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

Olympic Stadium; our day in court

134689106

Comments

  • in simple terms, at Half-time, what's the score ?

    2-0, and while the ref's abandonment was met with concern by the ..er... customers..it was in the cold light of day a reasonable decision.

    The first goal was definitely scored by the ICO counsel, Laura John with her quietly made suggestion that Murphy's witness statement portrayed their negotiating skills as "weedy". A diminutive but lethal striker.

    The LLDC centre back, Anya Proops looks and sounds classy, but one centre back cannot hold out if the rest of the line is in total disarray.
    At what point did you run into the courtroom with a pitchfork to help out?
  • I am a bit unclear as to what a good result is here. Is it embarrassing disclosure of behind the scenes deals leading to embarrassment of those involved, if so very good.

    Is there any real possibility of preventing the Hammers from taking the ground built by public money and getting a massive boost up unfairly and contrary to EU state aid provisions?

    Or is it too complicated to say...

    Which reminds me @TelMc32 , the lawyer from Mishcon was there today as a very interested observer. A very genial chap he is too. He of course did not want tosay what his exact interest was but he was very happy to allow us to believe it is serious. And someone has to pay for his several hours spent there.

    Good to hear he was there @PragueAddick Just a short walk across Lincolns Inn, so I wouldn't expect any travel expense to be billed!! :wink:

    I'm seeing them later this week. Nothing to do with this and they and I would certainly never discuss it. But, if they are involved in some aspect, I hope it is on our side in some form or other.

    Congratulations again on all your efforts on this. Sounds like the LDDC have scored an OG with their choice, or lack of choice, of representatives.

    Keep on keeping on!!
  • The motives of the complainant are relevant in as much as the complainant is representing us all, and doing a blimmin good job of it.

    I really hope there is a way of weaving this letter in to this appeal in order to indicate that the LLDC simply don't know what they're talking about.
  • So, @PragueAddick , sorry if I've missed this, but is there a date set for the rematch/continuation? Is it to be decided later? And do you have a rough idea how long the wait might be?
  • So, @PragueAddick , sorry if I've missed this, but is there a date set for the rematch/continuation? Is it to be decided later? And do you have a rough idea how long the wait might be?

    Unfortunately not yet. All three judges, counsel for both sides, and I, must agree a date. I can be pretty flexible but they cannot be so much. I think we are looking at 6 weeks minimum. In this sense at least, the LLDC regrettably have a result.
  • seth plum said:

    The motives of the complainant are relevant in as much as the complainant is representing us all, and doing a blimmin good job of it.

    I really hope there is a way of weaving this letter in to this appeal in order to indicate that the LLDC simply don't know what they're talking about.

    The legislation requires public authorities to be both motive and applicant blind. Each request must be handled on its own merits, irrespective of the person making the request (unless repeated, harassing, etc.).
  • So, @PragueAddick , sorry if I've missed this, but is there a date set for the rematch/continuation? Is it to be decided later? And do you have a rough idea how long the wait might be?

    Unfortunately not yet. All three judges, counsel for both sides, and I, must agree a date. I can be pretty flexible but they cannot be so much. I think we are looking at 6 weeks minimum. In this sense at least, the LLDC regrettably have a result.
    Or just a stay of execution?
  • seth plum said:

    The motives of the complainant are relevant in as much as the complainant is representing us all, and doing a blimmin good job of it.

    I really hope there is a way of weaving this letter in to this appeal in order to indicate that the LLDC simply don't know what they're talking about.

    It's in the "bundle" mate. However to be fair I must record that the LLDC dissociated themselves from those remarks in forwarding the letter to the ICO.

  • Sponsored links:


  • So, @PragueAddick , sorry if I've missed this, but is there a date set for the rematch/continuation? Is it to be decided later? And do you have a rough idea how long the wait might be?

    Unfortunately not yet. All three judges, counsel for both sides, and I, must agree a date. I can be pretty flexible but they cannot be so much. I think we are looking at 6 weeks minimum. In this sense at least, the LLDC regrettably have a result.
    Were you able to make this point when they turned up late? An adjournment is effectively what they achieved by appealing in the first place, and surely their only objective (they must have given up on actually winning or they would have sent more people).
  • I was chatting to a West Ham fan at the weekend and his view was that nothing is going to stop them using the Olympic Stadium because Newham Council need the land the Boleyn is on for housing.
  • Surely the LLDC delays are going to be detrimental to West Ham. If they are forced to up the rent then West Ham will be in a weaker negotiating position once Upton Park has gone. So whilst West Ham has LLDC over a barrel originally, if it get's the stage where the contract needs to be renegotiated later this year then LLDC will have the strong position of "agree to our terms or have no home". It's possibly why the two parties aren't as chummy now as they once were, there's a good possibility they'll be on opposite sides of the negotiating table soon and LLDC will be keen to prove they're playing fair by bargaining far harder with West Ham.

    I think it must at least give West Ham some uncertainty in terms of their budgeting for next season and beyond. If it was my company, I'd want it done and dusted as soon as possible so I would know if my costs were going to increase beyond the agreed contract terms.
  • edited January 2016
    Fair play Prague for all your efforts. Be great to see the taxpayers get a result.

    Are west ham liable for all upkeep/repair of stadium out of interest?


  • Are west ham liable for all upkeep/repair of stadium out of interest?

    No, of course not...
  • Fair play Prague for all your efforts. Be great to see the taxpayers get a result.

    Are west ham liable for all upkeep/repair of stadium out of interest?

    Cutting the grass, marking out of the pitch, goal post etc, being paid for by the taxpayer.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Dansk_Red said:

    Fair play Prague for all your efforts. Be great to see the taxpayers get a result.

    Are west ham liable for all upkeep/repair of stadium out of interest?

    Cutting the grass, marking out of the pitch, goal post etc, being paid for by the taxpayer.
    The undersoil heating, everyday maintenance and indeed the major upgrade that London United will doubtless demand in 20 years time....

  • Pico said:

    So you're an Orient fan who supports Viktoria Plzen and occasionally turns up at The Valley wearing a Swansea scarf.

    No wonder the LLDC are confused

    This is still not underwear right?
  • Fair play Prague for all your efforts. Be great to see the taxpayers get a result.

    Are west ham liable for all upkeep/repair of stadium out of interest?

    Actually mate, are you a member of the Lions Trust? It really is a shame that they are the only London Trust that has not joined or pledged support to the Coalition. They are nuts if they think this won't affect Millwall, and anyway it has gone way beyond a local thing. We would be pleased to have them on board.

  • edited January 2016
    Saga Lout said:

    I was chatting to a West Ham fan at the weekend and his view was that nothing is going to stop them using the Olympic Stadium because Newham Council need the land the Boleyn is on for housing.

    Then Newham Council probably need to grow a pair and insist on their own rules of every development having 50% of affordable & social housing.

    Gaillard Homes first plans included just 6% of affordable and no social housing.

    And despite being picked by WHam due to their local roots, which Lady Brady was keen to trumpet, Gaillard have now signed a joint venture with Barrett Homes (a national rather than local builder) and there are no signs of ANY affordable/social housing yet!

    That joint venture should pave the way for Gaillard to float, so not only the Gullivan & Brady bunch will be making a killing out of this deal!
  • I think it must at least give West Ham some uncertainty in terms of their budgeting for next season and beyond. If it was my company, I'd want it done and dusted as soon as possible so I would know if my costs were going to increase beyond the agreed contract terms.

    I was at a meeting with senior people at the club last night and they have absolutely no concern whatsoever for the action being taken. Absolutely no concern whatsoever. Even I was surprised.

  • Dansk_Red said:

    Fair play Prague for all your efforts. Be great to see the taxpayers get a result.

    Are west ham liable for all upkeep/repair of stadium out of interest?

    Cutting the grass, marking out of the pitch, goal post etc, being paid for by the taxpayer.
    The undersoil heating, everyday maintenance and indeed the major upgrade that London United will doubtless demand in 20 years time....

    They're already planning a 10k capacity upgrade - it's not clear who's paying for that.
  • gavros said:

    I think it must at least give West Ham some uncertainty in terms of their budgeting for next season and beyond. If it was my company, I'd want it done and dusted as soon as possible so I would know if my costs were going to increase beyond the agreed contract terms.

    I was at a meeting with senior people at the club last night and they have absolutely no concern whatsoever for the action being taken. Absolutely no concern whatsoever. Even I was surprised.

    Well I doubt they'd be telling you even if they did. I imagine they're confident that there will be no fallout for them - although I think that somewhat depends on what's in the contract. The LLDC are doing a great job of delaying the inevitable, but I'm not convinced it's all over yet.
  • rikofold said:

    Dansk_Red said:

    Fair play Prague for all your efforts. Be great to see the taxpayers get a result.

    Are west ham liable for all upkeep/repair of stadium out of interest?

    Cutting the grass, marking out of the pitch, goal post etc, being paid for by the taxpayer.
    The undersoil heating, everyday maintenance and indeed the major upgrade that London United will doubtless demand in 20 years time....

    They're already planning a 10k capacity upgrade - it's not clear who's paying for that.
    I can guess who's paying for it.
  • gavros said:

    I think it must at least give West Ham some uncertainty in terms of their budgeting for next season and beyond. If it was my company, I'd want it done and dusted as soon as possible so I would know if my costs were going to increase beyond the agreed contract terms.

    I was at a meeting with senior people at the club last night and they have absolutely no concern whatsoever for the action being taken. Absolutely no concern whatsoever. Even I was surprised.

    Ostriches.

  • Dont forget it's up to LLDC to prove that the IC is in the wrong in rejecting LLDC appeal. You would have thought that
    gavros said:

    I think it must at least give West Ham some uncertainty in terms of their budgeting for next season and beyond. If it was my company, I'd want it done and dusted as soon as possible so I would know if my costs were going to increase beyond the agreed contract terms.

    I was at a meeting with senior people at the club last night and they have absolutely no concern whatsoever for the action being taken. Absolutely no concern whatsoever. Even I was surprised.

    As relaxed as the captain of the Titanic.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!