Good question!

Complicated answer in this case!

Blah blah blah all garbage someone has cocked up and now we are filled with garbage. In simple terms there was no contract about a ground been built York court just got what they wanted and we haven't got anything in writing Dumb and fatal error.

Pointless waste of oxygen

Wow, what an insightful individual you are. We certainly could do with someone of your intelect fighting this with us. Please PM me as I'd love to meet with you in person and you can let us know where we are going wrong and how we can fight this to a winning conclusion.

With you by our side we cannot fail and we WILL get a new ground before Cas.

No chance of that ever happening.

Keep up the good fight SC, its not over yet ...

[url=http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/latest-news/top-stories/plan-to-revamp-wakefield-wildcats-stadium-rumbles-on-1-6801645YEP Story[/url

The clubs position is that they will play at either venue - whichever can be delivered with the right facilities! I don't think we're in a position to write off either opportunity!

On and on we go.....

The phrases 'fall guy' and 'stitched up' spring to mind.
We will play at either site quite happily. The club has no particularly weight in this agreement. The deal is between the council and developer and then the stadium trust on which I am merely invited as an observer. Think someone has either been a little naughty or mischievous with this one

So is that Rodders being misquoted or just getting it wrong and adding weight to the premise we don't want NM anyway?

Is this confirmed as a up to date quote from Sir Rodney Walker? If so at least we know what we are doing and what we have to do.

Reading the article and the post from Michael Carter, whilst the club don't have a preference, the trust see BV as a cheaper, more viable option.

[iSir Rodney said: “At the moment the club has decided they would rather see the refurbishment of Belle Vue rather than wait for a new stadium at Newmarket. Everyone is focussed on trying to get possession of Belle Vue, which is presently in the hands of a bank following a previous administration.[/i

That doesn't read to me like the club will do either but now want to stay at BV. Yet that is not the case? So either SRW is going out on a limb to try and secure at least something because he knows NM is dead and gone or he has got it wrong which will play right into the council & yorkcourts hands by saying in the press we don't want NM now anyway. Bit of a shambles really.

[iSir Rodney has said if Belle Vue was redeveloped, York Court has agreed to help fund that project instead of helping fund the new stadium.[/i

As for the part that Yorkcourt have agreed to pay towards the refurb then i'm not sure that is the case either is it which is the problem?!

And anyway doesn't any refurb of BV really depend on getting hold of the gym and superbowl site as well? All added costs which mean there will be less to actually spend of doing the place up which lets be honest ain't gonna be cheap. Fingers crossed something comes off but i'll believe it when i see it.

Daddycool has just said loud and clear he has been stitched up.

Rodders has also said in that article exactly what he wanted to say.
Its also strange that the developer hasn't the funds to deliver NM but can find money to deliver a revamped Belle Vue.
No mention of a dodgy 106 either.

Poor old developer he has used the promises of building a stadium at Newmarket to get the wider planning gain he wanted and
has now realised that it will cost him too much !!!

That suggests there was no method behind all of this - which I find very hard to believe.

Someone posted earlier that the company which signed the 106 agreement has since been wound up - if that's the case, it indicates that there was a plan all along to renege on the agreement.

I'm sending a brief outline of this case to Private Eye this weekend - they love anything to do with bent councils and dodgy companies.

If we were just to let this rumble on then we will get nothing at all and Michael Carter will be set up to be the scapegoat. You can see the outcome - "We've been unable to secure Belle Vue because of issues with the bank and the Receiver and because the Club told us that they did not want to move to Newmarket there was no point pursuing it without an anchor tenant so that opportunity has now gone. We are sorry but we did our best and had the Club indicated they wanted to go to Newmarket we could have delivered it but it all too late now. It's all Michael Carter's fault."

The Club have been manipulated and pushed to redeveloping Belle Vue and told its the only option and then its announced that Michael Carter WANTS to stay at Belle Vue. I've know for sometime after speaking with Michael that that is not true and now you've seen it on here. The Club have no preference and are equally happy to move to Newmarket or play in redeveloped Belle Vue. Someone has been a touch mischievous here and I'm being kind in saying mischievous..

We have to make it clear that we want to see a Community Stadium delivered at Newmarket as agreed following the planning inquiry and will only consider redeveloping Belle Vue provided the Stadium Trust are given freehold title to all the land and provided with adequate funding to provide a quality redeveloped stadium.

I believe the Council have the power to make something positive of this but unfortunately I have to question their desire.

So Rodney Walker is working against us now as well?

Don't know if the company who signed the Section 106 Agreement has been wound up or not but there has been changes in the Directors of the company.

If there was always an intent never to deliver on the Section 106 agreement then to my untrained legal eye that sounds like fraud.

As regards Ed Balls. I know he has a lot of faults but at least he has replied to me on the two occasions I wrote to him. In the first case he actually resolved the matter. So maybe not wasted if you do write to him.

I think Leeds Council were against the industrial development more than the stadium as it upsets their plans for the lower Aire Valley but I may be wrong.

I think there were other reasons but certainly that was one of them in my opinion.

See my earlier post

There are several 'Yorkcourt' companies the main stay are Colin Mackie and a guy called Jones. He is the son of the Jones and crecraft organisation that owned all the amusement arcades in Wakfield. These two are no longer involved with the company as dircetors that signed the 106. That company is left in the ownership of the Shipley brothers who I think have a lot of their money from bingo halls.

However Jones and Mackie have set up a new company and I think that is the one that applied for newcold planning.

I am sure if you start to dig really deep you will find many interesting links and avenues to explore.

Glad to have you on board mate hope you get some interest from Private Eye.

Any authority looking to prove wrongdoing will easily prove a link between the company that signed the 106 agreement and any other faux company set up by the same Directors. In fact, the more convoluted it gets the more it looks like they've planned to act improperly.

Hard to say, I have also been told that it is quite common to open and dissolve companies in the development world. There is certainly nothing illegal in what they are doing. According to Sir Rodney he is quite comfortable in the belief he will get the millions of pounds he
requires out of these people in order to buy and redevelop Belle Vue.

Let's hope SRW can do exactly that because this will be a one time deal and if we don't get enough to totally revamp the stadium then it'll be 50 years before we can try again.

Ok say who's stitched him up?
If Sir Rodney said: “At the moment the club has decided they would rather see the refurbishment of Belle Vue rather than wait for a new stadium at Newmarket..."
Then it would appear it is him if MC has not said that and does not think that.

Yes and in order to do that the stadium land has to go through planning in order to have its use changed and value increased.
Once that happens its the point of no return. Then if the money is not paid towards BV or the land of BV and superbowl are bought by someone else, there is no going back. We will then end up with nothing and poor old MC will get the blame for wanting to do this.

This scheme of Sir Rodney has been around for several months. It is a non starter without ownership of BV and superbowl. there has been more than enough time to secure these if the scheme was genuine and so far this has not been done.