I know that, you know that and even John Abbey knew that.

If you are I have a problem with that. For several reasons. First- and I'm sure there are more knowing people who could answer this- it was set up to solely buy player for the club. Second -and most important - will LISA get the money back? Third, a vote would be needed - I think- before this could happen. I have only been a LISA member for 4 months I think but I would have to say that the people who have been LISA members for 2 years and longer should only be allowed to vote on this question and if there is a legal stand on it then LISa should have it put in their constitution. The reason I say this is that these are the [people that have helped this club of ours to keeps it's head above water and have contributed a damn site more than me.

Sounds unbelievable to me! Lack of communication seems an understatement here.

LISA calls an emergency meeting and asks the question for its members to vote on - they vote and the thats it.
Then 23 fans pay 2 years Gold membership up front and hey presto - HMRC are paid.

£40K is small change so I am baffled by events.

Thats why I say that there is another case that has brought the club to this point.

Surly though Tony we need a club to have player's to sponsor.

You cant use members money without asking of course, but Im sure most would agree if the choice was no club otherwise, what do you think?

Wrong.

Amounts owed to employees for wages, holiday pay, PILON etc, up to certain limits, are preferential creditors.

Amounts owed to directors as employees, again up to certain limits, will likewise be preferential.

Amounts owed to HMRC have not been preferential since Crown Preference was abolished a few years ago. This is the main reason why HMRC are nowdays far more aggressive when owed money by insolvent employers.

The employees get paid before HMRC. If there are any assets...

btw - be very very careful about "fraudulent preference" - paying one unsecured creditor in preference to another. If that happens, the liquidator may be able to recover the payment made since all creditors in a class have to be treated equally. That might have a bearing on what you guys seem to be on about?

Good luck people. As the chairman of our own (skint, and on a wing and a prayer) club said a year or so ago, financially the whole game is built on foundations of sand. Without a sugar daddy, most clubs are fekked.

Have we got time though Lynda?

Absolutely spot on Mo...

Bizarre a club could fold with it's supporters club trust having a positive bank balance.... Only at Leyth

Thats why I say that the people who have been funding LISA for many years should be the ones to have the say and not people like me who have only been members for 4 months. Like you say the membership has drastically risen recently.

Ste who makes the decision then to use LIsa money to pay to Vat Man?
IF LISA WAS ASKED FOR ANY MONEY WE WOULD HAVE TO HOLD AN EMERGANCY MEETING.

Thanks for that mate. I retired over 6 years ago so obviously have had no reason to keep up to date with current legislation. Our club however has no assets so it matters not really.

Whatever' we need breathing space to pay outstanding liabilities so I am still confident via negotiation we can survive so we will try. Liquidation' no club. Then no payments to anyone that is the way it is.

Agreed again but we should also have a contingency were by in such emergencies the committee are allowed to act in emergencies without the need for a vote.

Quite simply the vote tonight is do you want a club yes or no

Frank, keep on it mate, i know you and John will try your best.

YES.

Unless our creditors agree to a payment schedule it matters not.

Fwiw if it went to a vote members would vote for keeping the club afloat but as the club has no assets and LISA funds do not cover the clubs liabilities the only way forward would be a payment schedule over a period of time with creditors.

Anyone not agreeing to such a schedule would get nothing as the club would have to be liquidated. Does not mean I am not sympathetic to those owed money' just a fact.

Staff wages first etc
HMRC next as they are a prefered Creditor

ie if Smiths Smelly Socks Ltd went into liquidation then the staff, get their wages, week in hands etc, first, then the HMRC get the next call on any monies, then what is left is split equally between the rest of the Creditors.

3 Words

Everybody , calm down

Not good news , but running round in circles will achieve nothing

Tommorrow , LISA needs to be told the situation , a meeting of the committee will be called

Trevor to be at the meeting to discus the options

Time is of the essence , but we are still talking days and weeks . Not hours

One thing is for certain , next year will be very hard , let's hope we are up to the challenge

Bloody glad I decided to go to the pub earlier

Who owns a company called Smiffs Smelly Socks? You could have used Long Johns Condoms or Grapple Mi Grapes pile cream.

Surely it's up to the 'skint' directors to initially stop us from 'folding', else why be a director - unless you just like the title.

Even though i am working in the morning Ste, i wish i had come with you, i have now run out of ale.

I wish I had before I got this news... some may disagree but I wanted to put it out there and I take full responsibility for that.

It has made for an interesting evening.

I am sure you were right to put the info out. There seems to be a deafening silence from all concerned with the club and has been for weeks.

Wrong mate.

Crown Preference was abolished by the Enterprise Act 2002. HMRC is an unsecured creditor like pretty well everyone else. See my post a few posts back.

Employees ARE preferential, as I said earlier too, but there are time and value upper limits.

Don't forget creditors secured by a mortgage or other fixed charge get paid out of the realisation of their security, with any shortfall being added to unsecureds. And a landlord can still distrain on goods for unpaid rent IIRC.

Please please be careful about fraudulent preferences. HMRC will be very alive to the risk, which is why they are unlikely to accept a settlement in preference to other unsecured creditors if there is any risk of reclaim by a subsequent liquidator. Remember too that HMRC (i.e. the taxpayer...) is sick and tired of sports clubs falling over, with the only two big unsecured creditors usually being them and the owner. Its hardly surprising they are being as aggressive as they currently are in this arena.