Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Jimenez/Cash sued over Greenwich Peninsula stadium development

24567

Comments

  • Chrispy51 said:

    Looks like the relevant punishment is indeed a fine:

    The League shall have the power to prescribe fixed fines pursuant to Regulation 81 of the Regulations, in respect of a failure by a Club to comply with the reporting requirements of Rule 2. There shall be no appeal against such penalties;

    (b) where a Club:

    (i) fails three or more times, following written demand from The League, to provide The League with a Declaration or an update to a Declaration and/or any other information required pursuant to Rule 4;

    (ii) intentionally, recklessly or negligently provides to The League a false Declaration in respect of any Relevant Person; or

    (iii) fails to ensure within 14 days of receipt of written notice from The League (or within such other period as is specified by The League in that notice) that a Relevant Person of the Club complies with the requirements of Rule 2 and Rule 3,

    then The League may give notice requiring the Club to transfer its membership to the Company Secretary (the ‘Notice’) in accordance with Articles 4.5 and 4.7 of the Articles of Association. Article 4.8 (suspension of the Notice) shall apply in the Board’s absolute discretion. There shall be no appeal against the service of the Notice.

    Read more at http://www.football-league.co.uk/global/appendix3.aspx#PkgGgW1BUTMqABJz.99

    I thought it had been widely reported that Slater was on the board and an official owner BUT he was not the supplier of the money. the money man wanted to be behind the scenes. the way I understood it was that Jiminez owned a proportion of the club and Slater owned a proportion of the club, but Slater was 'given' his proportion by the mystery owner (cash). The problems started because Slater is a football fan and wanted us to succeed but didn't have any of his own money to put in. Cash pulled the plug on 'Slater's' investment and Jiminez didn't have the funds himself to support the club. I don't think we will ever know the true reasons why cash pulled out, just speculation.

    It was widely assumed - the club explicitly stated otherwise, including in its formal declaration.
  • It's a shame we have to pick between being run by a madman or going bust
  • Also if Kevin Cash is reportedly worth $500m (not something I've ever believed) then why would they need to borrow £1.8m to keep the club afloat?

    It looks as though Mr Khakshouri has some previous in this area: http://nypost.com/2012/05/08/my-own-cousin-ripped-me-off/

    Because Cash got bored and pulled all funding from the club. I'm sure others on here will be able to shed more light on it.
    From what was said at the time, it sounded like at some point near the end of the promotion season cash found out, or suspected that TJ was using money that was set aside for the club for another of his failing business venture. So understandably pulled the plug. Then business started not being paid etc and ended up with RE, PV and SK all leaving the club around the same period.
  • I heard Cash wanted to invest heavily in players, but Slater and Jimenez weren't keen on being to much in debt. Because of this Cash pulled out his money.
  • Madz said:

    I heard Cash wanted to invest heavily in players, but Slater and Jimenez weren't keen on being to much in debt. Because of this Cash pulled out his money.

    Considering slater pretty much lost interest in anything to do with the club and his history of working for cash's circle of business friends I would have thought slater was the buffer between the club and cash.
  • Madz said:

    I heard Cash wanted to invest heavily in players, but Slater and Jimenez weren't keen on being to much in debt. Because of this Cash pulled out his money.

    Considering slater pretty much lost interest in anything to do with the club and his history of working for cash's circle of business friends I would have thought slater was the buffer between the club and cash.
    Doesn't mean his business mind wasn't looking at not being heavily in debt.
  • edited November 2015
    Madz said:

    Madz said:

    I heard Cash wanted to invest heavily in players, but Slater and Jimenez weren't keen on being to much in debt. Because of this Cash pulled out his money.

    Considering slater pretty much lost interest in anything to do with the club and his history of working for cash's circle of business friends I would have thought slater was the buffer between the club and cash.
    Doesn't mean his business mind wasn't looking at not being heavily in debt.
    TJ made his fortune in property - I don't think he has much of a problem with debt. That and him being sued for a £1.5 million debt.
  • Madz said:

    Madz said:

    I heard Cash wanted to invest heavily in players, but Slater and Jimenez weren't keen on being to much in debt. Because of this Cash pulled out his money.

    Considering slater pretty much lost interest in anything to do with the club and his history of working for cash's circle of business friends I would have thought slater was the buffer between the club and cash.
    Doesn't mean his business mind wasn't looking at not being heavily in debt.
    TJ made his fortune in property - I don't think he has much of a problem with debt. That and him being sued for a £1.5 million debt.
    I'm only saying what someone told me who used to work there. Doesn't necessarily mean its true. The person is/was credible in the past, but he doesn't/didn't sit in the boardroom or anything. I was just told Slater and Jimenez didnt' want to put the football club into debt by over spending on players. Ultimately the situation meant we did once Cash pulled out and now we are with RD.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I don't believe it. The spivs were financed by Cash and turned out to be spivs.

    Who'd have thought it ?
  • colin1961 said:

    So they were doing a deal behind everyone back to move us out of the valley in exchange for a loan ........

    muat be RD fault after all he saved us from these clowns and spent money on improving the valley

    Let's protest

    The Belgian is doing the same; lending money from another company. And look of the state he left Standard's balance sheet in.
  • So it confirms that they did have plans to move away from the Valley, as well as the mystery backer being Cash. Devious.
  • edited November 2015

    So it confirms that they did have plans to move away from the Valley, as well as the mystery backer being Cash. Devious.

    It would confirm they were telling people there were such plans, but as per VOTV at the time none of it really stacks up - except, I agree, either PL football or a stadium built primarily for something/someone else.
  • Madz said:

    Madz said:

    I heard Cash wanted to invest heavily in players, but Slater and Jimenez weren't keen on being to much in debt. Because of this Cash pulled out his money.

    Considering slater pretty much lost interest in anything to do with the club and his history of working for cash's circle of business friends I would have thought slater was the buffer between the club and cash.
    Doesn't mean his business mind wasn't looking at not being heavily in debt.
    TJ made his fortune in property - I don't think he has much of a problem with debt. That and him being sued for a £1.5 million debt.
    Jimenez - like most other 'property developers' doesn't have a 'fortune'. He has assets - most of which will be tied up in finance deals and investments that only return after a numbe rof years, and are dependent on various outside factors (not the least of which at that time was a fluctuating economy artificially inflated by a housing bubble). Wouldn't be surprised if, like many others, he didn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of when Cash withdrew his ('real') money
    Very true, I was getting at that in my post about how debt wouldn't really matter to a property developer since their industry is built on it.
  • edited November 2015
    Cash is purportedly a property man too and almost certainly therefore has no where near the liquid assets to keep plugging holes which I guess is why they went to the country with the most gullible people and befriended one to give them a loan.

    If this Yank lent money to make a return on us leaving The Valley then I for one am delighted that whether by luck or design TJ / KC lost him a whole truck load of cash.

    I would be even more delighted if mr gullible further stains the Spivs reputation by dragging them through court.
  • Looks like the relevant punishment is indeed a fine:

    The League shall have the power to prescribe fixed fines pursuant to Regulation 81 of the Regulations, in respect of a failure by a Club to comply with the reporting requirements of Rule 2. There shall be no appeal against such penalties;

    (b) where a Club:

    (i) fails three or more times, following written demand from The League, to provide The League with a Declaration or an update to a Declaration and/or any other information required pursuant to Rule 4;

    (ii) intentionally, recklessly or negligently provides to The League a false Declaration in respect of any Relevant Person; or

    (iii) fails to ensure within 14 days of receipt of written notice from The League (or within such other period as is specified by The League in that notice) that a Relevant Person of the Club complies with the requirements of Rule 2 and Rule 3,

    then The League may give notice requiring the Club to transfer its membership to the Company Secretary (the ‘Notice’) in accordance with Articles 4.5 and 4.7 of the Articles of Association. Article 4.8 (suspension of the Notice) shall apply in the Board’s absolute discretion. There shall be no appeal against the service of the Notice.

    Read more at http://www.football-league.co.uk/global/appendix3.aspx#PkgGgW1BUTMqABJz.99

    Looks like the relevant punishment is indeed a fine:

    The League shall have the power to prescribe fixed fines pursuant to Regulation 81 of the Regulations, in respect of a failure by a Club to comply with the reporting requirements of Rule 2. There shall be no appeal against such penalties;

    (b) where a Club:

    (i) fails three or more times, following written demand from The League, to provide The League with a Declaration or an update to a Declaration and/or any other information required pursuant to Rule 4;

    (ii) intentionally, recklessly or negligently provides to The League a false Declaration in respect of any Relevant Person; or

    (iii) fails to ensure within 14 days of receipt of written notice from The League (or within such other period as is specified by The League in that notice) that a Relevant Person of the Club complies with the requirements of Rule 2 and Rule 3,

    then The League may give notice requiring the Club to transfer its membership to the Company Secretary (the ‘Notice’) in accordance with Articles 4.5 and 4.7 of the Articles of Association. Article 4.8 (suspension of the Notice) shall apply in the Board’s absolute discretion. There shall be no appeal against the service of the Notice.

    Read more at http://www.football-league.co.uk/global/appendix3.aspx#PkgGgW1BUTMqABJz.99

    So not a points deduction then?

  • Cash is purportedly a property man too and almost certainly therefore has no where near the liquid assets to keep plugging holes which I guess is why they went to the country with the most gullible people and befriended one to give them a loan.

    If this Yank lent money to make a return on us leaving The Valley then I for one am delighted that whether by luck or design TJ / KC lost him a whole truck load of cash.

    I would be even more delighted if mr gullible further stains the Spivs reputation by dragging them through court.

    i think that cash is one of the few property tycoons that does actually have hard cash, forgive the pun.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I may be getting this wrong but in terms of what Airman has posted, you need, too, to look at the definition of a "relevant person". It is entirely possible there was no false declaration to the FL. First it seems a corporate entity cannot be a " relevant person". So the BVI entity or whatever it was cannot be caught by the FL's rules. In terms of it being an individual, in short, it has to be a shadow director if not an actual director, that is someone the actual directors take instructions from. Did Slater & Jimenez take instructions from Cash? Who knows, only those three I suspect. I'd guess that Cash lending money would not, of itself, put Cash into that position. It would only be if he was the de facto owner of the shares and therefore was in some way a controller of the club. Proving that, bearing in mind the convoluted ownership at that time might be quite difficult.
    It also seems as if Cash's wealth might actually be Daddy's wealth, which is held in trust in the BVI and which he merely manages on the family's behalf. So, he too, might be lacking in the proverbial piss pot.
  • edited December 2017

    I stumbled across this today via Google. It appears Tony J got another arse kicking.

    https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Khakshouri-v-Jimenez-judgment.pdf

    There may be some other interesting data in it, even if it is historical.

    "In Autumn 2013 Charlton Athletic Football Club (“the Club”) was in dire financial straits."

    So Jimenez and Cash have been found guilty of deceit, with the amount of damages to be decided.
  • Spivs, out spivved?
  • edited December 2017
    Two things stand out for me. Firstly the mess of the ownership structure. Is that normal? To my (untrained) eyes it looks almost as if it was deliberately designed to obfuscate. Secondly this little line, "Mr Duchatelet was clear that acquisition of the Club had to occur prior to the conclusion of the January 2014 transfer window". So all along it was Duchatelet's dastardly plan to by the club as a way of getting rid of Yoahan Thuram-Ulien! :wink:

  • Just one word for now - WOW!

    More words to follow...
  • Just one word for now - WOW!

    More words to follow...

    Well you did warn everyone at the time that they were not paying the bills
  • edited December 2017
    Here's an interesting nugget from the emails, which are fascinating. Who exactly are "we" in the highlighted sentence?

    Slater email to TJ and Cash, 28/12/13: "So we took the view that the best thing to do was to exchange and get the deposit [from Duchatelet]. I am 100% sure that we did the right thing. How else would we have put money into the club and Les Bordes this month..." (see para 62).

    Les Bordes is the golf course investment over which TJ is now in dispute with Mike Ashley and was also the investment that gave rise to Dennis Wise -v- TJ .

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/aug/30/mike-ashley-sues-former-business-partner-tony-jimenez-golf-course-scheme

    "In legal documents filed at the high court in London, Ashley says that in May 2008 he agreed to pay Jimenez £3m, which he believed would be invested in the Loire-based golf course Les Bordes in return for a 5% “or thereabouts” stake in the site’s owner.

    The two men agreed verbally that the investment would be paid to Jimenez’s company South Horizon, which was said to be in a position to provide the stake in Les Bordes’ holding company, according to the court documents.

    Ashley’s high court claim says Jimenez, a former co-owner of Charlton Athletic football club, practised a “deliberate fraud” in order to retain the money for himself without securing the golf course investment. It alleges that Jimenez reassured Ashley the investment was effective and his interest in the shares was being formalised when he knew that was not the case.

    In 2013 Ashley became aware, according to the documents, of a claim brought by former footballer Dennis Wise over a £500,000 investment in the same golf course. The judge ordered Jimenez to pay Wise compensation of that sum saying that he had been “guilty of considerable obfuscation” concerning the money paid to him.

    Ashley’s claim says he made inquiries that led to his lawyers receiving confirmation that neither he or Jimenez’s South Horizon were, or had ever been, investors in Les Bordes’ Cyprus-based holding company.

    When confronted with that evidence, Jimenez claimed Ashley had been too late in sending the £3m and so had lost the opportunity to purchase the shares in Les Bordes, according to the court filing. It was allegedly said Ashley had agreed the sum would not be returned but used as an advance payment of a fee claimed to be owed to Jimenez for procuring a purchaser for Newcastle United."
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!