- Aug 13, 2008
- 19,390
- 40,282
I hope he is! It seems crazy if we don't get the money to spend on players etc.The stadium is owned by Tottenham Hotspur limited not ENIC. Simple as that mabbut is wrong.
I hope he is! It seems crazy if we don't get the money to spend on players etc.The stadium is owned by Tottenham Hotspur limited not ENIC. Simple as that mabbut is wrong.
I might be wrong on this but I think the season levy got £6m was a one off as included some kind of bonus and last season he was back down to £3m. Obviously a very nice salary but probably in line with CEO at major companies with a revenue of £400m+. And in the big picture peanuts to the £500m odd he will make when the club is sold.
I checked to see if the uploaded document was a draft or a signed and executed s.106. if it had been a draft, then the scheme might still have been under negotiation.A Section 106 Agreement has been put up on the Harringey Goods Yard Site Planning Portal http://www.planningservices.haringey.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=326265
@davidmatzdorf is this an indication that the Planning Appeal is likely to succeed?
I checked to see if the uploaded document was a draft or a signed and executed s.106. if it had been a draft, then the scheme might still have been under negotiation.
It's not: it's fully signed-off, including by the council, and dated a week ago. Normally, that would mean it has already been approved, within the recent past. The council's legal officers would not have been authorised to sign this until the committee had already resolved to approve the scheme.
But this is a Planning Appeal against a refusal of consent. I think what has happened here is that the parties have signed off the S.106 so, if the Inspector decides to allow the appeal and approve the scheme, the council has secured the legal obligations it wants. I haven't read through the document - there may be a clause that cancels the obligations if the appeal is dismissed.
Final rebuttals are uploaded and are dated April, so I think we must be waiting for the Inspector's formal decision.
so there'll be new buildings or ?
In English please!I checked to see if the uploaded document was a draft or a signed and executed s.106. if it had been a draft, then the scheme might still have been under negotiation.
It's not: it's fully signed-off, including by the council, and dated a week ago. Normally, that would mean it has already been approved, within the recent past. The council's legal officers would not have been authorised to sign this until the committee had already resolved to approve the scheme.
But this is a Planning Appeal against a refusal of consent. I think what has happened here is that the parties have signed off the S.106 so, if the Inspector decides to allow the appeal and approve the scheme, the council has secured the legal obligations it wants. I haven't read through the document - there may be a clause that cancels the obligations if the appeal is dismissed.
Final rebuttals are uploaded and are dated April, so I think we must be waiting for the Inspector's formal decision.
Not seeing any problem there. There's not a lot of jargon in that post. What bit do you not understand?In English please!
I was simply asking for what project? More residential buildings or the hotel or ? Wasn't sure but Wine Gum kindly answered my question.How's this?
I checked to see if the uploaded document was an uncompleted draft or a finalised, signed and formally executed S.106. if it had been a draft, then the scheme might still have been under negotiation.
It's not: it's fully signed-off, including by the council, and dated a week ago. Normally, that would mean the scheme had already been approved by the council, within the recent past. The council's legal officers would not have been authorised to sign this until the committee had already resolved to approve the scheme.
But this is a Planning Appeal against a refusal of planning consent [actually, it appears that it is an appeal against the council not making a decision within the required time]. I think what has happened here is that the parties have both signed off the S.106 so, if the Planning Inspector [who handles the appeal] decides to allow the appeal and approve the scheme, the council has secured the legal obligations it wants and doesn't get stuck with nothing. I haven't read through the document - there may be a clause that cancels the S.106 obligations if the appeal is dismissed, so they can sign it without prejudicing the result of the appeal.
Final rebuttals [the last submissions to the appeal] have been uploaded and are dated April, so I think we must be waiting for the Inspector's formal decision.
There was nothing wrong with what you were saying its just that it was over my head, I didn't understand any of it. But...if I didn't know what you were saying, how do I know there was nothing wrong with it?Not seeing any problem there. There's not a lot of jargon in that post. What bit do you not understand?
[I have amplified- see below]
He's making it up isn't he! Its just nonsense.There was nothing wrong with what you were saying its just that it was over my head, I didn't understand any of it. But...if I didn't know what you were saying, how do I know there was nothing wrong with it?
Was the extended version clearer?There was nothing wrong with what you were saying its just that it was over my head, I didn't understand any of it. But...if I didn't know what you were saying, how do I know there was nothing wrong with it?
Ironically, one of the shareholders of ENIC(well in his family trusts name) is the highest paid chairman in the Premier League.
Not only that, a lot of it was backdated earnings he was entitled to from previous seasons.he received a massive bonus payment a few seasons back, and was made out by the media as the highest paid chairmen
he received a massive bonus payment a few seasons back, and was made out by the media as the highest paid chairmen
Not only that, a lot of it was backdated earnings he was entitled to from previous seasons.
Why let the truth get in the way of a good Lynch mob/click baiting/panty bunching!