Skrevet av Emne: Bates og Leeds United i retten  (Lest 2091 ganger)

0 medlemmer og 1 gjest leser dette emnet.

Promotion 2010

Bates og Leeds United i retten
« på: Mai 22, 2012, 10:20:32 »
Jeg finner ikke frem i tråd-jungelen, men Bates er vel mer i rettslokalet enn i det nye styrerommet i East Stand!

Her har vi en sak om klubbens forhold til politiet, noe som Bates mener er overpriset de-lux!

Leeds United’s battle with cops set for High Court  
By Paul Robinson


Published on Tuesday 22 May 2012 06:50


Leeds United’s legal battle over matchday policing costs at their Elland Road ground is heading for the High Court.


The Yorkshire Evening Post told last year how United had issued a writ against West Yorkshire Police chief constable Sir Norman Bettison, demanding a reassessment of their recent matchday costs.

Leeds claimed they had been overcharged by thousands of pounds for policing at home games.

Now it has emerged that the case is due to go before the High Court in London on July 11.

Both the police and United today said they were unable to comment in detail because of the imminent court proceedings.

Leeds have previously argued that they should not be billed for the cost of policing land around Elland Road that they neither occupy or own.

Before the start of the 2009-10 season, however, the West Yorkshire force decided it wanted to widen the area where it could charge for having its officers on duty, so that it took in local roads and car parks.

United’s policing bill is believed to be the highest of any club in their division.

Speaking last June, West Yorkshire’s then deputy chief constable David Crompton denied that the force was profiting from the policing arrangements at Elland Road.

He said: “For an average game at Elland Road, West Yorkshire Police deploy staff inside the ground, immediately outside to deal with crowd dispersal and traffic and also in Leeds city centre in case of trouble from unruly fans.

“On average this means that West Yorkshire Police use 100 staff per game, however [United] only contribute towards 40 of them.

“For a high risk game such as the ones against Millwall and Cardiff, the total number of staff rises to well over 300 and [United] only pay for 120 of them.

“In cash terms, this represents an underpayment of between £20,000 and in excess of £100,000 per game, therefore it is [United who are] being supported at the expense of the taxpayer.”

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/latest-news/top-stories/leeds-united-s-battle-with-cops-set-for-high-court-1-4570255
Min første Leeds-kamp:
Strømsgodset vs Leeds, 19.september 1973

lojosang

Sv: Bates og Leeds United i retten
« Svar #1 på: Mai 23, 2012, 00:46:19 »
Vi må da ha opparbeidet oss kvantumsrabatt på rettsaker nå da. Aldri så galt at det ikke er godt for noe!
- Leif Olav

Jon R

Sv: Bates og Leeds United i retten
« Svar #2 på: Mai 23, 2012, 01:01:32 »
Jeg finner ikke frem i tråd-jungelen, men Bates er vel mer i rettslokalet enn i det nye styrerommet i East Stand!

Her har vi en sak om klubbens forhold til politiet, noe som Bates mener er overpriset de-lux!


He-he. For et vidunderlig lite stykke dobbeltmoral.  ;D
Jon R.

Promotion 2010

Sv: Bates og Leeds United i retten
« Svar #3 på: August 22, 2014, 16:17:08 »
Nå har Cellino satt ned foten og vil komme til et forlik om oppsigelsen av Bates for et års tid siden. Cellino er lite glad for at navnet Leeds united til stadighet blir dratt gjennom søla.
Her er en oppsummering av Bates rettslige forhold til Leeds United og andre interessenter:



Phil Hay: Battle lines well and truly drawn between Leeds United and Bates

Published on the 30 November
2013
08:48

The final documents for Leeds United Football Club versus Kenneth William Bates were due to be submitted by close of play on Wednesday so the battle lines for their courtroom tear-up are well and truly drawn.


Barring a settlement before the new year they will see each other in the High Court to claim and counter-claim over Bates’ sacking as club president. The allegations are wide-ranging and colourful, laid out in papers lodged with the chancery division.

The case over United’s decision to dismiss Bates for gross misconduct on July 26 – 26 days into his three-year term as president – will centre around the private jet contract negotiated by him for his time in the job.

The contract committed Leeds to a bill of almost £500,000 over three years and was, according to the club, arranged by Bates for his “own personal benefit”, in breach of the terms of his contract at Elland Road. The 81-year-old, in papers outlining his defence and counter-claim, denies the claim, as he does the many other assertions made against him.

An expensive private jet deal is by no means the only allegation put forward by United as they seek to recover money they believe they are owed. Their court submission concentrates heavily on Bates’ expenses account, for which he was given an annual limit of £228,000 after GFH Capital bought the club from him on December 20, 2012.

Between the date of the takeover and the date of his sacking, United say that Bates claimed a total of £136,163, of which the club paid more than £89,500. Leeds claim to have “independently approved” £57,092 – in other words accepted that Bates is entitled to that sum – and admit that a further £5,059 is due to him. The remaining £79,070 was, they allege, “not properly payable” to Bates.

Among the costs which Leeds dispute are a £14,500 bill for a return flight to Portugal for Bates and his wife Suzannah ahead of the Football League’s annual general meeting; £1,630 spent on a chauffeured vehicle for Bates, his wife and his housekeeper in Monaco; a Sky subscription totalling £391.50 and a lunch for journalists which came in at £2,662.88.

United also say that Bates claimed without justification for more than £31,100 for two dinners held on April 28 and 29 – one a “thank you” dinner for staff at Elland Road and the other for “corporate guests and friends”. Bates admits that both bills were wrongly claimed but says they were submitted to Leeds by catering firm Compass without his knowledge. He says he has never seen either invoice and did not expect United to reimburse him. There are other sums which United list as “unreasonable expenses” but have not paid: almost £20,000 for a housekeeper in Monte Carlo and £7,000 for “further entertainment expenses”. They also dispute an attempt by Bates to recover the cost of personal tax advice, albeit only £200.

Part of Leeds’ argument is that Bates’ expenses were effectively passed without approval by anyone senior to him at Elland Road and that he failed to supply proper documentation.

Bates rejects that suggestion, saying his contract with United contained no guidance or provision for how expenses were to be claimed. He says he submitted receipts to Leeds’ finance director – Yvonne Allen – and gave them the chance to review his expenses before repaying him. He also argues that the payment of many of his expenses by Leeds essentially endorsed his claims or classed them as reasonable.

Additionally, United have taken issue with an historical claim for “February and March Monaco office expenses” which came in at £10,208 and were paid to Bates on March 22. They do not believe that the bill was incurred as a result of Bates carrying out his duties as club chairman, the position he held until June 30.

Furthermore Leeds allege that on the last day of January, Bates arranged a bank transfer of more than £5,000 from their accounts to himself, saying his expenses allowance entitled him to the money.

The club go on to claim that in early March, Bates asked a club employee to deliver him £2,000 in cash from a till at United’s club shop and in April asked another employee to take £5,000 in cash from the club safe at Elland Road and bring it to him. In both instances he is alleged to have said that the sums could be charged to his expenses account.

Bates denies all claims of gross misconduct and is counter-suing Leeds for wrongful dismissal, saying they had no grounds for terminating his presidency.

Leeds accept that Bates was due to be paid £250,000 a year for three years in the post but say he agreed to “waive his entitlement to receive the fee until and unless his appointment as chairman or president comes to an end other than for a permitted reason.” Successful action from United’s former chairman could land the club with a pay-out of up to £750,000.


 :o
Min første Leeds-kamp:
Strømsgodset vs Leeds, 19.september 1973

sportcarl1

Sv: Bates og Leeds United i retten
« Svar #4 på: August 22, 2014, 17:55:14 »
tråkigt att bates inte fattar hur alla dessa rättegångar skadar klubben, sedan om han har rätt eller fel är i grunden ointressant för mig, är ju bara småsummor hur som helst för bates, jag tror  ju att bates har rätt och nedskrivet på papper vad som gäller, är antagligen gfh som dabbat sig och nu får cellino ärva problemen, är säkert en hel del sådan här skumraskaffärer som kommer ploppa upp och som cellino omöjligen kan veta om
 

Promotion 2010

Sv: Bates og Leeds United i retten
« Svar #5 på: August 23, 2014, 08:53:51 »
YEP:

SACKED from his position as honorary Leeds United president 13 months ago, Ken Bates is due to have his day in court in October.

The case, if it goes that far, stands to cost someone a small fortune.

Leeds took action against Bates over a range of disputed costs, the largest a private jet contract negotiated by the 82-year-old to fly him to games from Monaco.

Bates was dismissed for gross misconduct but denied any wrongdoing and filed a counter-claim for wrongful dismissal. His position carried an annual salary of £250,000 – money Bates agreed to waive provided his three-year tenure as president did not end “other than for a permitted reason.”

The dispute was between Bates and Gulf Finance House, United’s former owner and the Bahraini bank who bought Leeds from him in 2012. Like most of GFH’s legacies, the court case fell into the lap of Massimo Cellino, when he replaced the bank as majority shareholder in April of this year.

A feature of Bates’ time as Leeds chairman was a heavy outlay on court cases. Shaun Harvey, the club’s chief executive for as long as Bates ran United, once said they were costing “a fortune”. But there is expectation that Cellino and Bates will settle amicably and out of court after three meetings between the pair this week. Harvey – now CEO of Football League, the governing body which tried to block Cellino’s takeover – attended at least one of them, for reasons unknown.

In an interview with his new radio venture, Radio Yorkshire, Bates said that in “the dispute between myself and Leeds United, we’re having very constructive discussions and I believe they’ll be resolved sooner rather than later.”

The interesting aspect of an agreement will be the part that the rights for live radio commentary of United’s games plays in it, if any. BBC Radio Leeds is in the second year of the three-year deal it negotiated with GFH in 2013 but the corporation does not bid for exclusive rights. As a public broadcaster, it leaves the door open to other stations to commentate in tandem.

Yorkshire Radio, the now defunct station which Bates established in 2006, commentated exclusively on Leeds’ fixtures for five years from the start of the 2008-09 season. The station folded in the summer of 2013 but Bates launched Radio Yorkshire this year, basing the station directly opposite Elland Road. Several sources claim that if Bates and Cellino shake hands, commentary rights will pass between them. Watch this space.

 :o
Min første Leeds-kamp:
Strømsgodset vs Leeds, 19.september 1973