The Hotel End
March 06, 2021, 04:33:42 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

Pages: 1 ... 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 [1393] 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?  (Read 1093651 times)
Wanderingteyn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 261


View Profile
« Reply #27840 on: December 07, 2020, 02:48:44 am »

Holy hell this is boring now.

Still the same people arguing the same arguments.
Report Spam   Logged
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1420


View Profile
« Reply #27841 on: December 07, 2020, 07:44:12 am »

Holy hell this is boring now.

Still the same people arguing the same arguments.
Name one thread that isn’t? Come to think of it the same accusation could be levelled at me and the missus? Looking on the bright side, at least on here I stand half a chance of winning the odd one or two?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2020, 07:47:49 am by Melbourne Cobbler » Report Spam   Logged

Chairman, Paul Stratford Fan Club, and proud member of the Steve Massey Appreciation Society. (Although refuse to be in his fan club on account of his crap goal celebration in front of The Hotel End when playing for Wrexham)
singcobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1930


View Profile
« Reply #27842 on: December 07, 2020, 08:21:45 am »

Name one thread that isn’t? Come to think of it the same accusation could be levelled at me and the missus? Looking on the bright side, at least on here I stand half a chance of winning the odd one or two?

 Grin
Report Spam   Logged
singcobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1930


View Profile
« Reply #27843 on: December 07, 2020, 08:22:54 am »

Name one thread that isn’t? Come to think of it the same accusation could be levelled at me and the missus? Looking on the bright side, at least on here I stand half a chance of winning the odd one or two?

 Grin

Arguing with a woman is like reading the license agreement of a software package, just scroll to the end and agree.
Report Spam   Logged
Deepcut Cobbler
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11816



View Profile
« Reply #27844 on: December 07, 2020, 09:17:38 am »

Grin

Arguing with a woman is like reading the license agreement of a software package, just scroll to the end and agree.


 Grin  Said Swiss Tony... Wink
Report Spam   Logged

“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon

The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1420


View Profile
« Reply #27845 on: December 07, 2020, 11:00:14 am »

Grin  Said Swiss Tony... Wink
Ah my hero, the used car industry’s silver tongued cavalier!
Report Spam   Logged

Chairman, Paul Stratford Fan Club, and proud member of the Steve Massey Appreciation Society. (Although refuse to be in his fan club on account of his crap goal celebration in front of The Hotel End when playing for Wrexham)
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3755


View Profile
« Reply #27846 on: January 27, 2021, 21:07:29 pm »

I see the KPMG audit report into the council handling of the loan has finally been released. I've not had a chance to read it yet but if the edited highlights the Chron are churning out are indicative of anything they've managed to spend years reaching conclusions the rest of us reached years ago. So far zero new information included in the Chron snippets!
Report Spam   Logged

The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
guest3419
Guest
« Reply #27847 on: January 28, 2021, 06:33:02 am »

When' oh when, will we get the decisions from the Police and CPS?
Report Spam   Logged
Boot and shoe
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3139


View Profile
« Reply #27848 on: January 28, 2021, 06:51:37 am »

This investigation by both the police and auditors is a joke .
How many reports do you need before names are named and the parasites are shamed .
The council are surely playing for time so that they can distance themselves at everyone’s expense and the police are taking far too long on this matter .
It’s nothing short of a gravy train and meanwhile the guilty are living their lives , enjoying the benefits .
if it goes on much longer , some of these charlatans will be dead of old age .
Report Spam   Logged
Deepcut Cobbler
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11816



View Profile
« Reply #27849 on: January 28, 2021, 08:09:58 am »

This investigation by both the police and auditors is a joke .
How many reports do you need before names are named and the parasites are shamed .
The council are surely playing for time so that they can distance themselves at everyone’s expense and the police are taking far too long on this matter .
It’s nothing short of a gravy train and meanwhile the guilty are living their lives , enjoying the benefits .
if it goes on much longer , some of these charlatans will be dead of old age .

You're last line could be near the truth of the intention?
Report Spam   Logged

“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon

The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
singcobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1930


View Profile
« Reply #27850 on: January 28, 2021, 08:27:45 am »

By now they have probably given more to the three auditing companies than was lost to the Cardozas.
Report Spam   Logged
Boot and shoe
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3139


View Profile
« Reply #27851 on: January 28, 2021, 10:45:20 am »

By now they have probably given more to the three auditing companies than was lost to the Cardozas.
Quite right , and then there is the police time which will be extortionate .
It is one sham after another and no one seems accountable for absolutely anything .
They are afraid of the disdain it will shower on the council and the spin offs it will have on the job for life brigade .
The police are afraid of losing and looking like numpties and so take far too long to reach a conclusion and actually act on anything whatsoever .
Meanwhile , on their yacht or in their country estate the shamed who cannot be named carry on quaffing and squirrelling ....
it is a farce
Report Spam   Logged
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3755


View Profile
« Reply #27852 on: January 28, 2021, 11:00:01 am »

Having now properly read the report now, here's some interesting snippets (spot the theme that keeps popping up):

Quote
This public interest report concerns NBC’s loan to Northampton Town Football Club (“NTFC”) and reports on significant failures of corporate governance and items of account that are, in KPMG’s view as the Appointed Auditor to NBC, contrary to law.

Quote
The agreement at the in principle stage included that the £5m proceeds of sale of the development would be used by the Council to offset the debt owed by NTFC. In our view that was inappropriate and there seems to have been no or insufficient benefit or any discernible rational reason to NBC to reduce NTFC’s debt in this way. Furthermore, although the sale did not in the event go ahead, if the £5m had been applied as outlined in the 17 July 2013 report it would have, in our view, run a high risk of constituting unlawful State Aid to NTFC;

Quote
. In our view the Council did not ensure that it followed the correct steps to ensure that the loans were lawful and did not represent State Aid;

Quote
The then Chief Executive authorised loans totalling £13.5m which was in excess of the “up to £12m” quoted in the Cabinet paper of 17 July 2013. The Council
advanced a further £1.5m for the stadium in April 2014 with inadequate due diligence undertaken as to why the extra money was needed nor what the previous £4.5m loaned until that point had actually been spent on. Officers had sought legal advice which determined that although the background in the Cabinet report referred to “up to 12m”, since the recorded decision did not
reference a specific figure, additional Cabinet approval was not required and entering into facility agreements for up to £13.5m was in line with the existing decision. In KPMG’s view this advice was incorrect and the delegation as to amount was subject to the overall limit quoted in the report and it is unreasonable to interpret this as being given authority to approve any size loan. We have concluded that in our view this decision went beyond the delegated authority and was therefore unlawful;

Quote
The Council was prepared to enter into a conditional agreement to sell land to a company (CDNL) that was proposed by NTFC without going through any competitive procurement process. NTFC and CDNL had directors on common, which is a further issue with regard to legality and financial and corporate governance which we would have expected the Council to have picked up onand considered the implications

Quote
Whilst one of the conditions required of the Chief Executive was satisfied and two conditions could be deemed as being partially satisfied, two were in our view definitely not satisfied: we have concluded (and subsequent independent reviews, reports and events have borne out), that the security provided by NTFC was neither sufficient nor tangible; and, there was no robust contractual arrangement in place between NTFC and a financially sufficient third party. In KPMG’s view, failure to meet these conditions rendered the decisions taken further to the delegated powers unlawful;

Quote
In KPMG’s view, the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning should have been able to foresee the risk of the Council being exposed to financial loss or liability and should have mitigated that risk accordingly. In KPMG’s view, failure to meet this condition rendered the decisions taken further to the delegated power unlawful.

Quote
Thus, NTFC’s average attendance in each of the previous five years was around 4,500 and the capacity of the stadium was 7,500. Yet the Council never questioned whether there was really a need for a stadium that per the loan application seated 10,000 people, i.e. NTFC were asking for an additional 2,500 seats. Similarly, at that stage there was, in KPMG’s view, inadequate critical review or challenge about whether there was demand for conference facilities or a hotel and/or the impact that additional provision might have on existing facilities elsewhere, with no clear partner agreements such as an agreed hotel developer for the site.
I do think KPMG are rather missing the point on this one - look down the road to MK for an example. Granted, a look at the league table shows it doesn't guarantee success, but their growth in support since relocating is still pretty impressive and if anything, their relative lack of footballing success in the same time frame points to the scale the facilities having an impact. Either way, this isn't a helpful statement when it comes to progressing the current situation...

Quote
However, the Council continued to advance money to NTFC even when it was obvious that something was seriously wrong. Quite apart from the lack of progress on site, NTFC submitted a revised planning application on 1 August 2014 which significantly reduced the scale of the stadium expansion.

Quote
The project was championed by the former Leader and, other than the points raised by three non-Cabinet Members attending Cabinet meeting and noted at paragraph 38 above, it appears to have been agreed without having been subject to any robust challenge by his fellow Cabinet Members. None of the other Cabinet Members were even aware that the Paper they approved contained a provision where it was intended that £5m of Council Taxpayers’ money loaned to NTFC was not going to be paid back. We were told by some of the officers and Members we interviewed as part of our review that there had been pressure to complete the deal (mainly from the Leader).
Tut tut, Fat Mack...

Quote
[one of the conditions was] That there were robust contractual arrangements between NTFC and a financially sufficient third party (i.e. a hotel chain). There was no such arrangement

Quote
The process which councils must follow when they sell land assets are set out in the Local Government Act 1972 section 123. Under case law interpreting this provision, a council/local authority will only have complied with its duties to its residents and protecting the public purse if it has (i) taken proper advice; (ii) followed that advice for reasons that can be justified; and (iii) not followed advice that was so plainly erroneous that in accepting it the local authority must have known, or at least ought to have known, that it was acting unreasonably. Principal among the requirements is that the Council must achieve best consideration (which can include non-monetary factors). The obvious way of doing this is to go through some kind of competitive process to identify the developer. In this case, the development company was proposed by the officers of NTFC and it would appear that at the time the Council’s
officers, using their delegated authority, accepted the recommendation without question. In the Cabinet Report of 17 July 2013, reference to ‘a developer’ was made, however CDNL or its relationship to the owners of NTFC was not. We consider this was inadequate, and the Council’s view that this does not matter because the sale did not go through is irrelevant because the Council did enter into a conditional agreement to sell and all the conditions could have been met without resolving this fundamental problem.
So basically, the council should have ensured NTFC went to tender to find a development partner but instead it was just given to CDNL. Owned by....?

Quote
The Council continued to advance money to NTFC even when it became clear that something was already fundamentally wrong with this project. Notwithstanding the lack of progress on site, NTFC submitted a revised planning application on 1 August 2014 which significantly reduced the scale of the stadium expansion. By this stage the Council had alreadyadvanced £7.5m for the stadium development and it subsequently advanced a further £1.5m on 19 August 2014 despite knowing that the proposed development had changed fundamentally. NTFC’s original planning application, submitted in November 2013, was to increase capacity by 2,347 seats and add a conference facility, but their revised application reduced that to just an additional 422
seats and no conference facility.

Quote
The Leader led the Council’s side of discussions with NTFC and many of these discussions were not minuted and not attended by any other Council representative. This resulted in a series of phone calls, texts and emails (on some occasions from a personal email account) from the former Leader instructing officers to take actions as he negotiated the Council’s position. For instance, the project was still being changed significantly by NTFC in the run-up to the Cabinet meeting on 17 July 2013. A draft version of the 17 July 2013 Cabinet report, which was dated 7 July 2013 states that the loan was to be for £10m to NTFC (and £2.5m to the Rugby Club), but this was then changed to up to £12m to NTFC following a meeting between the then Leader of the Council and NTFC (also the loan to the Rugby Club had doubled to £5m by the time the report was finalised). Following our various interviews of Council Members, officers,
and review of reports, we have seen no clear evidence to explain why the amount increased or that the Council considered the impact of the increase on, for example, the viability of the project or the security required.

There's also an extended section on what may or may not constitute state aid, which might colour any future arrangements between the club and the council, as might this recommendation:

Quote
Any future land sales should, other than in exceptional circumstances and where the law allows, be undertaken via means of a competitive process, in order that prospective parties are able to tender for the purchase, by submitting their plans for development. Each bid should be appropriately appraised, and consideration should be given to any relationships either with Council Members or related parties as part of the awarding process. The ultimate decision on who to award the sale to, should in a matter of this significance be undertaken by Cabinet
following receipt of a formal tender evaluation process, which includes the results of the due diligence undertaken against each bid. When considering best value for the land, the Council may (in limited circumstances and subject to the particular facts) be able to take into account ethical considerations.


Still quite a lot to read there, but hopefully a bit more concise than the 35 pages of repetition and waffle I've just slogged through!  Wink
« Last Edit: January 28, 2021, 11:03:30 am by BackOfTheNet » Report Spam   Logged

The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
Deepcut Cobbler
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11816



View Profile
« Reply #27853 on: January 28, 2021, 12:01:54 pm »

I do think KPMG are rather missing the point on this one - look down the road to MK for an example. Granted, a look at the league table shows it doesn't guarantee success, but their growth in support since relocating is still pretty impressive and if anything, their relative lack of footballing success in the same time frame points to the scale the facilities having an impact. Either way, this isn't a helpful statement when it comes to progressing the current situation...


Thank you picking out the points of concern that you have BOTN, saves a few of us taking the time to if that is the basis of the whole:
One point though: I don't think that KPMG are missing the point, they are just asking why the club were not challenged or asked to justify their request for additional seats and facilities?  If the club were challenged at the time and came up with a legitimate justification it would have been OK, the fact that they hadn't been challenged is the issue?
Report Spam   Logged

“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon

The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3755


View Profile
« Reply #27854 on: January 28, 2021, 12:05:06 pm »

Thank you picking out the points of concern that you have BOTN, saves a few of us taking the time to if that is the basis of the whole:
One point though: I don't think that KPMG are missing the point, they are just asking why the club were not challenged or asked to justify their request for additional seats and facilities?  If the club were challenged at the time and came up with a legitimate justification it would have been OK, the fact that they hadn't been challenged is the issue?


Fair point.
Report Spam   Logged

The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
Manwork04
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4607



View Profile
« Reply #27855 on: January 28, 2021, 12:08:59 pm »

This has all been going on for far too long, the CPS need to come to a decision, unfortunately judging by the time taken they are not confident of convictions, a lengthy trial would cost millions more tax payers money.
Meanwhile the guilty are laughing at us.
Report Spam   Logged

Rule Britannia
Deepcut Cobbler
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11816



View Profile
« Reply #27856 on: January 28, 2021, 12:18:45 pm »

This has all been going on for far too long, the CPS need to come to a decision, unfortunately judging by the time taken they are not confident of convictions, a lengthy trial would cost millions more tax payers money.
Meanwhile the guilty are laughing at us.

The investigation has to be concluded with a recommendation before the CPS get involved.
There's probably quite a few on a good earner that would prefer for the investigation to continue. Or is that too cynical?  Grin
Report Spam   Logged

“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon

The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
Larry
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


View Profile
« Reply #27857 on: January 28, 2021, 12:45:06 pm »

Thank you picking out the points of concern that you have BOTN, saves a few of us taking the time to if that is the basis of the whole:
One point though: I don't think that KPMG are missing the point, they are just asking why the club were not challenged or asked to justify their request for additional seats and facilities?  If the club were challenged at the time and came up with a legitimate justification it would have been OK, the fact that they hadn't been challenged is the issue?


Are KPMG suggesting there may never have been the intention to build the stand as initially described? They just wanted the money.
Report Spam   Logged
Deepcut Cobbler
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11816



View Profile
« Reply #27858 on: January 28, 2021, 12:51:05 pm »

Are KPMG suggesting there may never have been the intention to build the stand as initially described? They just wanted the money.

No, just that it's another example where the process, procedure, checks, balances and challenges, that they would normally expect for this type of financial transaction/activity, wasn't carried out.
Report Spam   Logged

“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon

The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
guest3419
Guest
« Reply #27859 on: January 28, 2021, 13:12:39 pm »

The investigation has to be concluded with a recommendation before the CPS get involved.
There's probably quite a few on a good earner that would prefer for the investigation to continue. Or is that too cynical?  Grin
I thought that one of the news bulletins early last year said that 'papers had been passed to the CPS'.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 [1393] 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Parental guidance is urged as this messageboard may not be suitable for all persons especially those under the age of 16 as the forums may contain words, phrases and expressions not considered appropriate for a younger audience so please express caution. If any posts in the forums offend you, please let us know and we will look at them and if we agree with your complaint, we will remove them. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and may be sued should your posting contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. We check the forums at various times of the day and remove offending posts. Other supporters are welcome but abusive or silly posts will be removed and the offenders potentially barred from future access to the site. We advise that you never reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: telephone number, home address or email address), and please do not include postal addresses of any kind. This messageboard is not endorsed or in any way affiliated with Northampton Town FC. All postings on this board become copyright of The Hotel End & may not be reproduced without the permission of the board administrator. By signing up to this message board you agree to this. The Hotel End cannot be held liable for the actions or postings of its members. The Hotel End reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. The Hotel End may disclose user information to government authorities at their discretion or when required by law. The Hotel End may also disclose user information when The Hotel End has reason to believe that someone is causing injury to or interference with its rights or property, other The Hotel End users, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities. By registering for The Hotel End, you agree to indemnify The Hotel End its representatives, and agents, and hold them harmless from any and all claims (including claims for legal fees) which may arise from your participation on the The Hotel End. You also agree that The Hotel End is not responsible for the materials posted by users of The Hotel End. In addition, you grant The Hotel End and its affiliates, worldwide, royalty-free perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display any message or content posted on The Hotel End and/or e-mail sent by you to The Hotel End (in whole or in part). The Hotel End reserves the right to make the rules up as it goes along. Thank you - The Hotel End I love Quidco
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMFServer.com - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy