Ernest Pawn v Dildo van Hit

[ironking]

Does anybody know what is occurring in the battle for Iron supremacy between the mighty twosome of Ernest Pawn and Dildo van Hit?

[sufc_not_on_tour]

Seconds out, round one in Leeds at the end of this month.

[sufc_not_on_tour]

Shame he didn’t change his name to Shilton.

[Anonymous]

Let’s hope it doesn’t become a protracted case.

[Awaywego]

What’s up with you AA, Hilton is relying on it being a protracted case, where we going to play if it isn’t.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Sanfran49

[Anonymous]

We need this chapter of our history closed one way or the other.

[Awaywego]

Quick case and Swann wins, we need the judge to tell him to get the land registration sorted and that will take more time I’m afraid.

[64]

What has the land registration got to do with this? It’s a rent disagreement as stated before

[MK Iron]

I must have got it wrong but I thought is was a disagreement over a purchase of the ground and associated land.

[64]

Swann says he let them stay in the ground for a set period so HiltonWhiteDave had time to time to stump up the cash,when that passed he issued this court writ to get his land back as Dave put a photocopy on the gate a security guard and a chain on the gate in a clumsy show of defiance
Dave says he has a lease agreement so can stay ,so now they be are in court

[sufc_not_on_tour]

I’m certain the judge won’t be interested in any he said/he said, only what’s legally binding.
We don’t know what was agreed on paper in January, I’m certain the judge will and make a judgement on what’s legally binding.

[Iron-awe]

Will the judge ask Hilton about his so called contingency plan if we get kicked out, if he hasn’t got one will the judge think twice about wrapping up a professional football club just into a new season and putting all those players and staff on the dole. It’s a big call whoever comes out on top.

[sufc_not_on_tour]

I have no legal experience but this is not a magistrates court with people making decisions based on whether football fans will be able to watch their team in a new season or whether the players will be able to earn their wages.
It surely will be a judge ruling on the legalities of a contract signed between two parties.

[lesgeo]

In all levels of court, Judges often familiarise themselves with the case in advance to try to find a way out of having a hearing.
They try to resolve any impasse by asking loaded questions. Both parties would be wise to listen to any proffered suggestions or advice.
Entirely dependent on the judge, of course. Some may go by the strict letter of the law but …

[Iron-awe]

I would hope any judge would take all considerations into account but in the end he will make a decision on what he believes is legally correct. It’s worth pointing out that does Ernest want to take possession of the ground and land just to let it stand empty for any amount of time to prove a point or has he got a buyer lined up or even has he already sold it? Either way it would seem a sensible outcome if the ground and land haven’t already been sold elsewhere in a deal that will come into play once the club is kicked out, that the club stay on paying monthly rent until a certain time as the whole site has been sold. A suitable notice period could then be worked out before the club vacates, either way does Ernest want to cut his nose off to spite his face? Seems rather silly if he does

[Awaywego]

You know you haven’t got it wrong MK, he told us it was to do with legalities (the registration of land) and reiterated that on his Humberside radio interview on Saturday, perhaps 64 should have a listen. Certainly sod all to do with a rental agreement.

[Iron-awe]

Hilton also said in that interview he couldn’t go into too many details because of the impending court case so we can make suggestions all we like, it doesn’t add up to much really. It is a very sad state of affairs for our football club which I’m sure we can all agree on.

[64]

Not to a judge,their only consideration will be is there a contract , if there is what does it say,?
Nothing else

[sufc_not_on_tour]

Swann owns a stadium and land.
Swann and Hilton exchanged contracts where Hilton agreed to buy it.
Hilton didn’t honour the contract by not paying.
Swann demanded his money.
Hilton is squatting on the land using “loopholes” he’s dreamt up.
I only see a judge making one decision.

[mistertonmick]

the Judge will also have to consider how much Hilton has paid in Tax owed during Swanns final weeks, players and staff wages from before he took over SNOT, plus any other missing details, also why Swann put the ground and land in his name in the first place, we just want it sorting out as quick as possible.
Why will he?

[Awaywego]

Subject to searches, all solicitor’s have to do that.

[sufc_not_on_tour]

mistertonmick wrote:

the Judge will also have to consider how much Hilton has paid in Tax owed during Swanns final weeks, players and staff wages from before he took over SNOT, plus any other missing details, also why Swann put the ground and land in his name in the first place, we just want it sorting out as quick as possible.

I disagree Mick,it’s a commercial law court, nothing whatsoever to do with how much Hilton claims to have paid to god know who else.
It’s about a contract and nothing else!

[TheJuryeffsOut]

It is about the stadium and the land. Anything to do with the football club – tax, wages etc won’t be relevant. Swann somehow put GP into the ownership of a separate company, unchallenged at the time, so that part is over.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[Riverman]

mistertonmick wrote:

the Judge will also have to consider how much Hilton has paid in Tax owed during Swanns final weeks, players and staff wages from before he took over SNOT, plus any other missing details, also why Swann put the ground and land in his name in the first place, we just want it sorting out as quick as possible.

Scunthorpe United Football Club and Glanford Park are two different identities, David Hilton bought SUFC from Peter Swann, the ground is owned by Coolsilk and at the present time SUFC are trespassing on GP and Coolsilk are trying to get SUFC evicted. It’s as simple as that (allegedly)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[Deereyme66]

Gonna see the riverman, gonna tell him I can…

Oops, non football

[Bartoniron66]

Hopefully it’s settled on the court steps then we can move on once and for all from the disastrous period of our clubs history!

1 user thanked author for this post.

TheJuryeffsOut

[Sanfran49]

TheJuryeffsOut wrote:

It is about the stadium and the land. Anything to do with the football club – tax, wages etc won’t be relevant. Swann somehow put GP into the ownership of a separate company, unchallenged at the time, so that part is over.

How do you challenge anything as the club was owned by the ego ! The predominant name of board members was SWANN so they will do as instructed.

[TheJuryeffsOut]

I agree, and like I said that chapter is over, water under the bridge, done and dusted. Coolsilk and therefore Swann, own it. (Or at least have their name on the mortgage…).
I also hope, like Bartoniron66, that it is settled out of court. I don’t think Hilton will have much chance with this in a courtroom.

[Bishops Finger]

Does Hilton have the money?
There is a bloke on the Facebook group ranting that a group of staff are YET to be paid and he will happily meet Hilton to discuss as he knows the truth! If he can’t pay the wages how can he pay Swann?

[TheJuryeffsOut]

If he doesn’t have the money, then what exactly is going on ?
I don’t know exactly how courts work but if Swann turns up at court with an entourage of solicitors and barristers etc and he wins then could he also get his costs from Hilton as well ?

[Author]

Posts