I voted No to AV, but Yes was my second choice

Maybe on the stamp on the postcard

Its relavant if people cant be bothered to vote - but sorry if that is to hard for you to grasp.

can some one please tell me how you can contact the local council ombudsman to question how the council can invest in a private company when they are cutting back on services for the elderly, disabled and those in need of care.
4.5 million can pay for a lot of things that are more important then a new stand for a club that should be in a posistion to get grants and borrow the rest from banks using the new facility as collataral.

The council are not loaning them the money outright or investing in Rovers, they are more or less acting as guarantor on a central government grant. The council apply for the grant, Rovers use it for stadium development and pay back the council by way of rent on the new facilities (think I've got it right).

A guarantor still undertakes the loan. How credit-worthy are Rovers and could the council have to cough up at some point? Perhaps a mystery buye.. I mean benefactor could step in?

spot on, it's basically a mortgage over 35 years that the council have to apply for on behalf of rovers, rovers pay the money though and still face the same penalties as anybody else if it is not repayed. mind you, don't let the facts get in the way of a good moan for some on here mind

So who pays if Rovers default or go bust?

sparky1963 wrote:can some one please tell me how you can contact the local council ombudsman to question how the council can invest in a private company when they are cutting back on services for the elderly, disabled and those in need of care.
4.5 million can pay for a lot of things that are more important then a new stand for a club that should be in a posistion to get grants and borrow the rest from banks using the new facility as collataral.


The council are not loaning them the money outright or investing in Rovers, they are more or less acting as guarantor on a central government grant. The council apply for the grant, Rovers use it for stadium development and pay back the council by way of rent on the new facilities (think I've got it right).


but if they default on the loan the council pick up the bill. and will they pay a viable rent for the facilities. i know that city and hull where given preferentiol rents at the KC but in my opinion they should all pay the going rate for the facilities they rent and the council should get a viable return on the money we as tax payers and technically owners of the old hull telephones deserve

OOOO now there you go - what are you saying Sandy???

The council are bearing the risk and underwriting the loan. Rovers, of course are only repaying £1.9m of the £6m. The rest of the bill is being footed by ERDF and an enterprise and training body who will occupy the offices and pay the majority of the repayments. The council, and public money, by any other name.

No. If a mortgage has a Guarantor on it and the borrower defaults, the Guarantor is legally obliged to make the repayements. It they fail to do this it's [itheir[/i assets that are at risk.

That's the whole point of having a Guarantor on a loan. It is extra security for the lender for advances that have a large degree of risk.

So I ask you again - if Rovers default or go bust, who makes the repayments?

Pretty Obvious HCC will be left footing the bill...

Basically you me and every person who lives in Hull will end up paying for Caravan park

Don't tell Sandy - he won't believe you.

Funny, isn't it? Why do Rovers have to undertake these convoluted deals for credit? The council Guarantor shenanigans, and the Allam loan 'cos he's nice and want's nowt back (not bluddy much ).

Wonder why they can't just go to the bank like every other credit-worthy and solvent business?