Bit of an update re Blackpool saga

A 12 points deduction would seem ridiculous to me, when such punishments are surely meant for clubs who use administration to avoid paying their bills (including local small businesses). This situation seems completely different

Congratulations!

I hope this goes through smoothly and that you are soon bought by a principled owner who enjoys football and will facilitate the rebirth of Blackpool FC.  A few more hurdles to overcome, but it seems at long last the winning post is in sight for you.

I would hate to piss on their chips but the receiver appointed is no less bent than Oysten in my opinion

Well they are just a.bunch of customers so why would the EFL do anything other than kick them in the teeth. A great day and as said already, Well done to the campaigners for never giving up on THEIR club. 

Congratulations to all Blackpool fans and wishing you a deservedly bright future.

Excellent news for Blackpool and their supporters, who have truly suffered for their art. The mere sight of Karl Oyston on the BBC website makes me feel sick to the stomach (not to mention his odious son).

Surely - on this occasion, if no other - the EFL will recognise the extraordinary circumstances of this case and apply no points penalty. As a High Court Judge held in November 2017, the Oystons operated an “illegitimate stripping” of the club or, as Belokon’s QC put it, they ran Blackpool as the family’s “personal cash machine” following the club’s season in the Premier League. It therefore follows that a non-deduction of points is most certainly not going to establish an unhelpful precedent for the EFL, which I imagine is a major source of concern for such administrators. 

The Blackpool FC company is also separate legal person and entity from the Oystons, as its directors. A company, which has no physical existence itself, has to act through its agents – i.e. its directors and its employees - and the company will, therefore, be taken to have their knowledge and committed their acts. There is, however, an equally well established and long standing exception under English law to this principle of attribution – often called the ‘Hampshire Land principle’ - under which clear and wilful breaches of duty by directors which injure the company itself, the very legal person to whom those duties were owed, will not be attributed to the company. 

The EFL apparently have a discretion under the rules as to whether or not to apply a points penalty but, whilst this is a case of receivership rather than attribution, I would expect them to have regard to the general thrust of the law when assessing the conduct of the Oystons. They should also take into account the fact that the receivership is purely a consequence of an intra-director dispute - rather than a club trying to avoid its debts (the 'mischief' the points penalty is designed to address) - and that Blackpool F.C. has, on any view, been a victim in this sorry and long-drawn out saga.

Let's hope that a bit of common sense prevails.

Before people rejoice then better wait and see what the reciever actualy does. They may not remove  Oystons if that way that get the best financuial outcome for the creditor.
Also this has not happend because of fans protests, but because of a falling out between coowners and the Oystons shafting there partner who then took them to court.

Great post @Blucher bang on the money 👍.

NapaAddick said:

Did I read the article correct that Blackpool can essentially be bought for £25M? That is a very alluring price for a club like that.

No it is not. Wigan was bought for £20m. And for £25m you could buy a club in London with a FAPL ready stadium, a plan in place for top level academy, a proactive customer fanbase; or at least in the real world you could...

What were Wigan’s debts/wage bill?

Brunello said:

I would hate to piss on their chips but the receiver appointed is no less bent than Oysten in my opinion

Why do you say that ?

addick05 said:

Now if only someone would relieve us of Roland....!

I would rather see him relieve himself. No ... wait a minute ... 

Covered_End_Lad said:

razil said:

What were Wigan’s debts/wage bill?

Ask Napa. IF their debts were 50 millions they would be worth 70

After 18 months and 1500 pages after claiming RD would either sell for $70M+ or keep assets if it sold for less, or not sell at all... have I been proven wrong? All the rumors and supposed deals being 48 hours away from so-called insiders... who has been most right on the takeover so far? Me.

Henry Irving said:

NapaAddick said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

razil said:

What were Wigan’s debts/wage bill?

Ask Napa. IF their debts were 50 millions they would be worth 70

After 18 months and 1500 pages after claiming RD would either sell for $70M+ or keep assets if it sold for less, or not sell at all... have I been proven wrong? All the rumors and supposed deals being 48 hours away from so-called insiders... who has been most right on the takeover so far? Me.

No, not you.

deleted because no reason to get pissy.

Brunello said:

I would hate to piss on their chips but the receiver appointed is no less bent than Oysten in my opinion

Care to share your evidence for this opinion?