| Cardiff on 15:46 - Jan 11 with 1275 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Cardiff on 13:01 - Jan 11 by Dr_Parnassus |
You have been taught the finer details of this case many times, why you still keep getting them wrong I’m not quite sure.
Cardiff did do things wrong, in fact their main argument was that he wasn’t registered to play in the Premier league… which was due to a technical error caused by them in structuring his bonus incorrectly.
The “agent” (who’s sons played for Cardiff due to their ongoing relations) perfectly legally booked a flight, it’s not illegal to book a flight.. so they didn’t lose anybody.
Next time Cardiff sign a player for so much they may take greater care of transporting him rather than giving an inconvenient commercial flight hours away from where he is. [Post edited 11 Jan 2023 13:12]
|
Cardiff have gone through legitimate legal channels as is their right. This is not "wrong doing" in my book. This is sensible testing of the case and legality of the deal and paperwork. Decisions went against them.
The player was voluntarily in the care of his agent who arranged transport for him to Cardiff as part of the service he offered, using his contacts. The player was given free flight by the agent who would have paid for it. The flight they arranged broke the law as proven in court. |  |
|  |
| Cardiff on 15:58 - Jan 11 with 1265 views | bennytheblue |
| Cardiff on 15:46 - Jan 11 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Cardiff have gone through legitimate legal channels as is their right. This is not "wrong doing" in my book. This is sensible testing of the case and legality of the deal and paperwork. Decisions went against them.
The player was voluntarily in the care of his agent who arranged transport for him to Cardiff as part of the service he offered, using his contacts. The player was given free flight by the agent who would have paid for it. The flight they arranged broke the law as proven in court. |
Can I have a bit more anti cardiff stuff and capital hatred? This balanced view is giving me a migraine |  | | |
| Cardiff on 16:05 - Jan 11 with 1250 views | pencoedjack |
| Cardiff on 15:58 - Jan 11 by bennytheblue |
Can I have a bit more anti cardiff stuff and capital hatred? This balanced view is giving me a migraine |
He has a different opinion than 3 courts & the majority of Cardiff fans |  | | |
| Cardiff on 17:31 - Jan 11 with 1208 views | Boundy |
| Cardiff on 13:18 - Jan 11 by bennytheblue |
Low wages at our place….no issue with ffp |
How would you know ,I thought you had no interest in the everyday workings of the Club ? |  |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Cardiff on 19:14 - Jan 11 with 1149 views | felixstowe_jack |
| Cardiff on 15:46 - Jan 11 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Cardiff have gone through legitimate legal channels as is their right. This is not "wrong doing" in my book. This is sensible testing of the case and legality of the deal and paperwork. Decisions went against them.
The player was voluntarily in the care of his agent who arranged transport for him to Cardiff as part of the service he offered, using his contacts. The player was given free flight by the agent who would have paid for it. The flight they arranged broke the law as proven in court. |
Makes no difference to the fact that he was a Cardiff player.
Exactly the same if any person accepts a lift from an uninsured non qualified driver.
At last Cardiff have paid up even if the have wasted 100,000s in wasted legal fees plus interest. | |
| |
| Cardiff on 19:16 - Jan 11 with 1146 views | dantheswansman |
Great they have the embargo lifted but no player worth having is going to want to go to that sewer pipe club
They cannot offer huge wages and their manager is complete garbage, maybe their huge concourse will attract some quality players lol |  | | |
| Cardiff on 19:27 - Jan 11 with 1139 views | bennytheblue |
| Cardiff on 17:31 - Jan 11 by Boundy |
How would you know ,I thought you had no interest in the everyday workings of the Club ? |
Yes but after 30 yrs of following I know plenty of people and people who work there | | | |
| Cardiff on 19:29 - Jan 11 with 1136 views | bennytheblue |
| Cardiff on 19:14 - Jan 11 by felixstowe_jack |
Makes no difference to the fact that he was a Cardiff player.
Exactly the same if any person accepts a lift from an uninsured non qualified driver.
At last Cardiff have paid up even if the have wasted 100,000s in wasted legal fees plus interest. |
Gives tan something else to moan about, he likes wasting cash, he’s not learned how not too in 11 yrs. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Cardiff on 20:01 - Jan 11 with 1116 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Cardiff on 13:18 - Jan 11 by bennytheblue |
Low wages at our place….no issue with ffp |
Then why has Tan been putting so much money in every month? I know the amount has dropped but very recently it was admitted he's still putting 1 million per month in.
Is it why people like Morrison are free to leave, to get the wages down? If FFP isn't problem why isn't he sacking the amanger no ine seems to rate and the talk is more about Warnock than anybody worthwhile?
It makes it sound like your club is dead broke. | | | |
| Cardiff on 21:06 - Jan 11 with 1075 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Cardiff on 15:46 - Jan 11 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Cardiff have gone through legitimate legal channels as is their right. This is not "wrong doing" in my book. This is sensible testing of the case and legality of the deal and paperwork. Decisions went against them.
The player was voluntarily in the care of his agent who arranged transport for him to Cardiff as part of the service he offered, using his contacts. The player was given free flight by the agent who would have paid for it. The flight they arranged broke the law as proven in court. |
Jimmy Savile would have gone through legitimate legal trials to avoid his wrongdoing too, doesn’t mean he would be in the right.
Decisions went against them for a reason…
“As part of the service offered” is something you have fabricated. Can you show me a list of services offered, one being that? No you can’t.
What do you mean the flight they arranged broke the law? You mean the arranging of the flight or the flight itself? Very different things.
If I ordered you an Uber and the car turned up under serviced and with a driver who has lost his license…. That wouldn’t be “an illegal arranging of transport”, while it may well be an illegal trip.
This is the detail you fail to understand and intentionally muddy the waters as a result. |  |
| |
| Cardiff on 21:13 - Jan 11 with 1072 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Cardiff on 13:43 - Jan 11 by bennytheblue |
You nailed it dr p as ever, why would mackay who everyone knows was employed by Nantes before and only got his sons involved in name as a cover story to continue working, bother to get involved ?
Because he was involved in booking that illegal flight, a flight that wasn’t worthy and killed two people. And there lies the connection to Nantes fc. It’s tenuous I grant you but people are sued for far less links these days….good day to you |
The booking of the flight was not illegal though. The flight was, due to the actions of the pilot in giving the job to another pilot not fit to fly it.
People book flights every single day, the company operating that flight then takes on that duty of care.
Let’s say he accepted Cardiffs offer of a flight on British Airways from Paris, the pilot was drunk and crashed.
Would you blame Cardiff? Would any court? Would any sane person?
It’s over, despite people desperately scrambling to suggest the opposite. | |
| |
| Cardiff on 22:57 - Jan 11 with 1024 views | bennytheblue |
| Cardiff on 21:13 - Jan 11 by Dr_Parnassus |
The booking of the flight was not illegal though. The flight was, due to the actions of the pilot in giving the job to another pilot not fit to fly it.
People book flights every single day, the company operating that flight then takes on that duty of care.
Let’s say he accepted Cardiffs offer of a flight on British Airways from Paris, the pilot was drunk and crashed.
Would you blame Cardiff? Would any court? Would any sane person?
It’s over, despite people desperately scrambling to suggest the opposite. |
Glad you cleared that up…..good stuff dude. Poor ole cardiff city init | | | |
| Cardiff on 23:02 - Jan 11 with 1009 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Cardiff on 22:57 - Jan 11 by bennytheblue |
Glad you cleared that up…..good stuff dude. Poor ole cardiff city init |
Not really poor them, they brought it on themselves.
They need to suck it up, stop blaming others and put things right. It’s in the hands, nobody has inflicted this on them. | |
| |
| Cardiff on 01:14 - Jan 12 with 979 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Cardiff on 21:13 - Jan 11 by Dr_Parnassus |
The booking of the flight was not illegal though. The flight was, due to the actions of the pilot in giving the job to another pilot not fit to fly it.
People book flights every single day, the company operating that flight then takes on that duty of care.
Let’s say he accepted Cardiffs offer of a flight on British Airways from Paris, the pilot was drunk and crashed.
Would you blame Cardiff? Would any court? Would any sane person?
It’s over, despite people desperately scrambling to suggest the opposite. |
Cardiff were right to contest the payment if they felt they had a case. The tribunals did not agree their case. Normal legal activity would have thought. The tribunals accepted their presentation and after due process rejected the claim. They did not reject it out of hand and allowed appeals.
I asked what Cardiff had done wrong. Not paid up was the answer. Well they have now with interest after legal claims were rejected. So what else did they do wrong by the player?
You cannot be so naive to ask me for a list of services offered by the agent. The services offered by agents are often unclear with out strict regulation it seems. Shady operators do not get tied down in detail.
I have pointed out the law on "duty of care". Not knowing is not a mitigating factor. The registered agent put the player on an aeroplane without checking the suitability of the plane, the pilots credentials nor the insurance position if something went wrong. He it seems blindly trusted in his dads mate who knows about flying. It was his duty. It was him that organised the plane through third parties and him that put the player on it. The player trusted him.
Uber is a special case with their business model which I am not fully conversant with. Uber will have written contract either on paper or on digital forms with drivers I assume and will rely on insurance cover of some sort as mandatory. It is not a cash in hand business clear of rules. When ordering Uber you are relying on the good name of a global brand to act rationally and in good faith with good business principles . Uber would do checks on their drivers. Regulations where not strict enough have seen them banned in some countries I read somewhere.
Duty of Care is about individual wellbeing , welfare, compliance and good practice.(google) [Post edited 12 Jan 2023 1:26]
| |
| |
| Cardiff on 01:27 - Jan 12 with 964 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Cardiff on 01:14 - Jan 12 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Cardiff were right to contest the payment if they felt they had a case. The tribunals did not agree their case. Normal legal activity would have thought. The tribunals accepted their presentation and after due process rejected the claim. They did not reject it out of hand and allowed appeals.
I asked what Cardiff had done wrong. Not paid up was the answer. Well they have now with interest after legal claims were rejected. So what else did they do wrong by the player?
You cannot be so naive to ask me for a list of services offered by the agent. The services offered by agents are often unclear with out strict regulation it seems. Shady operators do not get tied down in detail.
I have pointed out the law on "duty of care". Not knowing is not a mitigating factor. The registered agent put the player on an aeroplane without checking the suitability of the plane, the pilots credentials nor the insurance position if something went wrong. He it seems blindly trusted in his dads mate who knows about flying. It was his duty. It was him that organised the plane through third parties and him that put the player on it. The player trusted him.
Uber is a special case with their business model which I am not fully conversant with. Uber will have written contract either on paper or on digital forms with drivers I assume and will rely on insurance cover of some sort as mandatory. It is not a cash in hand business clear of rules. When ordering Uber you are relying on the good name of a global brand to act rationally and in good faith with good business principles . Uber would do checks on their drivers. Regulations where not strict enough have seen them banned in some countries I read somewhere.
Duty of Care is about individual wellbeing , welfare, compliance and good practice.(google) [Post edited 12 Jan 2023 1:26]
|
And Jimmy Savile would be right to contest his arrest if he felt it was wrong, however after the facts of the case are now public knowledge we can see that they were wrong to withhold payment, especially when the error they cited was their doing.
It’s not naivety, you claimed that arranging transport was part of the services. Part of the services for whom exactly? The sale was already complete, it’s not a service to Nantes to supply transport for another teams player. Sadly you aren’t thinking when it comes to your strange quest.
You honestly think McKay should have flown to France in order to check the plane out? Or requested documents from the pilot? He has no aviation knowledge or authority to check over planes, it’s a ludicrous suggestion. As you are well aware.
When was the last flight you took? Can you show me the documents the air company provided for you with regards to the pilot? Can you also show me your rigorous plane safety report you conducted after you checked it out? I’d be fascinated to see that.
Uber is not a special case, they are a company that provides travel for its clients. It’s the same as all, British Airways, Virgin, Uber, your local taxi firm - you name it, it’s all the same. If someone books a local taxi, it is not reasonable to think the person ringing the taxi firm has a duty of care to go and check out the mechanics of the car and vet the driver - you are living in dream land.
But this isn’t the first time you have made such ridiculous arguments, and it won’t be the last. | |
| |
| Cardiff on 01:43 - Jan 12 with 958 views | Dr_Parnassus |
In reply to your edit, I know what duty of care is, you don’t need a google definition.
I am making the factually correct point that duty of care with regards to the transport immediately falls on the aviation company not the person who booked it.
There is no reasonable precedent that states anyone booking transport must do a physical check of the transport itself and of the driver/pilot/captain/crew.
If you think everyone booking a taxi is responsible for the car that arrives and the qualification of the driver then you are on cloud cuckoo.
As I said, show us the reports you collated when you last booked a taxi and I will consider your point in terms of it at least being something you believe. Currently not only am I certain you don’t actually hold such a ludicrous view, I am pretty certain you realise how hilariously devoid of reality it is.
Over to you. | |
| |
| Cardiff on 08:45 - Jan 12 with 907 views | KeithHaynes |
Payment made and Cardiff can now make signings. |  |
| |
| Cardiff on 08:51 - Jan 12 with 898 views | STID2017 |
| Cardiff on 08:45 - Jan 12 by KeithHaynes |
Payment made and Cardiff can now make signings. |
First on their list should be a new manager maybe ? |  |
| |
| Cardiff on 11:01 - Jan 12 with 866 views | pete |
| Cardiff on 08:45 - Jan 12 by KeithHaynes |
Payment made and Cardiff can now make signings. |
I thought Fiffa band transfers for 3 windows and their ban still in force,or have they AS WELL as the e f l ? what happens when next payment due and lets say they do not pay again i wonder ? | | | |
| Cardiff on 12:06 - Jan 12 with 837 views | Boundy |
| Cardiff on 08:45 - Jan 12 by KeithHaynes |
Payment made and Cardiff can now make signings. |
Dont think so, I belive the FIFA embargo's in place until full payments received | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Cardiff on 12:53 - Jan 12 with 807 views | bennytheblue |
| Cardiff on 08:45 - Jan 12 by KeithHaynes |
Payment made and Cardiff can now make signings. |
Wow….the charge to the sunshine league begins eh? 😜🤩 | | | |
| Cardiff on 12:54 - Jan 12 with 800 views | bennytheblue |
| Cardiff on 01:14 - Jan 12 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Cardiff were right to contest the payment if they felt they had a case. The tribunals did not agree their case. Normal legal activity would have thought. The tribunals accepted their presentation and after due process rejected the claim. They did not reject it out of hand and allowed appeals.
I asked what Cardiff had done wrong. Not paid up was the answer. Well they have now with interest after legal claims were rejected. So what else did they do wrong by the player?
You cannot be so naive to ask me for a list of services offered by the agent. The services offered by agents are often unclear with out strict regulation it seems. Shady operators do not get tied down in detail.
I have pointed out the law on "duty of care". Not knowing is not a mitigating factor. The registered agent put the player on an aeroplane without checking the suitability of the plane, the pilots credentials nor the insurance position if something went wrong. He it seems blindly trusted in his dads mate who knows about flying. It was his duty. It was him that organised the plane through third parties and him that put the player on it. The player trusted him.
Uber is a special case with their business model which I am not fully conversant with. Uber will have written contract either on paper or on digital forms with drivers I assume and will rely on insurance cover of some sort as mandatory. It is not a cash in hand business clear of rules. When ordering Uber you are relying on the good name of a global brand to act rationally and in good faith with good business principles . Uber would do checks on their drivers. Regulations where not strict enough have seen them banned in some countries I read somewhere.
Duty of Care is about individual wellbeing , welfare, compliance and good practice.(google) [Post edited 12 Jan 2023 1:26]
|
Nicely put, dr p will never quite get it, let him have another waffle. Blessim | | | |
| Cardiff on 13:11 - Jan 12 with 778 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Cardiff on 01:43 - Jan 12 by Dr_Parnassus |
In reply to your edit, I know what duty of care is, you don’t need a google definition.
I am making the factually correct point that duty of care with regards to the transport immediately falls on the aviation company not the person who booked it.
There is no reasonable precedent that states anyone booking transport must do a physical check of the transport itself and of the driver/pilot/captain/crew.
If you think everyone booking a taxi is responsible for the car that arrives and the qualification of the driver then you are on cloud cuckoo.
As I said, show us the reports you collated when you last booked a taxi and I will consider your point in terms of it at least being something you believe. Currently not only am I certain you don’t actually hold such a ludicrous view, I am pretty certain you realise how hilariously devoid of reality it is.
Over to you. |
It is a forum and open for all to read. This is not a one to one debate. I like to provide an educational angle to my posts and not on here to points score or pit other posters down.
You are contradicting your earlier posts where you denied there was an 'aviation company' involved in this disaster to cover "duty of care " issues.
The "Registered Agent" put the player on a plane sorted out by his dads' mate who had a plane. I do not know if he did no research at all on the plane, the pilot, nor the mate of his dad organising it (possible aviation firm) nor insurance cover. This would be the duty of care.
The Registered agent is bound by the duties of "Duty of Care" as you would expect from Uber and a "FIFA Registered agent". He should have a paper chain that can be audited as part of his business. Assessor will ask to see this paper train perhaps. This was a big deal not popping down to Costco to get a big box of toilet rolls and coffee.
I have annual travel insurance which covers me for trips. It s common sense for me. If I sent an employee to work for me I would i ensure any flight taken by an employee would have travel insurance. I suspect this particular trip would have been subject to exclusions. Would an insurance firm cover a single flight form this particular aviation firm using this plane?
I sense we have had two positions and the truth is halfway perhaps?. You probably would never accept such a concept. 'Grey areas' abound in this case and you only deal in black and white I suspect. | |
| |
| Cardiff on 13:47 - Jan 12 with 765 views | bennytheblue |
| Cardiff on 13:11 - Jan 12 by ReslovenSwan1 |
It is a forum and open for all to read. This is not a one to one debate. I like to provide an educational angle to my posts and not on here to points score or pit other posters down.
You are contradicting your earlier posts where you denied there was an 'aviation company' involved in this disaster to cover "duty of care " issues.
The "Registered Agent" put the player on a plane sorted out by his dads' mate who had a plane. I do not know if he did no research at all on the plane, the pilot, nor the mate of his dad organising it (possible aviation firm) nor insurance cover. This would be the duty of care.
The Registered agent is bound by the duties of "Duty of Care" as you would expect from Uber and a "FIFA Registered agent". He should have a paper chain that can be audited as part of his business. Assessor will ask to see this paper train perhaps. This was a big deal not popping down to Costco to get a big box of toilet rolls and coffee.
I have annual travel insurance which covers me for trips. It s common sense for me. If I sent an employee to work for me I would i ensure any flight taken by an employee would have travel insurance. I suspect this particular trip would have been subject to exclusions. Would an insurance firm cover a single flight form this particular aviation firm using this plane?
I sense we have had two positions and the truth is halfway perhaps?. You probably would never accept such a concept. 'Grey areas' abound in this case and you only deal in black and white I suspect. |
He will go on and on. Years ago he went on about Langstone for about a year, a loan note of £15 million, it was like his life depended on it. This is his latest project. What a life eh? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
