Quote: Prince Buster "I entirely agree with your comments. Legal action is the only route as far as money is concerned I have been informed it is not that much in the grand scheme of things, about the same as we pour down the bottomless pit of BV to keep it alive season after season. I think spending the money on a legal challenge would be a more prudent investment than buying the yearly 'sticking plasters' to keep BV limping along for another season'"
It would likely run comfortably into a six figure fee with no guarantee of success, still a big risk.
But for all the talk of legal action, what, exactly will the legal action be for and who will it be against. Are we talking about the council here and it's decision to allow the Newcold build outside of the unilateral undertaking? If so i know from working in planning for many years there are a myriad of technicalities there that a good lawyer could exploit and i've no doubt the council would employ a pretty shrewd operator in that department. Bare in mind also that any defence from them comes from the public purse, given most of Wakefield couldn't give a stuff about whether Trinity get a new stadium or not the public support for clubs/trusts legal action may not be all that high in times when cuts are still having to be made. Other than that the council have done nothing other than offer a lack of support by the sounds, not really basis for a legal arguement even if it is the wrong stance to take. I have to agree that protests at this stage are probably pointless, the situation has moved on from there and having worked with Peter Box in a former life it will be like water off a ducks back.
Also what is hoping to be achieved by taking action? It won't suddenly force the council to build a stadium, they never had that responsibility anyway, it was always the developer. They are not going to all of a sudden build a stadium either, they would walk away from the project. Remember there was a trigger point that was to enable the build. Even if the freezer unit was included in 60,000 square meter limit the limit still wouldn't have been reached so they could still build another small unit somewhere and then call it off. So taking the developer to court won't work, they haven't actually broken any rules. They made a planning application for the freezer unit that was accepted. Not much else has happened on their part up to press so are untouchable and until they decide to build past the trigger limit nothing much can be done there. Morally wrong yes, but legally not.
Sadly I see no way in which even a successful legal challenge regarding the Newcold build will result in the club getting its new stadium. It may 'prove a point' or 'put some people in their place' which would be nice for about five minutes but ultimately the club will still be stuck with nowhere to go and have even more resentment built up against it in the corridors of power and potentially throughout the wider district. Given the costs involved and the chances of a successful outcome and what will be gained from that it's a tough decision to decide whether to proceed. I have to agree that a full statement is needed to clarify issues sooner rather than later.
