Think it was heading for mediation by a judge. But who knows.

rlhttp://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/15710703.Former_Bulls_players_and_staff_reach_settlement/rl

Well one of the parties has settled!

And the Tribunal for the others will start on January 23rd.

Got my hopes up then and thought I could safely buy a season ticket!

I wonder how they settled? They were liquidated, with no cash. But Petit would have had knowledge of the other parties & negotiations. And a paper trail. And knowledge has it's own value, of course.

I guess Pettit could have provided his 'knowledge' of the other parties, subject to legalities, of course.

I hope it's the RFL who have most to worry about rather than us. To be fair, if the RFL obeyed all the rules and financial regulations when the newco was set up then, logically, there really should be nothing for us to worry about. It's the letters F,L and R (not necessarily in that order) that |I worry about when I consider screw-ups and people acting beyond their competence.

Considering the sheer amount of lies the owners have told the fans over the last year, would it really surprise anyone if it ended up that they had acted in a dodgy fashion to get control of the club in the first place?

I'm fully expecting the current club to be hit with a bill for damages come the end of January.

There's plenty for us to worry about for the reason that win, lose or draw, we will have ended up spending a huge stack of cash we don't have on the legals of dealing with the claims. I dread to think how much will have been clocked up. Unless RFL pick up the tab, it is hugely bad news for us.

I also wouldn't think it would be that great for team morale and player relations if those players who are still with us that are claiming against us end up getting ted in the case, so a bit of a lose-lose situation.

Surely the motivation for bringing the case is to get money that is thought to be owed?

If that’s right then why would anyone sue a club with no money? If some of the claimants are still Bulls players or employees it seems a counterproductive thing to do since their success in the claim would also mean they’d most likely be out of a job.

I think the real target has to be the RFL. They’re the ones with the money and they had a prominent role in the sorry saga.

The legal fees is another matter. Maybe we’re paying toward that, I don’t know but surely the RFL would want us to be singing from the same hymn sheet as them and will have therefore engaged the lawyers since they have the most to lose?

…or am I barking up the wrong tree here?

I've said before that, in my opinion, the RFL 'engineered' the takeover anyway - at least that's how it appeared from the outside. The RFL have acted as though they feel they have something worry about when they tried to strike out some of the clauses. Lock them up!

But the fact is that we have been sued, so someone must think there's an advantage, tactical or whatever, to that


I would hope so but like I say we've been invited to the party too. And don't forget that Mr. Pettit & Co. were, and they have now exitd stage left, accompanied with gushing praise from the lawyers as to how spiffingly they have engaged in the process and done whatever deal it may be


I don't know but would be certain RFL and Bulls must be separately represented. I should not think it would be within the RFL's powers to agree to indemnify costs of any club being sued, and anyway as both we and RFL are being sued there would be a clear potential conflict of interest

I don't think you area million miles away. Having dealt with a number of claims cases in my day job I've seen far too many cases involve my employers on the basis that it creates uncertainty, even if not credible... uncertainty for individuals and as a collective group.

In this case, I think the main targets are the RFL and the administrators. That is where the big money lays and is largely based around the conclusion that both parties had involvement in sinking perfectly legitimate and acceptable bids (one from the administartors point of view and one from the RFL fit and proper ruling).

The "beneficiaries" of the ruling were Cha-Lo (if you could say acquiring a shell of a club a benefit) and will have been thrown into the mix to add doubt to the case.

If Cha-Lo had accepted and settled fearing a big sum awarded by the court then it leaves the RFL and Petitt in a weak and vulnerable position. As it happens, Petitt seems to have folded early which now leaves the RFL vulnerable and I'd imagine they too will settle.

This should leave the new club free and clear, unless some of the group get greedy and hold out for the full whammy.

I have no doubt this would serve no great purpose being a cash strapped club and would those involved in the claim want their names attached as the people who finally sunk a once great club, especially when some of them are reliant on them for their current employment? Not a chance I would suggest.

This has been in the making ever since the old club went bust. Had they gone to the Insolvency Service to claim redundancy they would have already been paid out by now (most of the club staff did follow this route). However, those who haven't took the gamble on offer and it seems to be paying off. In return they will get a bigger payout.

Think this is still going ahead. Hopefully there'll be a last minute settlement.

not sure where I saw it but seem to remember 25th or 27th january as being hearing date

Next Tuesday i believe. Hopefully get it out of the way relatively unscathed (or just survive) and we can all look forward.

Fully expecting the claimants to win their cases, it's just how it will affect the club in its current state that I have no idea about.