The council can't (wouldn't want to anyway) take control of the smc which is a private ltd co owned by the allams. ?They do have the option of taking legal action to effectively cancel the lease agreement but I can't ever see them going down that route personally

If they don't then it's carte blanche as far as the Allams are concerned. Their tentacles would be free to extend in all directions with tenacious grip and poison.

It would be the beginning of the end for us, I truly believe.

I doubt they have the balls to fight allam over the lease as a whole, only challenging isolated breaches. We could always lease caravan park 14 times a year

What's all this? Were the terms of the agreement changed when Bartlett bought City, or what?

What changes were made?

Ill ask him next time i see him. I do beleive hes on 'our' side bit is careful in what he says

We may have to!

I don't think the council have had the stomach for this so far, either. There's the cost issue and we have no idea what the "new" SMC lease terms are. Legally unsurmountable? Plus they probably have pressure from the central Labour party who are grateful to the benefactor and don't want him rattled (played a blinder there, did ultra-conservative Assam).

But most importantly, until the Allams breached the lease agreement, the only course of action open to the council was to take over the SMC, debts and all. Obviously a non-starter.

With the actual laying of the pitch the lease terms have been broken. It is only now the council can follow the second path of termination of the contract and casting the SMC adrift complete with their own debts. I hope the council realise it's now or never. And it will be "never" for us and a lot of others under the Allam influence if they don't. They may not want to, but they now have to.

Don't get me wrong, I like and trust Mr Brady. I just hope he isn't letting himself be constrained by legal costs which are really of little consequence given the scale of the situation now. It will cost far far more if he lets this little concern prevent action. Like not wanting spend money on the reel of cotton that prevents the stitch turning into nine. Or in this case a massive gaping rent that can never be repaired.

Surely if the Planning is put in place any NEW owner would then use it. Council don't have to build anything (as a house with planning in place for extension)

Just remember there was a very BIG caveat to Allam's offer of £500k extra support. It was only offered if Labour walked away from trades union support. So what would you do: accept a promise of a "gift" from a certifiable loon but walk away from £8m+ funding from grass-roots supporters, or stick with the status quo?

The extra offer is in addition to the extra £200,000 and the extra £300,000 donations he has already made, though. He is already a significant Labour party benefactor.

You're right that the additional £500k is a no-brainer and won't happen, though.

You're a card you are, How you can equate my comments to being self congratulatory is bizarre in the extreme, All I can think is that after the council had responded making you look quite foolish, you just went looking for another front to throw insults, I am a director of the Humber Sports Partnership that fund a lot of the clubs that use the Arena, and I make a comment about "being on their side" and you liken it to "Do you hear the people sing" from Les Miserables, it seems the only person on here shouting "Look at me" is you". You really need to take Kosh's advice and leave out the personnal attacks.

Quote ="Mrs Barista"Indeed. Disappointing. www.theguardian.com/football/dav ... ett-tigers'" The article you quote doest spell out the fact Bartlett mortgaged Hull City AFC's user agreement with the SMC, not the stadium lease. So nothing to do with FC Dont forget he also sold 3 years season tickets to ticketmaster

Quote ="Mrs Barista"Indeed. Disappointing. www.theguardian.com/football/dav ... ett-tigers'" The article you quote doest spell out the fact Bartlett mortgaged Hull City AFC's user agreement with the SMC, not the stadium lease. So nothing to do with FC Dont forget he also sold 3 years season tickets to ticketmaster

Odd as i recall in one of Allams public rantings that he personally paid off the morgages on the SMC user agreement in qestion in order to save the club blah blah.

So as i undertsand, there are no morgages. CBA to drag up an article, its just too early in the morning

Do you reckon he allows Trade Unionism in his chugger factory?

I've already said I'm really pleased the council are doing their job. This is the third time I think.

Just to clarify your earlier comment, how many millions did Adam Pearson borrow against the SMC? The Guardian link posted referenced Bartlett.

Just read Stephen Brady was on Burnsy's show this morning. Any new insight?

He aint happy. The Allams are liars. Legal action going ahead for the breach of the terms of the lease.

Just that Burnsey on about goes back to council not selling the Stadium.
Brady said he never offered any money or a bid
Burnsey on about Allam still wants apology from that meeting ???

So no new insight then.

Burnsy seems to think that the Allam's will argue that it is still available for hire by other users. Which would seem a strange thing to argue as for category 2 status they need 'exclusive use'.

Burnsy's on record as saying the council should have done a deal with Allam to ensure he got the stadium. Fair to say he's in Allam's pocket, remember that press conference when he asked Burns outright whether he (Allam) had ever gone back in his word. Burns said nothing despite having a catalogue of examples to choose from. Poor from a public service broadcaster, but the football inside track has greater stock apparently.

Is the Squash tournament happening there in May?

The Allams can argue all they want... This course of action won't get them category 2 status as it just fails criteria in so many ways...

He's paying to have a temporary floor fitted for that!

Time to complain to the BBC then ...