[cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]To be fair to Dowie (i dont like saying this) but i think i recall something being said about covering court costs at the time and once statements like that are said then they need to be honoured, That leaves the question to be If the club have said that they will cover costs and that is documented somewhere then who put it in the document and why.
There was supposed to be statements made by the club about the Dowie situation that have never been released this can only be because there is still leagl matters arising and the compromise it may cause. Unless we have been fobbed off.
It wouldnt surprise me if like Pardews 1.5million payoff that someone somewhere put those words in a legally binding document that Dowie has or else why mention it.
The shambolic decision to employ a man who is clearly incapable of managing his own time let alone a football team surely must lead us all to question wether or not said comments were actually made.
I for one think that there is a bloody good chance there may well be a piece of paper signed or documented from a meeting within the club that would back his claim up.
Think about it from the clubs point of view they had just employed a man who they believed had not done the stuff that Slimes was talking about why would they not back their man why wouldnt they offer him their full support to aid him winning the dispute and putting things to bed once and for all.
The best quote to be seen is where will it end because i dont think we will find the answer to that in the near future.
The mistake was not just employing Dowie it was not taking into account the legal crap that was to follow, at the press confrence to announce the fools employment a writ was served are you honestly telling me that noises had not been made prior to that or course they must have,
you dont need any more proof of the shambolic state the club was in behind the scences than that appointment and media debarcle
[cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]To be fair to Dowie (i dont like saying this) but i think i recall something being said about covering court costs at the time and once statements like that are said then they need to be honoured, That leaves the question to be If the club have said that they will cover costs and that is documented somewhere then who put it in the document and why.
i hope not henners i really do but i vaguely remeber comments about it at the time i hope i am wrong but the fact we have never had the statement from the club as to the reasons why he was let go have me worrying.
[cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]but the fact we have never had the statement from the club as to the reasons why he was let go have me worrying.
it's been on here loads. the reason he was sacked was because they all got lost on a run up north.
That was the media account there were reasons supposoedly linked (this is on hear say on my part) His brother,Days away from club and training methods and alike i was fully aware of the northern run that nearly killed all the players from the story in the papers,
i am sure it was either muzza or varney who said the club would release further details surrounding his dismissal as and when they could, i take that as they cant so havent
I also recall statemnt being made that Dowie would be fully supported by the club, however it seems pretty unlikely to me that the club would agree to indemnify Dowie against any compensation and costs in the event that he lost his Court case.
If they did, it would probably depand on what Dowie told them at the time. If the offer was made on the basis of misinformation given by Dowie, it's hard to see how the agreement could still apply.
Until the whole story comes out, who knows what really happened.
Even if there was some "tacit" or spoken agreement to fund his court case, frankly I doubt it was as it has been put forward now because why would you potentially sign yourself up, open endedly, to buying a potential "pig in a poke"? On top of that, there would be get outs relating to his conduct as an employee and what if he goes for "gross incompetance" etc. I don't know the detail.
This smacks of a try on. Plus, didn't I read somewhere that Jordan and Dowie settled out of court at a much lower level?
Dowie may have decided to bring an action for unfair dismissal but that is different to breach of contract over indemnifcation of legal costs.
I suspect that's his effort to get compensation for the sack and he's bolstering his claim to the nth degree as a negotiating ploy.
i.e Lump in everything you can in the hope you'll get a small percentage of a big amount rather than a small percentage of a small amount.
On the other hand it may be possible for Charlton to countersue him for misprepresentation so he may also be doing this to have a larger claim against our counter claim. Who knows and we'll probably never get to find out.
Comments
Good post.
Don't think so
it's been on here loads. the reason he was sacked was because they all got lost on a run up north.
i am sure it was either muzza or varney who said the club would release further details surrounding his dismissal as and when they could, i take that as they cant so havent
If they did, it would probably depand on what Dowie told them at the time. If the offer was made on the basis of misinformation given by Dowie, it's hard to see how the agreement could still apply.
Until the whole story comes out, who knows what really happened.
This smacks of a try on. Plus, didn't I read somewhere that Jordan and Dowie settled out of court at a much lower level?
Dowie may have decided to bring an action for unfair dismissal but that is different to breach of contract over indemnifcation of legal costs.
I suspect that's his effort to get compensation for the sack and he's bolstering his claim to the nth degree as a negotiating ploy.
i.e Lump in everything you can in the hope you'll get a small percentage of a big amount rather than a small percentage of a small amount.
On the other hand it may be possible for Charlton to countersue him for misprepresentation so he may also be doing this to have a larger claim against our counter claim. Who knows and we'll probably never get to find out.
This story did bring a smile to my face yesterday !
Small things please small minds.