ago.

The council have paid to get a safety certificate, surely that would require mains electricity?

[Tonsilitis]

Once a winding up petition is presented a provisional liquidator can be appointed till the petition is granted, then an interim liquidator is appointed until the 1st meeting of creditors where he/she or A.N.Other is appointed as liquidator.

In any even the debt has to be absolute in other words a statutory demand that has expired without challenge or dispute or a decree having been granted and the resulting charge having duly expired. (unless the creditor holds a bond or floating charge).

The council will have to follow procedure very strictly, the procedure starts with a request to remedy the breach, then they have to go to court to get a decree and the lease irritancy upheld/rubber stamped.

At every step Massone can defend the action and drag things out for ages and for the smallest of things, just a penny out on the amounts claimed on the date stated is enough.

My understanding was that the council had passed that stage but I may be wrong!