Clapham Saint

Daughter (our first) was born in October and is awesome. Not quite able to roll over from her back onto her front yet but not far off. Working all day and then coming home to bath and put her to bed (whilst her mum to a break) felt like the raw end of the deal at first but having how had a couple of days off with her at home whilst her Mum is out I can say with confidence that going to work is definitely the easier option. No question.

He can either get an extension of up to 6 months from the creditors (possibly unlikely as you say), or for longer from the court, most likely 12 months. If the court grants the extension then creditors aren't involved in the process. I'd be surprised if they hadn't at least applied for the extension already.

Getting an extension is unlikely to be an issue. It is not uncommon in Administrations. At worst the judge will express concern with regard to progress and limit the period of the extension but I doubt it.

:lol: Just a shame that the "Font-A" pronunciation is incorrect.

So... "I really really wanted to be involved but have no actual value to add. The HNW saw me for the mug that I am and gave me a noddy job title to keep me happy whilst giving me no information and using me as a PR shiled."

What is Mr Farmery's role in the PST? If he is relatively senior, should he not know what is included within the business plan and have access to the level of detail being asked for? Extremely worry for P*mpey fans if he genuinely knows as little as he is suggesting. If he is relatively junior, why the f*** is he being invited to host a web chat?

Which is why my medical history was reviewed by the police before I was alowed a certificate. I presume that if I were to go a bit mental now (whilst already holding a certificate), the plod would be notified. - Actually is this the case? Is there a conflict between my doctor keeping my records confidential unless I specifically give permission and the police being able to check that I haven't gone nuts?

Barclays asked for (all or part of), their money back. The directors knew that they weren't able to pay and so placed the company into administration. Prior to Barclays making demand their would have been discussions going on for months. The Directors placed the holding company into administration, however they did so becuase Barclays chose to withdraw funding. We have no idea what discussions took place or what actions were taken by either Barclays or the directors which promprted Barclays to decide to make demand. (One sentence paragraphs - nice I might apply of a job at the News.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21051062 Reading the comments on the BBC page got me thinking about current regulations. What are poster's thoughts on firearms restrictions? From reading the comments to the BBC article people generally seem polerised on the issue. Are you with the "it is my right to own a gun" or the "nobody "needs" a gun and they should be banned outright" camp? I hold a shotgun certificate and own a shotgun which I keep at home. It is used for clay shooting and (as required by law) is kept in an extremely secure safe. Personally I have absolutely no problem with firearms licences of any sort being made more onerous to obtain. I would also support a lifetime ban for anybody with criminal conviction. The vast vast majority of LEGALLY owned firearms are kept safely and responsibly and only ever used for legal purposes. Having to keep my gun at a club would be a pain in the ar se as I don't always shoot at the same club and so keeping the gun at home is significantly easier - but at the end of the day if I beleived it was liiely to save lives then I would clearly live with it. Would making licences harder to obtain really cut gun crime (domestic violence or otherwise)? Personally I doubt it. If somebody were to set out to plan a murder surely they would try to come up with something other than simply using their own gun, assuming they want to try and get away with it of course. Equally if it were a heat of the moment crime of passion surely the murderer is going to use whatever is to hand be it a shotgun (which would need to be unlocked from a safe) more likely to be used than a kitchen knife which is much more quickly accessed? I also don't understand the "self defence" argument for having a gun. If I thought somebody had broken into my house the very last thing that I would want is for a gun to be involved. ...reading that back it's a bit of a ramble but if you could be bothered to read it I'd be interested in people's views. And no, my name isn't Rupert.

Getting too close will be dificult and most likely mean that you spend hours in traffic both before and after the game. Depending on where you're coming from I'd park further out near a tube or overland station and then go in from there. If you're coming up the M3 you could carry on up the A316, park in Richmond (Old Deer Park Car Park) and then get the tube in (would need to change at Earls Court).

'Coz the real account is obviously full of ********. ("PN" at the begining is the real one "PN" at the end is the spoof.

Exactly! Keep up with the thread FFS!

:lol::lol:

They can apply to court to remove the administrator from office (and for an alternative to be appointed). This is what chinny tried at the last court date. Insolvency rule 2.122 if you're feeling geeky.

Gemmel, sorry for the slow response but I hit the three post wall (really need to cough up my fiver) A secured creditor cannot vote in a CVA. Where there is a shortfall in their security (which can be demonstrated/valued) they can vote for the unsecured element so in if Chinny can demonstrate a shortfall of £10m then he would be able to vote of £10m, however... Once the CVA is approved it is binding on all creditors who were eligible to vote. Unless specific provision were made in the agreement then a creditor can't apply to vary it as and when they wish. Was the agreement worded in such a way that his pulling out of the purchase makes it fail? I doubt it as there wasn't much fuss when he withdrew a few months ago, before returning. The FL limited the amount of secured debt which could be carried over. This doesn't limit the amount of unsecured debt. I think that they were seeking to prevent Chinny from continually being owed more under his fixed charge than the club was actually worth outbidding any genuinely commercial offer for the business from future insolvencies (however many there may be...). If Chinny's debt were split between £3m (say) which was secured on the ground and £14m which was unsecured he will likely lose the £14m in the next administration helping to break the cycle.

The CVA was approved months ago. I'm not going to trawl back through the thread but, if memory serves, the original proposal was that the club would be sold to Chinny for £500k but it was amended at the creditors meeting to allow TB some time [lol] to see if any alternative bidders could be found.

I'm pretty sure this is exactly what the skates were saying just a few years ago...

Got my ticket. Never been to Villla before, which is the best away pub?

Is it possible to have deja vu... about deja vu?

Fair enough. My comment was fully tounge in cheek.

BT in backing wrong horse shocker?

I'm sure that they said that supporters needent worry about the level of pledges as the initial purchase was covered by the HNW individuals. The final number of pledges was therefore not critical becuase they would only be used for additinal working capital (read transfer funds to be "competitive"). This is definately a change of tune but I really can't be bothered to trawl thorugh the thread to prove it...

The diference between Rangers' statemnts thanking fans for their support and the P*mpey statemnets urging (read begging) supporters to make a pledge is stark. £1,000 is a lot of money to most so anybody who felt pasionately enough to buy a full share (having had weeks to do so), will have signed up by now. The only further pledges that will come in will be dribs and drabs from people who have scraped £20 each and are buying a share between 50 of them. There won't be many of these.

The period between anouncement and full implementation will be a nightmare as the unions go into melt down but the sooner the tube is fully driverless the better.

For those travelling to Fulham, as well as a lack of trains you could also struggle with the tube http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20757141