The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[jamboz]

Sevco's next set of accounts could possibly now have a big "Contingent Liabilities" section. Whyte, Green & oldco creditors lining up for a piece of the pie now. Green claiming a possible ?500k in legal fee's is just the cherry on top. [emoji4]

 

But ii is all good news for King though aye?

 

[Stuart Lyon]

Well another poster thought it was good news for King but I don't see it my self.

[jambovambo]

_{http://news.stv.tv/west-central/1329389-rangers-will-strongly-resist-charles-greens-bid-over-legal-fees/}

 

_{Rangers will 'strongly resist' Charles Green's bid over legal fees}

Edited September 24, 2015 by jambovambo

[The Gasman]

As taking on the roll of a Director of a business means you also take on certain legal responsibilities, is it usual to have something written in to personally cover you for any legal costs you may incur from your time in post..?

 

If that is the case with Rangers (and I'm asking the question, not claiming it is) then as a business they may find themselves paying for several people's legal fees for their time at Ibrox....

[The Gasman]

_{http://news.stv.tv/west-central/1329389-rangers-will-strongly-resist-charles-greens-bid-over-legal-fees/}

 

_{Rangers will 'strongly resist' Charles Green's bid over legal fees}

I need to type faster..!

 

This seems to suggest that Green may have some contractual claim (whether the claim is successful or not looks like being decided by a Court now) for legal costs - so I wonder if others may as well..?

 

If the figure of ?500,000 is at all accurate, and if it may be applicable to more than one person, it could represent a further substantial drain on the Clubs already inadequate resources....

[jambovambo]

Allegedly in Green's contract :

 

[jambovambo]

Allegedly in Green's contract :

 

(found on Twitter - look up @CemetryGates89)

[davieholt]

This implies that the insurers rather than sevco would pick up the tab?

[Footballfirst]

Allegedly in Green's contract :

 

 

I have a copy of the fully document. I think it came from CF.

[Daydream Believer]

This implies that the insurers rather than sevco would pick up the tab?

But have Sevco been paying the premiums?

 

 

Edit - Can you even imagine the phone call to the insurance company?

 

"Hi this is Dave King, I'd like insurance against legal action for all current board members and those employed in the last 6 years. Hello? Is there anyone there?" 

Edited September 24, 2015 by Daydream Believer

[alwaysthereinspirit]

If Newco say he never contacted them then who are we to disbelieve. Its not like they have previous on this kind of stuff.

I for one believe them.

[Footballfirst]

If Newco say he never contacted them then who are we to disbelieve. Its not like they have previous on this kind of stuff.

I for one believe them.

 

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/10191-dave-king-statement

 

 

 

 

STATEMENT on behalf of Rangers Chairman Dave King

 

Charles Green approached the Club prior to his arrest and demanded that we pay his legal costs in respect of his co-operation with Police Scotland in its criminal investigation into his time as an officer of the Club. 

 

I advised him that we would not do so. He was subsequently arrested and has now approached the Court to compel the Club to pay the legal costs of his defence to the criminal charges. This application will be strongly resisted.

Edited September 24, 2015 by Footballfirst

[DETTY29]

 

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/10191-dave-king-statement

 

 

 

 

 

From denial of approach to confirmation of approach in less than a day!!!

 

Even Cameron knows when to keep stoom.

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

But have Sevco been paying the premiums?

 

 

Edit - Can you even imagine the phone call to the insurance company?

 

"Hi this is Dave King, I'd like insurance against legal action for all current board members and those employed in the last 6 years. Hello? Is there anyone there?" 

You can be pretty certain that Green would have arranged cover, and kept up the premiums while he was on the board. The big question now is, have the current board kept up the premiums? If they have, Green's claim is no big problem for them. If they haven't!!! and it's in Green's contract that the club/company have to provide this cover!!!

 

If anybody thinks criminal charges are not covered by D&O insurance, have a look at this (though it is English Law)

 

http://m.legalweek.com/legal-week/blog-post/2228403/news-group-must-pay-coulson-legal-costs-implications-of-the-court-of-appeal-judgment

[alwaysthereinspirit]

 

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/10191-dave-king-statement

 

 

 

 

He he he.   As stated earlier, who are we to disbelieve?

[RobNox]

Would this insurance cover him for actions taken before he took up office?  Bear in mind, it is purchase of assets that is under review, would Charlie have been a director prior to the sale going through?  The club would still be administered by D&P at that time.  So it's hard to see how Charlie has a valid claim to cover him against actions taken prior to his appointment as a director.

[Unknown user]

Would this insurance cover him for actions taken before he took up office? Bear in mind, it is purchase of assets that is under review, would Charlie have been a director prior to the sale going through? The club would still be administered by D&P at that time. So it's hard to see how Charlie has a valid claim to cover him against actions taken prior to his appointment as a director.

He was a director of Sevco Scotland before they bought Rangers' assets and continued to be a director once they changed name as I understand it.

That would mean the alleged fraudulent activity happened while he was director of this current company, just that it had a different name at the time

[RobNox]

He was a director of Sevco Scotland before they bought Rangers' assets and continued to be a director once they changed name as I understand it.

That would mean the alleged fraudulent activity happened while he was director of this current company, just that it had a different name at the time

Right, so they may well have to stump up.  And if Rangers are intending to resist the claim, is that because they haven't got the insurance in place to cover it?  Either way, it's going to cost them money just to defend themselves against Charlie's claim.

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Right, so they may well have to stump up.  And if Rangers are intending to resist the claim, is that because they haven't got the insurance in place to cover it?  Either way, it's going to cost them money just to defend themselves against Charlie's claim.

 

 

Yeh, but it's all good news for the glib & shameless one as he'll maybe get a chance to spend some of his kids' inheritance on the lawyers fees. 

[SUTOL]

The Rangers fans must be so glad that Ashley has saved them... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RobNox]

The Rangers fans must be so glad that Ashley has saved them... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rangers fans seem to have gone a bit quiet on here

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

The Rangers fans must be so glad that Ashley has saved them...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Of that there can be no mistake"

 

[Sidsnot]

4.1.2.8 Directors? liabilities

Subject to companies legislation, every director and former director shall be

indemnified by the Company against any liability attaching to him in

connection with:

(a) civil or criminal proceedings in relation to the Company or an associated

company (other than a liability incurred in defending proceedings brought

by the Company or an associated company in which final judgment is given

against the directors);

( criminal proceedings in relation to the Company or an associated company

(other than a fine imposed in such proceedings, or a liability incurred in

defending proceedings in which the director is convicted and the conviction

is final);

© regulatory action taken by or a regulatory investigation by a regulatory authority

in relation to the Company or an associated company (unless a sum is payable

to a regulatory authority by way of a penalty in respect of non-compliance with

any requirement of a regulatory nature (however arising));

(d) any application for relief:

(i) under sections 144(3) or (4) of the 1985 Act or 661(3) or (4) of the

2006 Act (power of court to grant relief in case of acquisition of shares

by innocent nominee), or

(i) sections 727 of the 1985 Act or 1157 of the 2006 Act (general power

of court to grant relief in case of honest and reasonable conduct),

unless the court refuses to grant the director relief, and the refusal of relief

is final; or

(e) civil proceedings in relation to an occupational pension scheme of which

the Company is a trustee in respect of liability incurred in connection with

the Company?s activities as a trustee of the scheme (other than a fine

imposed in criminal proceedings, a sum payable to a regulatory authority by

way of a penalty in respect of non-compliance with any requirement of a

regulatory nature (however arising) or a liability incurred in defending

proceedings in which the director is convicted and the conviction is final).

4.1.2.9 Insurance

The directors may purchase and maintain insurance for a person who is, or was at

any time, a director, officer or employee of the Company, any company within the

Group or, any other body in which the Company is or has been interested of the

Company against any liability incurred by such persons in respect of any act or

omission in the actual or purported execution or discharge of their duties or in the

exercise or purported exercise of their powers or otherwise in relation to their

duties, powers or offices in relation to the Company or any such other company,

subsidiary undertaking or pension fund.

4.1.3 General Meetings

4.1.3.1 The Board may call general meetings whenever it thinks fit and on receipt of a

requisition of members pursuant to the Companies Acts.

4.1.3.2 An AGM shall be called by notice of at least 21 clear days. All other general

meetings shall be called by at least the minimum number of days? notice

permissible under the Companies Act.

[Armageddon]

I wouldn't get too excited, they'll be selling Danny Ings for ?50M soon ...

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

I wouldn't get too excited, they'll be selling Danny Ings for ?50M soon ...

Probably off the back of the massive Adidas deal with Dallas Coyboys tie-ins. Green really delivered on that one.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-chief-charles-green-set-1335458

[iainmac]

If the insurance premiums have been paid up to date, why would Green have to take Sevco to court? He'd surely just ring the Insurers direct & quote the policy number and they'd say "Chuckie, you're covered, old bean".

[Angus Young]

If the insurance premiums have been paid up to date, why would Green have to take Sevco to court? He'd surely just ring the Insurers direct & quote the policy number and they'd say "Chuckie, you're covered, old bean".

 

 

 The Glib liar has not paid the premiums hence his " This application will be strongly resisted " the man has no money and is a sham glib walter mitty

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

Where's CJGJ when we need him to give us the facts that prove, beyond doubt, that this claim for legal expenses by Green, is, in fact, not bad news for King and his puppets? I'd like his assurance that, should the judge make the mistake of upholding Green's claim, that the facts are that a businessman as astute as King would have ensured the necessary D&O insurance policy was in place with premiums fully paid up. I'm sure, though, he knows, as a fact, that Dave King, that man of unimpeachable character, has the wherewithall to meet Green's, and anyone else given the gift of a fulfilled contract, legal fees from his back pocket.

 

Just a thought though, surely Dave King, a man who is no stranger to the inside of a criminal court, would ensure such legal cover insurance is in place! Though I do wonder if it's cheaper to restrict the cover to named directors, and, in the interest of austerity, previous directors have been removed from the policy; now that really would be silly!

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Maybe the insurance policy premiums weren't paid long before King took over, maybe this is just another landmine left behind by Ashley & Co?

 

What really would be funny is if Craigy boy had a similar contract as well, imagine the meltdown the orcs would have with that one.  

[Unknown user]

Just been reading yesterday's daily record story on this.

I hadn't realised they're reporting that it was specifically written into his termination deal that he'd be covered if ever accused of being a criminal.

If true, the technicalities of when he was a director etc don't matter- this could really hurt them

[Angus Young]

Just been reading yesterday's daily record story on this.

I hadn't realised they're reporting that it was specifically written into his termination deal that he'd be covered if ever accused of being a criminal.

If true, the technicalities of when he was a director etc don't matter- this could really hurt them

 

 

Is it possible the Glib Liar could do " Walking Away " and leave all this mess to be sorted out by Pot Less Paul ?

[Rods]

Surely this latest claim is like pleading guilty.

 

It sounds like to me that he knew that it was a scam from the start and basically covered his back.

[hueyview]

Is it possible the Glib Liar could do " Walking Away " and leave all this mess to be sorted out by Pot Less Paul ?

Te three Bears better have plenty of porridge stored away for such an emergency

[Glamorgan Jambo]

Putting criminal as well as civil cover into D&O indemnity clauses is fairly standard as there's a whole raft of legislation where company directors can be hauled up before courts these days (health and safety, environmental to name a couple). However anything I've been involved with has always specifically excluded fraud.

 

This will all be down to whoever drafted and approved these contracts. Whether RIFC have kept up, or ever made, payments on any D&O indemnification insurance policies is irrelevant. The liability is with the company.

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

It would appear from what's in the public domain that TRFC/RIFC are contractually bound to provide an indemnity for their directors, past and present, to cover any possible civil or criminal charges. The validity of this will be decided next week in court. If TRFC/RIFC hold the required insurance cover, then there is really nothing more problematical for them than the embarrassment of having to assist their hated creator. If they have no insurance cover, or have let it lapse, then they will have to find hundreds of thousands of pounds to pay Green's legal costs should he be found innocent. If he is found guilty, it would appear he has to make any payment himself (lose his chateaux and stables). The problem for TRFC/RIFC is that they will have this contingent liability (if no insurance) over their head for some time to come, but worse than that, there is every likelihood that Green's legal team will know better than to proceed without the certainty of payment, and to ensure that, I'm sure they would seek to serve an arrestment of funds on TRFC/RIFC.

 

I would imagine that there has been some pretty frantic searching of every nook and cranny at Ibrox for an insurance policy document over the past few days...

[Tasavallan]

Surely this latest claim is like pleading guilty.

 

It sounds like to me that he knew that it was a scam from the start and basically covered his back.

Unlike everything else surrounding Oldco/Newco, whether or not Chuckles was covered under the terms of his contract with RIFC for legal costs during and after his employment by the club is easy enough to establish. However what will be interesting to find out is whether or not the club have this covered by insurance. I suspect not.

 

All these shenanigans is going to cost the glib liar dear.

[Jamdub]

Unlike everything else surrounding Oldco/Newco, whether or not Chuckles was covered under the terms of his contract with RIFC for legal costs during and after his employment by the club is easy enough to establish. However what will be interesting to find out is whether or not the club have this covered by insurance. I suspect not.

 

All these shenanigans is going to cost the glib liar dear.

 

Which would make most of Scottish football very happy......

[Angus Young]

It would appear from what's in the public domain that TRFC/RIFC are contractually bound to provide an indemnity for their directors, past and present, to cover any possible civil or criminal charges. The validity of this will be decided next week in court. If TRFC/RIFC hold the required insurance cover, then there is really nothing more problematical for them than the embarrassment of having to assist their hated creator. If they have no insurance cover, or have let it lapse, then they will have to find hundreds of thousands of pounds to pay Green's legal costs should he be found innocent. If he is found guilty, it would appear he has to make any payment himself (lose his chateaux and stables). The problem for TRFC/RIFC is that they will have this contingent liability (if no insurance) over their head for some time to come, but worse than that, there is every likelihood that Green's legal team will know better than to proceed without the certainty of payment, and to ensure that, I'm sure they would seek to serve an arrestment of funds on TRFC/RIFC.

 

I would imagine that there has been some pretty frantic searching of every nook and cranny at Ibrox for an insurance policy document over the past few days...

 

Lets wait to see what Phil ( funny second name ) has to say about the latest shenanigins at the big hoose.

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

Lets wait to see what Phil ( funny second name ) has to say about the latest shenanigins at the big hoose.

OK, I won't take any action until then

[jambovambo]

Lets wait to see what Phil ( funny second name ) has to say about the latest shenanigins at the big hoose.

Here you go ... http://linkis.com/ie/5jt0p

[RobNox]

Probably off the back of the massive Adidas deal with Dallas Coyboys tie-ins. Green really delivered on that one.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-chief-charles-green-set-1335458

 

Clearly from the pen of Jabba.  He's not able to refer to Adidas or the Dallas Cowboys without referring to them as 'giants'.  

[part_time_jambo]

Lets wait to see what Phil ( funny second name ) has to say about the latest shenanigins at the big hoose.

Is it MaCaveety?

[RobNox]

Is it MaCaveety?

Or MacCracken?

 

Edit - he has this to say on the latest development

 

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/high-maintenance-charlie/

 

Usual catch phrases, but does make the valid point that if this goes to court, then it might mean that Rangers current financial state is exposed.  Now that could be fun!

Edited September 25, 2015 by RobNox

[tcjambo]

Cant see anyway insurance policy or not that you can insure yourself against any alleged deliberate fraudulent act or for  that matter make someone else pay.

[Australis]

Or MacCracken?

 

Edit - he has this to say on the latest development

 

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/high-maintenance-charlie/

 

Usual catch phrases, but does make the valid point that if this goes to court, then it might mean that Rangers current financial state is exposed.  Now that could be fun!

 

 

His only valid point each time is that they have no bank supporting the zombies.

I wish I did not keep clicking on his site. as I probably keep giving him income.

[RobNox]

Cant see anyway insurance policy or not that you can insure yourself against any alleged deliberate fraudulent act or for  that matter make someone else pay.

Ah, but he's been to Butterfield Direct....

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-QfTKoea5Y

[SUTOL]

Cant see anyway insurance policy or not that you can insure yourself against any alleged deliberate fraudulent act or for  that matter make someone else pay.

 

It's insurance to pay the legal fee(s) not against doing the deed as it were. 

[The Gasman]

If the insurance premiums have been paid up to date, why would Green have to take Sevco to court? He'd surely just ring the Insurers direct & quote the policy number and they'd say "Chuckie, you're covered, old bean".

Whether or not Rangers took out insurance to cover their liability in this, is their problem - Chuckie has no contract with any insurer, so cannot make any claim with any insurer - his claim would be against the Club that offered him the indemnity - hence the court action.

 

[jamboz]

Whether or not Rangers took out insurance to cover their liability in this, is their problem - Chuckie has no contract with any insurer, so cannot make any claim with any insurer - his claim would be against the Club that offered him the indemnity - hence the court action.

 

Gonna get a bumper supply of popcorn

[Angus Young]

Der hun lorded it over all of us for many years cheating their way to titles and cups they told us that they were the people now they get the Karma that they deserve long may they and there poxy vile fans suffer.