Newham council in trouble maybe....?

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,440
#21
Also what is Borris willing to give to not have a court case hanging over the Olympics, which is 4 months away.
Also it is a bit of real estate that cost £500m.
 

Rocksuperstar

just a child getting older...
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
41,911
#22
Also what is Borris willing to give to not have a court case hanging over the Olympics, which is 4 months away.
Also it is a bit of real estate that cost £500m.
4 months away? :think:

Did i doze off for about a year? Man, work are going to be so pissed with me :shifty:
 

Booney

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
2,738
#23
Exactly. Nobody thinks anybody is going to turn around and give us the stadium now. However, we invested money, time and energies into a process that was both flawed and unfair so we want to recoup something.
 

striebs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2004
Messages
4,499
#24
Exactly. Nobody thinks anybody is going to turn around and give us the stadium now. However, we invested money, time and energies into a process that was both flawed and unfair so we want to recoup something.
So you want the taxpayer to reimburse Tottenham for a risk they factored in before deciding to make a bid ?

Is anyone else getting a bit tired of all this bailing out nonsense and companies doing business by the threat of legal action ?

Why exactly was the process flawed and unfair ? Just cos Daniel Levy couldn't get his own way ?

Hope we get stung with massive great legal feels for this .
 

Rocksuperstar

just a child getting older...
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
41,911
#25
So you want the taxpayer to reimburse Tottenham for a risk they factored in before deciding to make a bid ?

Is anyone else getting a bit tired of all this bailing out nonsense and companies doing business by the threat of legal action ?

Why exactly was the process flawed and unfair ? Just cos Daniel Levy couldn't get his own way ?

Hope we get stung with massive great legal feels for this .
I'm obviously no legal bod here, but we've spent money putting together a bid - there are suspicions that the process was flawed from the start and we end up with nothing for our money. We are obviously bummed about losing that much cash, but simple questions about the process are being ignored when it should be entirely transparent.

If it turns out we never had a prayer of getting the stadium, we wouldn't have spent X million on trying, so if the process was crooked to the point where we were on a hiding to nothing yet were not made aware of the pre-exisiting opinions of the selection committee, Newham Councils willingness to offer financial assistance and the apparent buttering up of officials in particular areas by our rival bidder.

With so many apparently unfair factors now becoming visible and no-one answering the questions they raise, surely it'd be irresponsible of us to just let that money go and accept that we've been conned and were nothing more than a side-mark to make the process complete in it's details?
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,995
#26
So you want the taxpayer to reimburse Tottenham for a risk they factored in before deciding to make a bid ?

Is anyone else getting a bit tired of all this bailing out nonsense and companies doing business by the threat of legal action ?

Why exactly was the process flawed and unfair ? Just cos Daniel Levy couldn't get his own way ?

Hope we get stung with massive great legal feels for this .
It doesn't seem like we're taking anyone to court, we just want to have a look at some of the processes behind the bidding process to be confident nothing untoward went on. Sadly it looks like Newham are refusing to talk to us leaving us little option but to apply for the court to force them to come clean.

Personally I think it's pretty odd that Newham haven't just complied with our request and then it would all be over with. Unless they've something to hide of course...
 

brasil_spur

SC Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
8,196
#27
So you want the taxpayer to reimburse Tottenham for a risk they factored in before deciding to make a bid ?
No we want Tottenham to be reimbursed if indeed the whole decision process was rigged in West Hams favour to start with, rather than it being a proper democratic process.

Is anyone else getting a bit tired of all this bailing out nonsense and companies doing business by the threat of legal action ?
Not really, it's how the world has been operating for the best part of a hundred years now. Without legal consequences companies and governments could do whatever they pleased.

Why exactly was the process flawed and unfair ? Just cos Daniel Levy couldn't get his own way ?
Well that's what we're trying to find out here. Presumably the above mentioned 39 gifts and lack of proper distribution of documents prior to a decision being taken, if both true, would make the process flawed and unfair.

Hope we get stung with massive great legal feels for this .
Brilliant, what a great idea, let's hope our club looses money.... :roll:
 

Hoowl

Dr wHo(owl)
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
6,513
#29
Haringay are desperate to keep us so following this logic why don't newham want two football clubs in the borough?
 

$hoguN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
21,339
#30
Haringay are desperate to keep us so following this logic why don't newham want two football clubs in the borough?
Possibly as it would be detrimental to West Ham and alot of the council are West Ham fans
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
17,256
#31
I don't know anything about Newham Council, but given your above statement, why is the whole place suck a pike hole?
Historical, it always has been and it's not what the place is like it's how the council deals with it.

A couple of other points of note with regard to Newham Council. The leader of the council has declared that he has received 39 gifts from West Ham FC over the past 3 years. I have not seen the nature of the gifts but even 39 lots of match tickets adds up to a few thousand pounds.

There was also an article on the BBC website before the Newham Council vote about the guarantees (or lack of them) for the loan. It was suggested that if West Ham were to be relegated and go into administration, the council would not be indemnified for any losses it may suffer. I have not seen any subsequent articles on this issue but if true it would also warrant a judicial review.
The Mayor is a season ticket holder at West Ham, as are a number of local councillors(Haringey take note:evil:) and the gifts were the occasions when he accepted an invitaion from the board to hospitality drinks after games, nothing sinister in it but the Mayor was scrupulous in declaring every one something that some fair minded people may think he should be praised for not reprimanded.

As I understand it the loan is underwritten by Gold and Sullivan personally.
 

Wiener

SC Supporter
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
1,096
#32
Can anyone explain what we are trying to get out of this? I don't mean putting pressure on Boris but what the judicial review itself would mean for Spurs? Are we trying to find out if the loan is legal or what? If it was given through improper channels what would that mean for West Hams bid?
I think that's the most question marks I've put in a paragraph in my life but if anyone can give a fuller explanation I'd much appreciate it.
I believe Levy wants to make sure that the commitment to keep the athletics track is legally binding. Otherwise there would be nothing stopping West Ham from implementing Levy's plan a few years down the road once the financial inviability of the current plan becomes clear. The reason why this is relevant to us is that an Abramovich II would find West Ham an attractive prospect and we would have another club in London with the more financial muscle than us as we struggle to increase capacity. Another good reason of course would be to stop Gold and Sullivan from making a killing.
 

Achap

Active Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
492
#34
I had previously wondered why Westfield had backed the West Ham/Newham bid for the Olympic Stadium. It didn't seem on the surface to affect them either way, as they could presumably bid for some of the construction work whoever won. It could also be claimed that a top Premiership club and entertainment consortium would provide the higher footfall that is considered essential for the success of their Stratford development - as opposed to a potentially Championship club and athletics.

However, they have got the nod for a large casino in one of their malls - involving no further regeneration for the area, and presumably very much lower costs to them - as opposed to the huge, £250million regeneration proposed by a competitor for Great Eastern Quays. So Westfield's backing of West Ham/Newham Council now makes more sense, although having said that, they couldn't have known about the decision in advance as it was apparently taken in an open and transparent process behind closed doors.

'This is London' describes the rival bids in more detail:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...e-challenged-over-stratford-city-mall-site.do
 

Hoowl

Dr wHo(owl)
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
6,513
#35
London 2012 Olympics: Tottenham's stadium row threatens to derail 2017 World Championships bid


There are growing concerns within government that Tottenham Hotspur's legal challenges over the Olympic Stadium could derail London's chances of staging the World Athletics Championships for the second time in less than a year.
Up in the air: the Olympic Stadium talks has been stalled by the Spurs legal challenge Photo: GETTY IMAGES
By Paul Kelso 6:30AM BST 20 Apr 2011 Follow Paul Kelso on Twitter

Comment

Spurs and Leyton Orient are mounting a number of challenges to West Ham's selection as preferred bidder, a process that could delay a binding agreement over the Olympic Stadium into the autumn. If that is the case London may not be able to proceed with its bid for the 2017 World Athletics Championships, final bids for which have to be lodged at the end of August. The legal challenges have already stalled negotiations between the Olympic Park Legacy Company and West Ham, which were scheduled to be completed by the end of last month. The potential impact on an athletics bid is a cause of irritation in government, and there is a suspicion that Tottenham may use the issue as leverage in their search for financial assistance for a new ground.

Tottenham insist they are simply keeping their options open and pursuing all avenues to ensure the club can move to the new ground that is crucial to their development. As well as appealing against the Stratford decision, they are examining ways of making their original stadium development at Northumberland Park more affordable, and looking at alternative sites in Haringey.


Telegraph Sport can disclose that a site near Tottenham Hale station has emerged as the leading alternative location, with sources suggesting it is being looked at "very seriously". Crucially, the site has better transport links than White Hart Lane and the Northumberland Park site, with a Victoria Line tube station and overground rail links to the north. Last October, UK Athletics had to withdraw its bid for the 2015 World Championships because, had Tottenham been selected to take on the stadium, the running track would have been removed.

Following West Ham's selection as preferred bidder by the Olympic Park, Legacy Company in February however, UKA focused on winning the 2017 event. Facing well-funded opposition from Doha, it has received government support, and held a series of meetings with International Association of Athletics Federations president Lamine Diack in London this month. UKA and the Government will not proceed with a bid unless they have legal certainty over the stadium, however, as the reputational damage of withdrawing would be too great. In 2001, Britain pulled out of hosting the 2005 event following the Picketts Lock fiasco – the Government withdrew its support for the £87million national athletics stadium – and there is no appetite for a repeat.

The issue is particularly sensitive for Government as securing athletics' showpiece event would help justify the decision to award the stadium to West Ham, who, unlike Spurs, pledged to retain the running track. With doubts over the long-term viability of a football ground with a track, a meaningful athletics legacy would counter criticism of the process and the final decision. Any delay could also impact on the future ambitions of London 2012 chairman Lord Coe, who is expected to stand for election as IAAF president at some stage.

Spurs are seeking judicial review of Newham Council's decision to lend West Ham £40 million for the stadium project, and are considering a similar challenge against OPLC, central government and London mayor Boris Johnson over the decision to select West Ham as preferred bidder. Orient have commenced judicial review proceedings against all four parties. Spurs chairman Daniel Levy has held discussions with sports minister Hugh Robertson over ways in which government might help the club, but meaningful talks may be harder to sustain with the threat of judicial review in the air. The prospect of causing political embarrassment is clearly a card Levy could play as he seeks to maintain pressure on Johnson to provide assistance for a new 60,000-seat stadium. Certainly there is resentment at White Hart Lane at the process. Levy believes that he was encouraged to bid by Johnson and understood Spurs had an even chance of success, only to find that the process was weighted against them.

Spurs believe that the regeneration benefits of a new stadium development mean they ought to receive financial assistance, and can point to Newham's loan to West Ham, secured at preferential government rates, as evidence of the support they have not had from Haringey. The club, backed by local MP David Lammy, are pressing for Tottenham to be declared an Enterprise Zone by Johnson, a move that could open up tax and financial incentives for the Northumberland Park development. The benefits may not be as great to the club hopes however as Enterprise Zones are intended to encourage new business rather than create new opportunities for existing concerns.

Tottenham and Orient are not the only ones challenging Newham Council over its decisions relating to regeneration of the borough. A casino developer on Tuesday launched a judicial review of a separate decision. City and Eastern Limited was one of three bidders for a casino licence in Newham but after a tender process that C&E argues was opaque, the licence was awarded to Aspers. A council spokesman said: "The decision-making process was robust and fair."
 

michaelden

Knight of the Fat Fanny
Joined
Aug 13, 2004
Messages
20,628
#36
surely there is so much smoke surrounding the OPLC and Newham that they must call the tender award null & void and restart the process in a more open & accountable manner?
 

Rocksuperstar

just a child getting older...
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
41,911
#37
surely there is so much smoke surrounding the OPLC and Newham that they must call the tender award null & void and restart the process in a more open & accountable manner?
It is looking more and more spurious a process the longer it drags on, huh? Seems everyone and their wife has a valid question to ask, yet get no answer.

If the process was entirely fair and involved no slight of hand or tomfoolery then why are the powers that were involved being so coy about it all?
 

michaelden

Knight of the Fat Fanny
Joined
Aug 13, 2004
Messages
20,628
#38
yip. I think that this will go 1 of 2 ways, it gets retendered, or most likely, a closed door committee look at the tender process and green flag it saying all was above board
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
17,256
#40
Interesting sentence here:-

"Any delay could also impact on the future ambitions of London 2012 chairman Lord Coe, who is expected to stand for election as IAAF president at some stage."

As I said at the time of the decision, to ensure his future senior position in the Olympic organisation Lord Coe had to deliver the running track in the stadium going forward, he did but he did it at the expense of athletics in this country.

Still it's nice to know that every delay puts back the next possible world championships again which means it puts back the day when West Ham can demolish the stadium and rebuild it without the running track as they have always intended.
 
Top