Hang em all

It was only a matter of time. https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/ ... al-2891995

It was only a matter of time. https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/ ... al-2891995

Quote ="King Street Cat"It was only a matter of time. https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/ ... al-2891995'" Obviously, one has to be careful to post replies about this, but most of us always thought there was a bad smell about the whole Odyssey of Belle Vue. I do hope the investigation the by the N C A, will uncover details of the involvement of a former senior Council official, and a Knight of the realm.

Quote ="King Street Cat"It was only a matter of time. https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/ ... al-2891995'" Obviously, one has to be careful to post replies about this, but most of us always thought there was a bad smell about the whole Odyssey of Belle Vue. I do hope the investigation the by the N C A, will uncover details of the involvement of a former senior Council official, and a Knight of the realm.

You're right we have to be careful what we say, but when information is given in the press that we paid nearly twice the value for the ground it does make you question why. Perhaps we had no choice and had to pay the price demanded? whatever, I will remain adamant the club will have acted legally and correctly, because that's how MC and his team do things.

Just thinking out loud, this doesn't necessarily have an impact on Trinity. Looking into a deal can mean so many things. It doesn't mean that Trinity can have the ground taken from them. It is perfectly possible that Trinity is the victim in all this. But of course the paper wants a story about a financial investigation and the phrase "loan from the taxpayer". The paper might know nothing but has created a story that doesn't actually tell you anything.

That's exactly how I see it

Yeah, for us the pertinent questions surround the initial purchase, the party's involved and how it came about.
Whilst nobody will be surprised if the businessmen involved turn out to be a cartel of crooks, it'll be interesting to find out the extent of WDC's involvement in that chain of events.

That depends on the ‘deal’ between the club and the council as well.

We are certainly the injured party in this, having to pay twice the value for something, but my worry would be if the original sale becomes void, where does that leave us?

I'm not sure the courts can set aside transactions, as there are legitimate purchasers involved. What they can do is look at someone's assets and say, "tell us where it came from, and if you can't, we'll assume it came from criminal activity and seize it from you". Now, what someone can say, for example, is "a couple of million came from a really good land deal", which might cause the NCA to look into the deal to verify that this was the case.

What the NCA could also do is look at other players, to see whether there is anything improper, whether others are involved in creating a false profit in order to explain away someone's millions, but if there's nothing to see, there's nothing to worry about. We got shafted by being asked to step aside in the original purchase, and got shafted again by having to pay a higher value, but that doesn't mean there is anything to impact on the club.

The NCA are bound to look at all major transactions. It doesn't mean they amount to anything. But the Yorkshire Post has got plenty of people to look at a story that tells you precisely zilch, and they'll pick up the advertising revenue from it. Smart journalism. Creates clicks but says zero.

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5 ... 0dac31b1b1 This is a long but interesting read, wonder what the due diligence department at Bank of Ireland were doing when then sold BV to 88m ,

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5 ... 0dac31b1b1 This is a long but interesting read, wonder what the due diligence department at Bank of Ireland were doing when then sold BV to 88m ,

Bloody Hell your not kidding. There are some nasty criminals named at this hearing.
The first paragraph is why the court hearing takes place

The second paragraph about 2 hours later is the conclusion.
NATIONAL CRIME AGENCY V HUSSAIN & ORS

Mr Justice Murray :
1. On 12 July 2019, at the conclusion of a hearing to consider without notice applications by the applicant, the National Crime Agency ("the NCA"icon_wink.gif, I made:

i) an unexplained wealth order ("UWO"icon_wink.gif under section 362A of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 ("POCA"icon_wink.gif against Mr Mansoor Mahmood Hussain, whose identity, until today, was protected by an anonymity order made by Lang J on 4 July 2019, for reasons explained in this judgment; and

ii) an interim freezing order ("IFO"icon_wink.gif under section 362J of POCA against Mr Hussain and each of six corporate respondents ("the Other IFO Respondents"icon_wink.gif.

Conclusion
118. For the foregoing reasons, at the conclusion of the hearing I was satisfied that:

i) it was strictly necessary to conduct the hearing of the NCA's applications for a UWO against Mr Hussain and an IFO against Mr Hussain and the Other IFO Respondents in private; and

ii) in all the circumstances, it was just, appropriate and proportionate to make:

a) the UWO sought by the NCA against Mr Hussain; and
b) the IFO sought by the NCA against Mr Hussain and each of the Other IFO Respondents.
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

I hope I’ve got this right, but you’re all welcome to read the full hearing account. Good luck with that.

Hussain quoted as 'clean skin' some tasty associates named in this report, I am pretty sure any cops, ex cops or those associated with the Justice System will be familiar with the OCGs referred to.

Just browsing through the court documents. Amongst all the properties registered or connected to Mr Hussain. Is this one, I wonder if any part of Belle Vue land.

iv) freehold property consisting of land on the south side of Doncaster Road, Wakefield, registered at the Land Registry under Title No WYK912235, the registered owner of which is Jayco88 Limited, despite that company having been dissolved by voluntary strike-off on 20 March 2018;

Pssssst! Wanna buy a rugby grarnd guv'nor??

I do know PT that in Criminal Law, the true 'owner' of property remains such, even if the property is stolen and sold on to an innocent purchaser.
Motor vehicle thefts are rife with such purchases and if the vehicle is recovered it is usually removed from the innocent purchaser and returned to the true owner.

In the case of land though, surely deeds provide proof of ownership? and I would have thought the sale to Manni from the BOI and subsequently to WT would have been handled by a solicitor?

On the other hand, if by some reason the sale does become void we might get the chance to purchase it again at the true price!

Lets hope there's no advice suggesting we stay out of the bidding to allow a "White Knight" to step in and help.

Crickey, sounds like he is in a pickle.

Scroll down to point 102 for the interesting stuff.

Yeah, because if you think about it logically, if the sale is voided, someone ends up with an asset they don't want anymore, taken from the people who do want it.

What the enquiry will really involve re Belle Vue is where he got the money from to buy it, and it is likely to help him slightly, as the profit he made will explain away some of his assets.

You can do a "detailed search" on the Land Registry site and get the title plan for £3. I'm too tight to pay it, but it's there. More likely to be the Superbowl site than Belle Vue.

Its a massive grey area and often comes down to a judge making a call on whether original owner still retains title or has lost it.
Massively frustrating at company i work for.
As an example we have title to an asset,that has been rented by another party,the other party has "sold" the asset (which he wasn't legally entitled to do).
The asset in a short space of time has passed through 3/4 people and ended up being purchased by an innocent party.
Now you would think the sensible outcome is that the asset is returned to its rightful owner.Very rarely the case,if innocent purchaser convinces/proofs to judge they were a victim we lose title to asset.So even though we were the rightful owners of that £300k asset,we can't get it back and instead have to pursue the original renter who has effectively stolen our property.

Just for once it would be nice for Wakey if everything was straightforward and simple and we were not associated with the financial skullduggery of others (Slightly understated use of words if the charges are proved).
However I do believe the current board acted in the best interest of the club.

Thanks. Know very little about property laws but I should have known nothing can be taken for granted!

This not a straight forward decision on who owns a property this is under the Proceeds of Crime Act. In essence the investigation is to identify that assets have been obtained through or linked ro criminality without going into detail as this is a live investigation it's going to be very interesting to see what comes out in relation to the source of the funds used to buy BV by the subject of the order and in particular financial declarations made at that time and then of course the sale of BV at a high price in effect creating legitimate funds that transaction will be interesting. The NCA of course are looking at many such issues so it could be a while before anything comes out. There is the possibility that all identified assets involved could be restrained not sure if this is the case but it could be a factor in getting any work done at the ground.

Totally agree,was generalising around issue of title holders actually getting their assets back from innocent purchasers.
The business I'm involved in(just happens to be a target/avenue)for laundering,don't think a week passes without NCA cropping up over some issue,whether it be us reporting or them asking for information.