| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action 16:13 - Jul 21 with 21933 views | Vetchfielder |
I’ve reviewed the Consultation Papers that arrived today and they are well presented and clear. Personally I could have added a couple more lines to the Pro’s section for legal action but it is specifically it is the aspect of legal fees in the Consultation Papers has left me with major gripes.
The first thing is that we don’t seem to have got a quotation or even an estimate of the legal costs of going ahead with legal action. If we did get a quotation or estimate then it has not been included in the documentation. Has the Trust Board asked for an estimate, was one provided and what are the details ?
What about a "No-Win / No-Fee" type of legal engagement— mentioned by Dai Little in the first Trust meeting yet I can see no mention of this in the documentation?
Regarding the magnitude of legal costs, the words we are given are:
(a) In the Options Matrix, Impact on Trust Funds section: “Likely substantial reduction, possibly wiped out completely, or worse”.
(b) In the Cons section of Option 2: “Legal action is costly and unpredictable. There is a real chance the Trust could lose, in which case the existing funds of over £800,000 could be wiped out or even lead to the Trust being in debt. If legal costs were to exceed the current Trust funds, which is a likely scenario, it is unclear at this time how the Trust would be able to fund these costs — which may impact the Trust’s ability to proceed beyond that point”.
Regarding (a), no detail is provided as to exactly what “worse” means in practical terms and how we would deal with it.
Also, there is a big contradiction between funds “possibly” wiped out in (a) and a “likely” scenario of debt in (b) which means it’s probable. So I don’t know whether the Trust Board thinks it’s just possible or that it's probable and exactly on what that judgement is based.
For me, the really disappointing words here in (b) are “it is unclear at this time how the Trust would be able to fund these costs”. The Trust Board has known about the potential for legal action for many many months so has had more than ample time to take advice, have a clear view, have a plan and identify a proposed approach if the funds aren’t sufficient for legal action.
On the basis of these Papers, I feel that not enough effort has gone into establishing what litigation really means in £ terms of legal costs and how the Trust could/would fund it, possibly because we have been distracted by what the Trust Board consider an acceptable offer. |  |
| Proud to have been one of the 231 |
| |  |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:30 - Jul 21 with 9965 views | DazzaJack |
I feel that the first time any mention of "preferred option" by the Trust should have been at the very end of the pros and cons. Not last month, not at the start of this document. Anyway, hasn't won my vote regardless, legal action please. |  | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:37 - Jul 21 with 9959 views | PozuelosSideys |
Hard to tell what the overall cost impact will be isnt it? Corporates hold up cases in courts for years and years so that the other party runs out of money and have to jack it in.
Id have thought the only ways to deal with excessive costs would be to stop the process, or require the Trust Membership to step in and pay for it out of their own pockets. Im sure all the moaners at the Trust on here would love that. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 18:38]
|  |
| "Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper." | | Poll: | Hattricks |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:54 - Jul 21 with 9923 views | marchamjack |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:30 - Jul 21 by DazzaJack |
I feel that the first time any mention of "preferred option" by the Trust should have been at the very end of the pros and cons. Not last month, not at the start of this document. Anyway, hasn't won my vote regardless, legal action please. |
Got home and got my pack of voting papers (as has Mrs MJ). Credit to the Trust for laying out the options in such full and clear detail (accepting they make a clear recommendation, as would be expected from any such report in my experience).
No new news as it were and the other Trust thread has done the issues to death.
I'll say this now...which was not how I first thought 2/3 weeks go...I feel genuinely nervous at the prospect of casting my vote and hopefully getting the right decision for my club. I felt much less responsibility casting my vote back in June! This is my club. 40 odd years of vested interest in it. This is serious stuff. Massive responsibility for a 1000 odd of us.
We Members can't fck this up.
Love to be in a hindsight position right now to see how this all plays out, but that's not gonna happen. Got to say, the bsht rumours on Indian businessman couldn't have come at a worse time for influencing my thoughts on the vote. If that's going to happen (or similar) then court it is. If it's not, go with Trust recommendation. Problem is, all out of our hands now of course. Do we play the long game (court action) or try to avoid destabilising the football club in the short term (Trust recommendation).
Seriously, this is a very very hard choice now I'm faced with actual pen to paper and not just talking about it on here, which is easy by comparison. |  |
| Oh,..Dave, what's occuring? |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:56 - Jul 21 with 9914 views | vetchonian |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:37 - Jul 21 by PozuelosSideys |
Hard to tell what the overall cost impact will be isnt it? Corporates hold up cases in courts for years and years so that the other party runs out of money and have to jack it in.
Id have thought the only ways to deal with excessive costs would be to stop the process, or require the Trust Membership to step in and pay for it out of their own pockets. Im sure all the moaners at the Trust on here would love that. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 18:38]
|
I doubt if most of the moaners are members of the trust! | |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 19:17 - Jul 21 with 9856 views | Pacemaker |
Every time that you engage in litigation you can expect a massive bill. What you can't ever do is get a reasonable estimate of the costs there are just too many variables.
You dont just employ a QC but an entire team and every piece of communication or conference is billed, if the case is heard in London then double the costs.
There are a lot of people on here pumping out their chests but this legal action could destroy the trust and some people fail to recognise the dangers. |  |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 19:22 - Jul 21 with 9822 views | jacabertawe |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 19:17 - Jul 21 by Pacemaker |
Every time that you engage in litigation you can expect a massive bill. What you can't ever do is get a reasonable estimate of the costs there are just too many variables.
You dont just employ a QC but an entire team and every piece of communication or conference is billed, if the case is heard in London then double the costs.
There are a lot of people on here pumping out their chests but this legal action could destroy the trust and some people fail to recognise the dangers. |
Well said.
Those who vote for litigation are voting for the unknown. Not all options may be palatable, but going down this route may well destroy our Club at many levels.
Myself and Mrs JA are going with the Trust's recommendation. |  |
| Britishness...is a political synonym for Englishness which extends English culture over the Scots, the Welsh, and the Irish. - Gwynfor Evans
|
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 19:51 - Jul 21 with 9759 views | LeonWasGod |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:54 - Jul 21 by marchamjack |
Got home and got my pack of voting papers (as has Mrs MJ). Credit to the Trust for laying out the options in such full and clear detail (accepting they make a clear recommendation, as would be expected from any such report in my experience).
No new news as it were and the other Trust thread has done the issues to death.
I'll say this now...which was not how I first thought 2/3 weeks go...I feel genuinely nervous at the prospect of casting my vote and hopefully getting the right decision for my club. I felt much less responsibility casting my vote back in June! This is my club. 40 odd years of vested interest in it. This is serious stuff. Massive responsibility for a 1000 odd of us.
We Members can't fck this up.
Love to be in a hindsight position right now to see how this all plays out, but that's not gonna happen. Got to say, the bsht rumours on Indian businessman couldn't have come at a worse time for influencing my thoughts on the vote. If that's going to happen (or similar) then court it is. If it's not, go with Trust recommendation. Problem is, all out of our hands now of course. Do we play the long game (court action) or try to avoid destabilising the football club in the short term (Trust recommendation).
Seriously, this is a very very hard choice now I'm faced with actual pen to paper and not just talking about it on here, which is easy by comparison. |
Yeah, I'm sweating over it a little bit too.It also begs the question why is the trust membership so low? As a minimum you'd think all ST holders would sign up. |  | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 19:57 - Jul 21 with 9735 views | Smellyplumz |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 19:22 - Jul 21 by jacabertawe |
Well said.
Those who vote for litigation are voting for the unknown. Not all options may be palatable, but going down this route may well destroy our Club at many levels.
Myself and Mrs JA are going with the Trust's recommendation. |
Yeah and going the other route might also destroy the club and trust. |  |
|
""Although I cannot promise or predict the future, I can guarantee one thing - the current board of directors will always fight, as we have done over the last 12 years, to work together as one with the Supporters Trust to make 100% sure that Swansea City football club remains the number one priority in all our thoughts and in every decision we make." | | Poll: | Huw Jenkins |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 20:00 - Jul 21 with 9721 views | vetchonian |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 19:57 - Jul 21 by Smellyplumz |
Yeah and going the other route might also destroy the club and trust. |
Ok tell us all then how litigation is the answe | |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 20:12 - Jul 21 with 9693 views | Flashberryjack |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 18:56 - Jul 21 by vetchonian |
I doubt if most of the moaners are members of the trust! |
What the f*ck has being a member of the trust got to do with giving an opinion on the destiny of the club they support.
I'm a long time ST holder, but not a trust member, so obviously I can't vote, but I and supporters like me most certainly have the right to pass comment.
BTW I'll say it again "There will be no litigation" for many reasons. |  |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 20:12 - Jul 21 with 9693 views | homeiswheretrundleis |
Having received my consultation papers today I would have thought there would be a 4th option (which would have been option 2) and that is the trust should ask for an increase in the number of shares being bought say at least £10.5m and find out what the response to that was before we decide on OPTION 1 or LEGAL ACTION or DO NOT pursue LEGAL ACTION.
Maybe this can be added as an extra option | | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 21:14 - Jul 21 with 9607 views | Smellyplumz |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 20:00 - Jul 21 by vetchonian |
Ok tell us all then how litigation is the answe |
There's no perfect answer, the club is no longer ours, it's about getting the best deal we can. | |
|
""Although I cannot promise or predict the future, I can guarantee one thing - the current board of directors will always fight, as we have done over the last 12 years, to work together as one with the Supporters Trust to make 100% sure that Swansea City football club remains the number one priority in all our thoughts and in every decision we make." | | Poll: | Huw Jenkins |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 21:17 - Jul 21 with 9598 views | Smellyplumz |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 21:14 - Jul 21 by Smellyplumz |
There's no perfect answer, the club is no longer ours, it's about getting the best deal we can. |
Hand on heart do you trust Huw Jenkins? Do you trust the yanks? If the answers yes then your mad if the answers no why on earth would you accept their offer? | |
|
""Although I cannot promise or predict the future, I can guarantee one thing - the current board of directors will always fight, as we have done over the last 12 years, to work together as one with the Supporters Trust to make 100% sure that Swansea City football club remains the number one priority in all our thoughts and in every decision we make." | | Poll: | Huw Jenkins |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 21:35 - Jul 21 with 9557 views | Dewi1jack |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 20:00 - Jul 21 by vetchonian |
Ok tell us all then how litigation is the answe |
Or to switch that line of questioning around. Which seems to be dripping sarcasm
OK then. Tell us how option 1 is the proper answer.
Tell us we're staying up in the PL so the Trust can sell all it's shares as per the non litigation option.
Or tell us our Colonial cousins aren't going to pull a stunt with the Drag rights (option 1) or set up a shell company to avoid ownership problems as they have done before.
Or tell us why jenkins whose fuggin fault this sh1te is gets to buy more shares after what the b'stard has done.
Tell us Jase and Stevie boy are going to buy the extra shares for sure.Or that they're going to involve a 21% shareholder properly.
If any of this crap was guaranteed, i'd go for the deal.
it isn't.
It comes down to trust.
Do any of us trust the Merrycans?
Do any of us trust Capt beaky?
Or any of the ex board including that b'stard Dimwit, who got his shares after being a "top boy" with our very own Trust?
I don't.
Not now. Not ever
And that's the reasoning option 1 is off the table for me.
And I think the story of the Indian buyer has come at the absolutely perfect time, if it makes people think about the Drag rights issue.
Option 3 is actually looking the best bet at the mo- preserve the Status quo and see which way the Yanks are considering going with us.
Make no bones they're here only to make money.
I also think the board flogging Sigurdsson could sway the odd(?) voter. Although if they let that sway their thinking, maybe they shouldn't have been allowed outside to post their vote in the first place. |  |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 21:38 - Jul 21 with 9541 views | E20Jack |
I still don't understand how it is a tricky situation, genuinely.
***Influence***
1) Do you believe we have any influence what so ever now? (Couldnt even influence a friendly ticket price)
2) Do you think this lack of influence is likely to change after we waiver the threat of legal action? Surely it is even less likely when there is no real incentive or threat to.
So no influence now, not if we lose the case and none if we win it. Influence is neither here nor there. It went as soon as the voting rights were handed over. So this should not make up any part of anyones decision making.
*** Money***
1) What does the Trust need money for? Presumably to buy a meaningful stake in the club in the future right?
2) Will the £5m The Trust is being bunged be a sufficient amount to do that? No. Is it even close to an amount that can buy a controlling stake in a relatively healthy club? No. If it accepts the £5m, is it ever likely to get to a sufficient figure to do so? No.
3) now influence is gone - surely the more money to buy shares (and thus influence) is more important. Legal action, of which we have a strong case for brings upwards of £20 million.
***Protections***
1) We have no protections now. Any deal we do for an amount of money that cannot achieve club security in the future surely must be offset by these protections. Are we being offered them? No.
2) once we accept this deal we cannot prevent who the club gets sold to, for how much or for what purpose. The Trust may also have to sell every single share they have (likely) for whatever price the rest is being sold at too, which could be pennies.
***Summary***
So considering the QC (of which we paid tens of thousands of pounds for) says we have more chance of winning than losing - and presumably the legal team for the Americans have told them they have more chance of losing than winning... Why on earth would we accept an offer that doesnt offer protection, eneough money or influence?
I feel there is a legacy on the line here. If we take this offer and the club gets sold on for minimal amounts, forcing the Trust out of the club as a result, leaving them in a position to have to just stand by and watch due to not having enough money to compete - then the Trust WILL be remembered as the organisation that manipulated its members into ruining the club for short term meaningless gain. Thats not a barb or a quip - it honestly is what will happen. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 21:51]
|  |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 08:47 - Jul 22 with 9352 views | 3swan |
If a legal case is won, what happens if the owners don’t have £21.8m sitting around? How long are they likely to be give? Forced sale by them? No buyer etc.
What happens if accepting the offer.
Tag along — Trust is involved.
What if new buyers only want to purchase 68% or the equivalent of the majority owners.
Can they just buy them out leaving the Trust with 21% or will legally the Trust be able to force a % share sale , which would decrease the Trust share holding?
Whichever option apart from doing nothing. 20% of the value of sale price is lost to the owners/Trust in tax, that's a few million pounds. | | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 09:45 - Jul 22 with 9288 views | Polskijack |
The point that the OP makes regarding who pays if the trust lose and the costs exceed the amount they have in the bank, is an important one. Theoretically if the trust lose, as mentioned above, the members at that time could be liable for the extra costs (both ours and theirs) and this could be a substantial sum. I'm no lawyer so I wonder if this has been looked into? Also if the trust doesn't have a “legal personality” any contracts or liabilities could be the responsibility of the trustees as individuals, rather than of the organisation itself which would be worrying for whoever they are, and would certainly influence any position of legal action against accepting the deal.
But of course this doesn't matter IF the trust win. |  | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 13:21 - Jul 22 with 9131 views | AguycalledJack |
Hi all, long time reader first time poster and trust member.
1. Regarding the cost of litigation, the op does have a point about utilising a no win no fee agreement. These are available for such actions. Therefore there would be no risk involved in respect of the trust's own legal costs were such an agreement to be entered into.
2. Were such an agreement to be entered into and the trust win then the trust would be liable to pay a success fee to their solicitor which by law is capped at 25% of the damages recovered.
3. There are insurance policies available to cover legal costs were the trust to be on the receiving end of an adverse costs order, thus covering the clubs/Americans legal costs. Have such policies been looked into? These however by their very nature can be expensive.
3. It is now a myth that you are unable to pre determine what exactly it would cost to run litigation such as this. There is a process known as costs budgeting that was introduced circa 3 years ago where parties have to estimate their costs of litigation all the way through to trial and possible settlement. That costs budget is then subject to agreement between the parties or court approval. That budget can then only be exceeded upon agreement by the parties or upon agreement of the court and then only in exceptional circumstances. As such the costs of the parties are effectively known at an early stage in the litigation. This is called case management. That said costs budgeting isn't automatic for cases over 10 mil however an application can be made for budgeting to apply.
4. To run a case such as this is expensive. However, there is not necessarily a need to run the case via London solicitors. Not sure what firm the trust are using but savings on hourly rates can be made by instructing firms in Swansea, Cardiff or Bristol. These firms charges would be far less than a London based firm. Make no mistake there are one or two firms in Swansea that could deal with this type of litigation. Similarly the same applies to Barristers and QCs.
5. Solicitors hourly charging rates vary geographically. If the case was run out of South Wales I'd anticipate a top end charging rate of £350 - £400 an hour with 10% of that rate being charged for letters written and telephone calls received and made. That rate would be for the top fee earner. However the grunt work would be done by lower grade fee earners and again if run in South Wales I would anticipate a charging rate of between £111 per hour - £180 an hour. You could pretty much add half the hourly rate again were the litigation to be run out of London.
6. I think it would also be prudent to let you know that once the main action is concluded there is then a process known as Detailed Assessment which deals with the recovery of the winning parties costs from the loser. If settlement as to costs can't be achieved then a formal bill will be drafted by the winning party which is served on the loser who then has 21 days to file points of dispute against that bill with the winning party then being given the opportubity to prepare and serve points of reply thereto. If no agreement can be reached as to costs following this process then the bill is subject to court assessment which in this type of litigation would undoubtedly involve an oral hearing as the costs will undoubtedly exceed £75,000. Generally the winning party can expect to recover 70~80% of their total final Bill. Interest on the recovered costs runs at the court rate of8% per annum from the date of conclusion of the case.
I hope the above is of interest and hopefully it provides a brief insight intothe process concerning legal costs.
Make no mistake this is a massive point in the history of much loved club. I see on a daily basis the problems that can occur when the heart rules the head of entering into such weighty litigation. I am undecided on how to vote myself, but I hope that you will find the above of some interest when making your own personal choice on how to proceeded.
Jack and Danny ........ [Post edited 22 Jul 2017 13:52]
| | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 14:52 - Jul 22 with 8994 views | skacrazy |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 20:12 - Jul 21 by homeiswheretrundleis |
Having received my consultation papers today I would have thought there would be a 4th option (which would have been option 2) and that is the trust should ask for an increase in the number of shares being bought say at least £10.5m and find out what the response to that was before we decide on OPTION 1 or LEGAL ACTION or DO NOT pursue LEGAL ACTION.
Maybe this can be added as an extra option |
Agreed. I appreciate the risks involved in pursuing legal action but accepting the current offer has risks also if we drop out of the PL. As it stands the offer seems very low and I think we should be looking for a better offer for the initial share purchase. | | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 15:40 - Jul 22 with 8918 views | Pacemaker |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 15:20 - Jul 22 by Vetchfielder |
Brilliant post, thank you, and exactly the sort of information I was hoping to receive.
 |
There is no way a no win no fee deal will be offered here this is not cash for crash or ppl this will be a big bill if it goes to litigation. | |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 16:27 - Jul 22 with 8843 views | everytimeref |
The question of who pays the legal costs if the Trust loses any litigation needs clarification before the vote. If the members are personally liable for the costs then that is a huge factor in the decision.
If I remember correctly there have been cases in the past where golf clubs have lost court cases and the members have been personally liable for the costs.
Whatever the Q.C has advised there are no guarantees in any litigation.
As for no win, no fee, good luck getting any Q.C.
worth their salt to agree to that. | | | |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 16:37 - Jul 22 with 8821 views | monmouth |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 16:27 - Jul 22 by everytimeref |
The question of who pays the legal costs if the Trust loses any litigation needs clarification before the vote. If the members are personally liable for the costs then that is a huge factor in the decision.
If I remember correctly there have been cases in the past where golf clubs have lost court cases and the members have been personally liable for the costs.
Whatever the Q.C has advised there are no guarantees in any litigation.
As for no win, no fee, good luck getting any Q.C.
worth their salt to agree to that. |
If that were true then the members would also be entitled to share out the proceeds of the win. It has to be bollocks.
I agree it still needs to be confirmed as such before the vote though, rather than left open. |  |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 16:42 - Jul 22 with 8810 views | E20Jack |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 15:40 - Jul 22 by Pacemaker |
There is no way a no win no fee deal will be offered here this is not cash for crash or ppl this will be a big bill if it goes to litigation. |
http://www.belllax.com/site/services_disputes/shareholder_disputes/unfair_prejud
Just one of a host of firms that do a no win no fee basis specialising in commercial unfair prejudice cases against shareholders.
Obviously they would only take on strong cases. Provided that we have spent tens of thousands on two QC opinions that say we have a steong case, I would imagine of of these firms would glady take the case on as it could be worth millions to them. | |
| |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 16:53 - Jul 22 with 8783 views | everytimeref |
| Consultation Papers - Cost of Legal Action on 16:37 - Jul 22 by monmouth |
If that were true then the members would also be entitled to share out the proceeds of the win. It has to be bollocks.
I agree it still needs to be confirmed as such before the vote though, rather than left open. |
Not necessarily as what happens to any monies obtained from the litigation would have to be determined by reference to the articles or constitution of the Trust. Presumably any monies gained would have to be applied for the purposes for which the trust was set up. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
