Omar Khan: I am owed £38,500 for Bradford Bulls bills

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Omar Khan Omar Khan

Bradford Bulls’ owner Omar Khan says administrators of the defunct former outfit owe him £38,500 for bills he paid before he saved the club from the brink of liquidation.

Club honorary chairman Gerry Sutcliffe said the restaurant boss was in dispute with administrators The P&A Partnership over money he says he paid towards pension contributions, flights and wages from before he took over the Super League side on August 31 last year.

The Telegraph & Argus reported on Saturday how both parties are in dispute over who owed who cash and that it had led to Mr Khan delaying the final £25,000 installment of his £150,000 payment for the club by two months.

A progress report for creditors, dated January 28, stated the new OK Bulls company owes £15,200 for expenses incurred by the administrators for the club’s home game against Hull FC the day after Mr Khan took over.

But former Sports Minister Mr Sutcliffe said Mr Khan had been left out of pocket after paying pension contributions amounting to £13,500, an August wage bill of £13,000 and flights for overseas players costing £12,000 – totalling £38,500.

A meeting had been due to be held between Mr Khan, the Bradford South MP and the administrators to discuss the payments on Monday, but it was postponed.

Mr Sutcliffe said he was keen for the meeting to be rearranged as soon as possible so both parties could reach an “amicable” resolution.

“We want to come to a sensible agreement. We know the administrators have a job to do, but it’s got to be a fair settlement,” he said.

“We are talking about a substantial sum of money and this needs to be resolved as soon as possible.

“The administrators are getting substantial pay and need to recognise that we are a new business.

“We want to resolve this amicably, but we’re not going to roll over. There are questions to be asked.”

Joint administrator Brendan Guilfoyle, of The P&A Partnership, which has billed for £288,631 of work since Bradford Bulls Holdings went into administration, was not available for comment last night.

However, he has previously confirmed a meeting would be held to discuss the “apportionment of things on either side of the takeover”.

Comments (45)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:15am Wed 13 Feb 13

Prycey says...

£288k for admin work. Not a bad pay-out if you can get it. Doesn’t that mean he was paid more than Omar paid for the club? The previous chairmen Caisley and Hood have a lot to answer for. Thank goodness Omar had the nerve to save the club and give us another chance.
£288k for admin work. Not a bad pay-out if you can get it. Doesn’t that mean he was paid more than Omar paid for the club? The previous chairmen Caisley and Hood have a lot to answer for. Thank goodness Omar had the nerve to save the club and give us another chance. Prycey
  • Score: 0

9:22am Wed 13 Feb 13

tyker2 says...

I have always said that the sale of the lease had some undertones about how desperate the clubs finances were
I have always said that the sale of the lease had some undertones about how desperate the clubs finances were tyker2
  • Score: 0

9:33am Wed 13 Feb 13

Sheffieldbull says...

"Joint administrator Brendan Guilfoyle, of The P&A Partnership, which has billed for £288,631 of work since Bradford Bulls Holdings went into administration, was not available for comment last night."

Well well well, some things never change! £288k for a service where the main 'player' doesn't use voicemail (his admission) and no doubt he bills the service of his PA, who obviously cannot contact him either - good work if you can get it eh? Anyone who witnessed Guilfoyle's performance at the Guide Post Hotel would undoubtedly have to count their fingers, if there were unfortunate enough to shake his hand.
Shark in a suit!
"Joint administrator Brendan Guilfoyle, of The P&A Partnership, which has billed for £288,631 of work since Bradford Bulls Holdings went into administration, was not available for comment last night." Well well well, some things never change! £288k for a service where the main 'player' doesn't use voicemail (his admission) and no doubt he bills the service of his PA, who obviously cannot contact him either - good work if you can get it eh? Anyone who witnessed Guilfoyle's performance at the Guide Post Hotel would undoubtedly have to count their fingers, if there were unfortunate enough to shake his hand. Shark in a suit! Sheffieldbull
  • Score: 0

9:53am Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

So he took over now he wants money back ?
With the akbars money and such did he actually pay for anything for the club ?
Viking used to sing we're in the money but does not look like it thus far.
Maybe a payday loan from Provident will tie him over ?
So he took over now he wants money back ? With the akbars money and such did he actually pay for anything for the club ? Viking used to sing we're in the money but does not look like it thus far. Maybe a payday loan from Provident will tie him over ? wembley bound
  • Score: 0

10:39am Wed 13 Feb 13

Potter for the sack says...

I'll be putting my £100 bill into Guiltyfoil for my contribution!
I'll be putting my £100 bill into Guiltyfoil for my contribution! Potter for the sack
  • Score: 0

11:04am Wed 13 Feb 13

Thee Voice of Reason says...

£288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it.

I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k.
£288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it. I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k. Thee Voice of Reason
  • Score: 0

11:24am Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

These lot won't see that TVOR.
One eyed myopic lot.
These lot won't see that TVOR. One eyed myopic lot. wembley bound
  • Score: 0

12:31pm Wed 13 Feb 13

tyker2 says...

if you are owed money:sue him but make sure you have everything documented:why would someone pay the administrators expenses in any event?
if you are owed money:sue him but make sure you have everything documented:why would someone pay the administrators expenses in any event? tyker2
  • Score: 0

12:34pm Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

I think its very rich coming from OK about someone owing HIM money.
I think its very rich coming from OK about someone owing HIM money. wembley bound
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Bone_idle18 says...

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
£288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it.

I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k.
£1.5 million debt, that's small change compare to what city owed it's creditors isn't it? How much of that did they pay back?

so, before you start taking the moral high ground, consider the background of your own club.
[quote][p][bold]Thee Voice of Reason[/bold] wrote: £288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it. I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k.[/p][/quote]£1.5 million debt, that's small change compare to what city owed it's creditors isn't it? How much of that did they pay back? so, before you start taking the moral high ground, consider the background of your own club. Bone_idle18
  • Score: 0

1:01pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Wipsi says...

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
£288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it. I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k.
Even more stray simpletons than usual on here today,must be from the same kennels,walkies ??
[quote][p][bold]Thee Voice of Reason[/bold] wrote: £288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it. I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k.[/p][/quote]Even more stray simpletons than usual on here today,must be from the same kennels,walkies ?? Wipsi
  • Score: 0

1:03pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Steam Pigs says...

Wipsi wrote:
Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
£288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it. I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k.
Even more stray simpletons than usual on here today,must be from the same kennels,walkies ??
you are as bad!! you inadvertently encourage them by responding!!!

JUST IGNORE THEM
[quote][p][bold]Wipsi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thee Voice of Reason[/bold] wrote: £288k to erase £1.5m worth of debt. Thats not a bad deal when you look at it. I'd snap someones hand off if they said this £150k mortgage would only cost me £28k.[/p][/quote]Even more stray simpletons than usual on here today,must be from the same kennels,walkies ??[/p][/quote]you are as bad!! you inadvertently encourage them by responding!!! JUST IGNORE THEM Steam Pigs
  • Score: 0

1:30pm Wed 13 Feb 13

bullybullman says...

Brenda Tinfoil is a crook ! thank the good lord we have buisness men running the club. Dont let them get away with it Omar ! I wonder how much Shadey Caisley got out of this.

Expose them Omar for what they are.
Brenda Tinfoil is a crook ! thank the good lord we have buisness men running the club. Dont let them get away with it Omar ! I wonder how much Shadey Caisley got out of this. Expose them Omar for what they are. bullybullman
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Avro says...

The honeymoon was short lived and how long before the retribution kicks in?.
The honeymoon was short lived and how long before the retribution kicks in?. Avro
  • Score: 0

1:34pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Avro says...

wembley bound wrote:
I think its very rich coming from OK about someone owing HIM money.
Indeed, what about the creditors who lost out a **** sight more than 38.5k
[quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: I think its very rich coming from OK about someone owing HIM money.[/p][/quote]Indeed, what about the creditors who lost out a **** sight more than 38.5k Avro
  • Score: 0

1:37pm Wed 13 Feb 13

bullybullman says...

When you supply a company on any notice of pay be it 28 days 60 days whatever you take the risk. What happened with the previous board has nothing to do with OK Bulls.

A caterer who shall remain nameless waited 3 months to be paid yet continued to supply ! who`s to blame.
All he does is winge to this day.

Omar should be respected for what he has done and not accused or berated imo.
When you supply a company on any notice of pay be it 28 days 60 days whatever you take the risk. What happened with the previous board has nothing to do with OK Bulls. A caterer who shall remain nameless waited 3 months to be paid yet continued to supply ! who`s to blame. All he does is winge to this day. Omar should be respected for what he has done and not accused or berated imo. bullybullman
  • Score: 0

1:46pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Sheffieldbull says...

Avro wrote:
wembley bound wrote:
I think its very rich coming from OK about someone owing HIM money.
Indeed, what about the creditors who lost out a **** sight more than 38.5k
Why don't you pay them then Avro? Ridiculous comment? Well, you started it!

Which bit can you NOT understand.. hang on, I'll buy some crayons and draw you a picture

Bit like blaming Air traffic controllers for Pilot error.... but you'll not understand that would you? Ask TVOR to explain it, he's on your level
[quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: I think its very rich coming from OK about someone owing HIM money.[/p][/quote]Indeed, what about the creditors who lost out a **** sight more than 38.5k[/p][/quote]Why don't you pay them then Avro? Ridiculous comment? Well, you started it! Which bit can you NOT understand.. hang on, I'll buy some crayons and draw you a picture Bit like blaming Air traffic controllers for Pilot error.... but you'll not understand that would you? Ask TVOR to explain it, he's on your level Sheffieldbull
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Steam Pigs says...

bullybullman wrote:
When you supply a company on any notice of pay be it 28 days 60 days whatever you take the risk. What happened with the previous board has nothing to do with OK Bulls.

A caterer who shall remain nameless waited 3 months to be paid yet continued to supply ! who`s to blame.
All he does is winge to this day.

Omar should be respected for what he has done and not accused or berated imo.
well said!!!
[quote][p][bold]bullybullman[/bold] wrote: When you supply a company on any notice of pay be it 28 days 60 days whatever you take the risk. What happened with the previous board has nothing to do with OK Bulls. A caterer who shall remain nameless waited 3 months to be paid yet continued to supply ! who`s to blame. All he does is winge to this day. Omar should be respected for what he has done and not accused or berated imo.[/p][/quote]well said!!! Steam Pigs
  • Score: 0

2:15pm Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it.
If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ?
Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )
Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it. If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ? Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes ) wembley bound
  • Score: 0

2:29pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Sheffieldbull says...

wembley bound wrote:
Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it.
If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ?
Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )
Glad you asked thicko, NO! I'd expect the NEW builder I'd hired to finish the job for NOWT! After all, I've already paid haven't I? does that answer the idiots question?

Salford were NOT in Administration Dumbo - you really are damaged goods ain't you?
[quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it. If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ? Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )[/p][/quote]Glad you asked thicko, NO! I'd expect the NEW builder I'd hired to finish the job for NOWT! After all, I've already paid haven't I? does that answer the idiots question? Salford were NOT in Administration Dumbo - you really are damaged goods ain't you? Sheffieldbull
  • Score: 0

2:57pm Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

Salford new owner paid out to all who were owed and has a clean conscience.
He could have waited till they went into admin but chose not to.
You would pay a builder and when he left without completing job you would pay another to finish it ? That's why you look a trifle dumb and are a laughing stock not only in your own house but on here too.
Only good point with the builders is that there is no houses worth over 100k down there so bill should not be much.
Salford new owner paid out to all who were owed and has a clean conscience. He could have waited till they went into admin but chose not to. You would pay a builder and when he left without completing job you would pay another to finish it ? That's why you look a trifle dumb and are a laughing stock not only in your own house but on here too. Only good point with the builders is that there is no houses worth over 100k down there so bill should not be much. wembley bound
  • Score: 0

4:03pm Wed 13 Feb 13

olicanabull says...

Creditors of the former owners can be paid out of funds garnered by the administrators from the assets of the previous company. Unfortunately if there are insufficient assets to pay all the creditors they can be paid nothing or only a proportion of what they are owed.
The new owner who takes over from the administrators has no obligation to the creditors of the former company. He may choose to pay out of good will but if he hasn't got the funds there is no legal obligation for him to pay. And why should he? His first priority was to save the club as a going concern. Mr Khan deserves praise, not blame, for that. I think the administrators were charging something in the region of £170 per hour for work done. Perhaps criticism, if there is any, should be directed at them for what many people would consider inflated rates. But maybe that is the norm for accountants and lawyers. Let's hope this dispute is resolved satisfactorily - it should surely be possible to work out who paid for what and when. I just hope it doesn't alienate Mr. Khan from the whole business.
Creditors of the former owners can be paid out of funds garnered by the administrators from the assets of the previous company. Unfortunately if there are insufficient assets to pay all the creditors they can be paid nothing or only a proportion of what they are owed. The new owner who takes over from the administrators has no obligation to the creditors of the former company. He may choose to pay out of good will but if he hasn't got the funds there is no legal obligation for him to pay. And why should he? His first priority was to save the club as a going concern. Mr Khan deserves praise, not blame, for that. I think the administrators were charging something in the region of £170 per hour for work done. Perhaps criticism, if there is any, should be directed at them for what many people would consider inflated rates. But maybe that is the norm for accountants and lawyers. Let's hope this dispute is resolved satisfactorily - it should surely be possible to work out who paid for what and when. I just hope it doesn't alienate Mr. Khan from the whole business. olicanabull
  • Score: 0

4:04pm Wed 13 Feb 13

olicanabull says...

Creditors of the former owners can be paid out of funds garnered by the administrators from the assets of the previous company. Unfortunately if there are insufficient assets to pay all the creditors they can be paid nothing or only a proportion of what they are owed.
The new owner who takes over from the administrators has no obligation to the creditors of the former company. He may choose to pay out of good will but if he hasn't got the funds there is no legal obligation for him to pay. And why should he? His first priority was to save the club as a going concern. Mr Khan deserves praise, not blame, for that. I think the administrators were charging something in the region of £170 per hour for work done. Perhaps criticism, if there is any, should be directed at them for what many people would consider inflated rates. But maybe that is the norm for accountants and lawyers. Let's hope this dispute is resolved satisfactorily - it should surely be possible to work out who paid for what and when. I just hope it doesn't alienate Mr. Khan from the whole business.
Creditors of the former owners can be paid out of funds garnered by the administrators from the assets of the previous company. Unfortunately if there are insufficient assets to pay all the creditors they can be paid nothing or only a proportion of what they are owed. The new owner who takes over from the administrators has no obligation to the creditors of the former company. He may choose to pay out of good will but if he hasn't got the funds there is no legal obligation for him to pay. And why should he? His first priority was to save the club as a going concern. Mr Khan deserves praise, not blame, for that. I think the administrators were charging something in the region of £170 per hour for work done. Perhaps criticism, if there is any, should be directed at them for what many people would consider inflated rates. But maybe that is the norm for accountants and lawyers. Let's hope this dispute is resolved satisfactorily - it should surely be possible to work out who paid for what and when. I just hope it doesn't alienate Mr. Khan from the whole business. olicanabull
  • Score: 0

4:12pm Wed 13 Feb 13

bartsbull says...

Omar purchased the Bulls from the administrator

So he has no obligation to pay any creditors that were owed money from the previous company

It is the previous company that owe money to the crediters these are the people that need to be brought to the fore

We the fans the players and staff were taken for a ride by this crew

They deserve all that will come there way when all this mess is sorted out

I and many others are glad that Omar had the heart and the passion to save the Bulls long live the Bulls
Omar purchased the Bulls from the administrator So he has no obligation to pay any creditors that were owed money from the previous company It is the previous company that owe money to the crediters these are the people that need to be brought to the fore We the fans the players and staff were taken for a ride by this crew They deserve all that will come there way when all this mess is sorted out I and many others are glad that Omar had the heart and the passion to save the Bulls long live the Bulls bartsbull
  • Score: 0

4:52pm Wed 13 Feb 13

fraternise says...

olicanabull wrote:
Creditors of the former owners can be paid out of funds garnered by the administrators from the assets of the previous company. Unfortunately if there are insufficient assets to pay all the creditors they can be paid nothing or only a proportion of what they are owed.
The new owner who takes over from the administrators has no obligation to the creditors of the former company. He may choose to pay out of good will but if he hasn't got the funds there is no legal obligation for him to pay. And why should he? His first priority was to save the club as a going concern. Mr Khan deserves praise, not blame, for that. I think the administrators were charging something in the region of £170 per hour for work done. Perhaps criticism, if there is any, should be directed at them for what many people would consider inflated rates. But maybe that is the norm for accountants and lawyers. Let's hope this dispute is resolved satisfactorily - it should surely be possible to work out who paid for what and when. I just hope it doesn't alienate Mr. Khan from the whole business.
That about sums it up olican.

Explaining this to the likes of those who only wish the Bulls harm is a waste of time, mainly because all they want to do is to latch onto something that is controversial, which takes the focus away from their own inadequacies as human beings.

Leave them to it, they are largely a waste of space.
[quote][p][bold]olicanabull[/bold] wrote: Creditors of the former owners can be paid out of funds garnered by the administrators from the assets of the previous company. Unfortunately if there are insufficient assets to pay all the creditors they can be paid nothing or only a proportion of what they are owed. The new owner who takes over from the administrators has no obligation to the creditors of the former company. He may choose to pay out of good will but if he hasn't got the funds there is no legal obligation for him to pay. And why should he? His first priority was to save the club as a going concern. Mr Khan deserves praise, not blame, for that. I think the administrators were charging something in the region of £170 per hour for work done. Perhaps criticism, if there is any, should be directed at them for what many people would consider inflated rates. But maybe that is the norm for accountants and lawyers. Let's hope this dispute is resolved satisfactorily - it should surely be possible to work out who paid for what and when. I just hope it doesn't alienate Mr. Khan from the whole business.[/p][/quote]That about sums it up olican. Explaining this to the likes of those who only wish the Bulls harm is a waste of time, mainly because all they want to do is to latch onto something that is controversial, which takes the focus away from their own inadequacies as human beings. Leave them to it, they are largely a waste of space. fraternise
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Wed 13 Feb 13

-HCK3R- says...

wembley bound wrote:
Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it.
If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ?
Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )
Maybe the threat of losing six points and the loss of sky money made it more worthwhile for Salfords debts to be taken over....
[quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it. If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ? Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )[/p][/quote]Maybe the threat of losing six points and the loss of sky money made it more worthwhile for Salfords debts to be taken over.... -HCK3R-
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Wed 13 Feb 13

billybobbull says...

I think maybe the parasites have met their match and will likely cave in to avoid further reputation damage.
Omar Khan is no angel, nor is he daft. White professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years, it takes someone like Khan to turn the tables, with different thought procees to put them in their place. Guilfoyle will be happy with his share and fuming he might lose this battle.......but eh...sometimes you have to realise the opposition is more intelligent and plays by hs own rules and wins.

Let's focus on the rugby please and not rake over last years ashes.
Trust in OK. COYB.
I think maybe the parasites have met their match and will likely cave in to avoid further reputation damage. Omar Khan is no angel, nor is he daft. White professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years, it takes someone like Khan to turn the tables, with different thought procees to put them in their place. Guilfoyle will be happy with his share and fuming he might lose this battle.......but eh...sometimes you have to realise the opposition is more intelligent and plays by hs own rules and wins. Let's focus on the rugby please and not rake over last years ashes. Trust in OK. COYB. billybobbull
  • Score: 0

5:28pm Wed 13 Feb 13

billybobbull says...

Sheffieldbull wrote:
wembley bound wrote:
Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it.
If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ?
Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )
Glad you asked thicko, NO! I'd expect the NEW builder I'd hired to finish the job for NOWT! After all, I've already paid haven't I? does that answer the idiots question?

Salford were NOT in Administration Dumbo - you really are damaged goods ain't you?
No need to personal. Grow up please.
[quote][p][bold]Sheffieldbull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it. If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ? Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )[/p][/quote]Glad you asked thicko, NO! I'd expect the NEW builder I'd hired to finish the job for NOWT! After all, I've already paid haven't I? does that answer the idiots question? Salford were NOT in Administration Dumbo - you really are damaged goods ain't you?[/p][/quote]No need to personal. Grow up please. billybobbull
  • Score: 0

6:07pm Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

Sheffield ( the taker ) and viking ( the giver ) only become abusive when beaten.
Sheffield ( the taker ) and viking ( the giver ) only become abusive when beaten. wembley bound
  • Score: 0

6:50pm Wed 13 Feb 13

tinytoonster says...

wembley bound wrote:
Sheffield ( the taker ) and viking ( the giver ) only become abusive when beaten.
correct.
they usually spit their dummies out and report people when they don't like a comment.
[quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Sheffield ( the taker ) and viking ( the giver ) only become abusive when beaten.[/p][/quote]correct. they usually spit their dummies out and report people when they don't like a comment. tinytoonster
  • Score: 0

7:02pm Wed 13 Feb 13

WayneRouke says...

wembley bound wrote:
So he took over now he wants money back ?
With the akbars money and such did he actually pay for anything for the club ?
Viking used to sing we're in the money but does not look like it thus far.
Maybe a payday loan from Provident will tie him over ?
Provident dont do Payday Loans.
[quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: So he took over now he wants money back ? With the akbars money and such did he actually pay for anything for the club ? Viking used to sing we're in the money but does not look like it thus far. Maybe a payday loan from Provident will tie him over ?[/p][/quote]Provident dont do Payday Loans. WayneRouke
  • Score: 0

7:41pm Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

Sheff and viking bully people and report you when it does not go their way, viking disappears but logs on under another name ( he has about 4 Nosher etc )

As for payday loans I would not know as never had one so will rephrase it to high APR loan.
Sheff and viking bully people and report you when it does not go their way, viking disappears but logs on under another name ( he has about 4 Nosher etc ) As for payday loans I would not know as never had one so will rephrase it to high APR loan. wembley bound
  • Score: 0

8:39pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Sheffieldbull says...

billybobbull wrote:
Sheffieldbull wrote:
wembley bound wrote:
Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it.
If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ?
Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )
Glad you asked thicko, NO! I'd expect the NEW builder I'd hired to finish the job for NOWT! After all, I've already paid haven't I? does that answer the idiots question?

Salford were NOT in Administration Dumbo - you really are damaged goods ain't you?
No need to personal. Grow up please.
Don't preach to me sunshine, and if you do,try to make your fingers type as slowly as your mind works ;-)

Which planet are you from? One with no access to the T&A site or do you just visit every blue moon?.... Please, try to keep up billybobikins, and we'll all try and be nice to each other... promise!
[quote][p][bold]billybobbull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sheffieldbull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it. If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ? Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )[/p][/quote]Glad you asked thicko, NO! I'd expect the NEW builder I'd hired to finish the job for NOWT! After all, I've already paid haven't I? does that answer the idiots question? Salford were NOT in Administration Dumbo - you really are damaged goods ain't you?[/p][/quote]No need to personal. Grow up please.[/p][/quote]Don't preach to me sunshine, and if you do,try to make your fingers type as slowly as your mind works ;-) Which planet are you from? One with no access to the T&A site or do you just visit every blue moon?.... Please, try to keep up billybobikins, and we'll all try and be nice to each other... promise! Sheffieldbull
  • Score: 0

8:46pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Sheffieldbull says...

billybobbull wrote:
I think maybe the parasites have met their match and will likely cave in to avoid further reputation damage.
Omar Khan is no angel, nor is he daft. White professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years, it takes someone like Khan to turn the tables, with different thought procees to put them in their place. Guilfoyle will be happy with his share and fuming he might lose this battle.......but eh...sometimes you have to realise the opposition is more intelligent and plays by hs own rules and wins.

Let's focus on the rugby please and not rake over last years ashes.
Trust in OK. COYB.
"WHITE professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years"

...now What does that smack of? Think you might wanna contact a 'WHITE' professional billybobby.....
[quote][p][bold]billybobbull[/bold] wrote: I think maybe the parasites have met their match and will likely cave in to avoid further reputation damage. Omar Khan is no angel, nor is he daft. White professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years, it takes someone like Khan to turn the tables, with different thought procees to put them in their place. Guilfoyle will be happy with his share and fuming he might lose this battle.......but eh...sometimes you have to realise the opposition is more intelligent and plays by hs own rules and wins. Let's focus on the rugby please and not rake over last years ashes. Trust in OK. COYB.[/p][/quote]"WHITE professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years" ...now What does that smack of? Think you might wanna contact a 'WHITE' professional billybobby..... Sheffieldbull
  • Score: 0

9:00pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Wipsi says...

wembley bound wrote:
Sheffield ( the taker ) and viking ( the giver ) only become abusive when beaten.
After comments like these,in future if I comment on an article thats all it will be,the best thing all genuine posters can do is ignore the ignorant ones on here,I know its hard,but all they crave is being taken notice of,and I have been as guilty as anyone of retorting.
Lets just try it.LETS ALL JUST INORE
[quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Sheffield ( the taker ) and viking ( the giver ) only become abusive when beaten.[/p][/quote]After comments like these,in future if I comment on an article thats all it will be,the best thing all genuine posters can do is ignore the ignorant ones on here,I know its hard,but all they crave is being taken notice of,and I have been as guilty as anyone of retorting. Lets just try it.LETS ALL JUST INORE Wipsi
  • Score: 0

9:03pm Wed 13 Feb 13

WayneRouke says...

Sheffieldbull wrote:
billybobbull wrote:
I think maybe the parasites have met their match and will likely cave in to avoid further reputation damage.
Omar Khan is no angel, nor is he daft. White professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years, it takes someone like Khan to turn the tables, with different thought procees to put them in their place. Guilfoyle will be happy with his share and fuming he might lose this battle.......but eh...sometimes you have to realise the opposition is more intelligent and plays by hs own rules and wins.

Let's focus on the rugby please and not rake over last years ashes.
Trust in OK. COYB.
"WHITE professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years"

...now What does that smack of? Think you might wanna contact a 'WHITE' professional billybobby.....
TOSH, UTTER TOSH
[quote][p][bold]Sheffieldbull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]billybobbull[/bold] wrote: I think maybe the parasites have met their match and will likely cave in to avoid further reputation damage. Omar Khan is no angel, nor is he daft. White professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years, it takes someone like Khan to turn the tables, with different thought procees to put them in their place. Guilfoyle will be happy with his share and fuming he might lose this battle.......but eh...sometimes you have to realise the opposition is more intelligent and plays by hs own rules and wins. Let's focus on the rugby please and not rake over last years ashes. Trust in OK. COYB.[/p][/quote]"WHITE professional businesses such as lawyers, accountants and administrators have been screwing money out of the world for years" ...now What does that smack of? Think you might wanna contact a 'WHITE' professional billybobby.....[/p][/quote]TOSH, UTTER TOSH WayneRouke
  • Score: 0

9:18pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Wembley Bound. says...

Please take notice of me everybody. I am a sad and lonely virgin. This is my only escape. Don't stop responding to my jibes. It makes my life worth living. Sad, lonely pathetic individual that I am.
Please take notice of me everybody. I am a sad and lonely virgin. This is my only escape. Don't stop responding to my jibes. It makes my life worth living. Sad, lonely pathetic individual that I am. Wembley Bound.
  • Score: 0

9:22pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Sheffieldbull says...

"TOSH, UTTER TOSH".... oh you wordsmith you Wayne...

...is it 'International disturbed day' today?'
"TOSH, UTTER TOSH".... oh you wordsmith you Wayne... ...is it 'International disturbed day' today?' Sheffieldbull
  • Score: 0

9:37pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Victor Clayton says...

wembley bound wrote:
Salford new owner paid out to all who were owed and has a clean conscience.
He could have waited till they went into admin but chose not to.
You would pay a builder and when he left without completing job you would pay another to finish it ? That's why you look a trifle dumb and are a laughing stock not only in your own house but on here too.
Only good point with the builders is that there is no houses worth over 100k down there so bill should not be much.
If, after you had completed on a new home British gas sent you a bill for the previous owner. Would you pay it?
[quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Salford new owner paid out to all who were owed and has a clean conscience. He could have waited till they went into admin but chose not to. You would pay a builder and when he left without completing job you would pay another to finish it ? That's why you look a trifle dumb and are a laughing stock not only in your own house but on here too. Only good point with the builders is that there is no houses worth over 100k down there so bill should not be much.[/p][/quote]If, after you had completed on a new home British gas sent you a bill for the previous owner. Would you pay it? Victor Clayton
  • Score: 0

9:41pm Wed 13 Feb 13

wembley bound says...

Viking back again I see.
Don't like it do you big man Sheff?
Viking back again I see. Don't like it do you big man Sheff? wembley bound
  • Score: 0

9:55pm Wed 13 Feb 13

WayneRouke says...

Sheffieldbull wrote:
"TOSH, UTTER TOSH".... oh you wordsmith you Wayne...

...is it 'International disturbed day' today?'
More drivel. When will these people grow up.

Go home, the earth is full.

I feel sorry for the villages that are now missing their idiots..
[quote][p][bold]Sheffieldbull[/bold] wrote: "TOSH, UTTER TOSH".... oh you wordsmith you Wayne... ...is it 'International disturbed day' today?'[/p][/quote]More drivel. When will these people grow up. Go home, the earth is full. I feel sorry for the villages that are now missing their idiots.. WayneRouke
  • Score: 0

9:59pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Wipsi says...

IGNORE
IGNORE Wipsi
  • Score: 0

10:47pm Wed 13 Feb 13

notpoliticallycorrect says...

I am afraid that having dealt with admnistrators in the past, they are the biggest leaches on any floundering business I have ever known.

When my company was in trouble I asked the administrator how much he would charge and his first question was " How much is in the bank?" I would have preferred to have been asked "How much do you owe?" but they seemed less interested in that figure.

Once a company gets in debt you get to see the real 'vultures' of the indusrty which are the administrators and the fraudulent debt collectors which are known as High Court Enforcement Officers, who invent fees and charges that you would not believe.

One such firm doubled my debt from £2000 to £4500 overnight without even coming out to see me ............... like I say absolute swines, most will never experience it but believe me, ever have a business in debt and you will find out.

Don't trust Mr Khan but I actually believe him on this.
I am afraid that having dealt with admnistrators in the past, they are the biggest leaches on any floundering business I have ever known. When my company was in trouble I asked the administrator how much he would charge and his first question was " How much is in the bank?" I would have preferred to have been asked "How much do you owe?" but they seemed less interested in that figure. Once a company gets in debt you get to see the real 'vultures' of the indusrty which are the administrators and the fraudulent debt collectors which are known as High Court Enforcement Officers, who invent fees and charges that you would not believe. One such firm doubled my debt from £2000 to £4500 overnight without even coming out to see me ............... like I say absolute swines, most will never experience it but believe me, ever have a business in debt and you will find out. Don't trust Mr Khan but I actually believe him on this. notpoliticallycorrect
  • Score: 0

12:06am Thu 14 Feb 13

axlef1963 says...

thinking back a certain x chairman of ours said that if someone stood down he had backers in place to take over club instead he appointed a adminestrator and cost us a fortune.should have known better as they also said harris contract with whinos wasnt water tight mmmmmm
thinking back a certain x chairman of ours said that if someone stood down he had backers in place to take over club instead he appointed a adminestrator and cost us a fortune.should have known better as they also said harris contract with whinos wasnt water tight mmmmmm axlef1963
  • Score: 0

2:01am Thu 14 Feb 13

Adeybull says...

-HCK3R- wrote:
wembley bound wrote:
Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it.
If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ?
Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )
Maybe the threat of losing six points and the loss of sky money made it more worthwhile for Salfords debts to be taken over....
At last. Somebody gets it.

Seems to me - and I think to you? - that the RFL sent out a clear message: either take on the business debts if you want to take over a SL club and retain the Licence, or we will fine and punish you SO much that you will wish you had.

Although in our case, the forced administration crystalised more debts than would ever have been there had some alternative been available. Unfortunately, OK never had the chance to pursue any alternative, since the Strangely Silent Solicitor's little group had already appointed administrators weeks before.

As I say in my signature elsewhere, "Welcome to Bradford - the Admiral Byng of Rugby League". It would seem that the RFL determined that it was appropriate to shoot a new club owner, "pour encourager les autres". And, like the Admiralty over the unfortunate Admiral Byng, IMO the RFL shot an innocent man. Maybe for similar reasons...?

While I am here: I am astounded at the cost of the administration so far, given virtually no-one at the club seemingly ever saw Guilfoyle, and the ongoing running looks to have been done largely by volunteers without pay.

But then, I was astounded that Guilfoyle was appointed in the first place, instead of one of the RL specialists like O'Hara. I wonder what O'hara would have charged? Or done? But I am sure the Strangely Silent Solicitor must have had a very good reason for the choice.

At least all those who were so vociferously arguing the supposed benefits of administration - to sort out the shareholders once and for all - might now better appreciate just why I was so violently opposed to administration unless there was absolutely no alternative?

OK, said my bit. The trolls can come out again from under the bridge now.
[quote][p][bold]-HCK3R-[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wembley bound[/bold] wrote: Salford take over paid everyone not changed the name to get out of it. If you got a builder in to do a job paid him cash he went bankrupt before finishing job but continued to trade you would just let him off with it Sheff ? Oh yes course you would ( rolls eyes )[/p][/quote]Maybe the threat of losing six points and the loss of sky money made it more worthwhile for Salfords debts to be taken over....[/p][/quote]At last. Somebody gets it. Seems to me - and I think to you? - that the RFL sent out a clear message: either take on the business debts if you want to take over a SL club and retain the Licence, or we will fine and punish you SO much that you will wish you had. Although in our case, the forced administration crystalised more debts than would ever have been there had some alternative been available. Unfortunately, OK never had the chance to pursue any alternative, since the Strangely Silent Solicitor's little group had already appointed administrators weeks before. As I say in my signature elsewhere, "Welcome to Bradford - the Admiral Byng of Rugby League". It would seem that the RFL determined that it was appropriate to shoot a new club owner, "pour encourager les autres". And, like the Admiralty over the unfortunate Admiral Byng, IMO the RFL shot an innocent man. Maybe for similar reasons...? While I am here: I am astounded at the cost of the administration so far, given virtually no-one at the club seemingly ever saw Guilfoyle, and the ongoing running looks to have been done largely by volunteers without pay. But then, I was astounded that Guilfoyle was appointed in the first place, instead of one of the RL specialists like O'Hara. I wonder what O'hara would have charged? Or done? But I am sure the Strangely Silent Solicitor must have had a very good reason for the choice. At least all those who were so vociferously arguing the supposed benefits of administration - to sort out the shareholders once and for all - might now better appreciate just why I was so violently opposed to administration unless there was absolutely no alternative? OK, said my bit. The trolls can come out again from under the bridge now. Adeybull
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree