Sam hammam suing ccfc for 15 million

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

This little spat of two white knights protecting they princess.

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

how many millions are we in debt Wez.. its like the never ending gob stopper..

According to the 2018 accounts around 139 million liabilities but that's coz of a loan of 28 million and player purchases of 35.6 million in june of that year ,its on the last page of the accounts on companies house but that doesnt take into account the 130-40ish million pound income of the 2018/19 season obviously you have to take the costs and wages of that season out of that amount depending on also how much tan has written off or converted too in that period

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

This little spat of two white knights protecting they princess.

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

what mess ?
how many millions are we in debt Wez.. its like the never ending gob stopper..

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00109065 all here every accounts you can download for free

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

This little spat of two white knights protecting they princess.

ah right.. nice one.. and I thought he was asking genuinely..
didn't realise it was just your spud peeler.

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

This little spat of two white knights protecting they princess.

ah right.. nice one.. and I thought he was asking genuinely..
didn't realise it was just your spud peeler.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

To be honest neither of them would be my choice for owners. But out of the 2 I’d choose tan all day long. As I think a lot of fans did at the time. I remember a large group of us at Coventry away I think lifting our skirts to entice in new owners waving flags as Sam terrible work kept putting at risk of extinction.

And really who cares what done is done now. Can’t we just support the club we love?

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

This little spat of two white knights protecting they princess.

ah right.. nice one.. and I thought he was asking genuinely..
didn't realise it was just your spud peeler.

no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

This little spat of two white knights protecting they princess.

ah right.. nice one.. and I thought he was asking genuinely..
didn't realise it was just your spud peeler.

no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez

You asked about the debt it's there in black and white

To be honest neither of them would be my choice for owners. But out of the 2 I’d choose tan all day long. As I think a lot of fans did at the time. I remember a large group of us at Coventry away I think lifting our skirts to entice in new owners waving flags as Sam terrible work kept putting at risk of extinction.

And really who cares what done is done now. Can’t we just support the club we love?

no you cant.. you have to have an agenda and anyone that's ever done any good here has to be slaughtered , complained about and lied about..
and seemingly you cant try to be reasonable about it either without being a white knight defending a princess..

[/quote]Cardiff City were League 4 in debt on the verge of bankruptcy, Ninian Park in a terrible state, crowds of 3,500 and NO one wanted us.

We had not had the Success Sam gave us, for for over 40 years at least.

I would say 85% of the fans at Cardiff City are there nowadays due to Sam Hammam taking over Cardiff City and taking us on an unbelievable journey.

Atmosphere was bouncing once Sam took over.

99% of the fans I have met who slate Sam were not there the season before Sam came when I ask them were they attending.[/quote]

Have to agree!!! Sam woke up the sleeping giant, without him we wouldn't be where we are now..... yes he took a lot of risks and gambled on getting us to the Premiership, but nobody else would have taken the risk!!! Some of my best days at Ninian Park was down to Sam and I'll always thank him for that.

Am I missing something here why dogfound and forever blue so protective of Sam?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it mate. you can not use different criteria for one owner to another.. if Sam is owed money ,well he is owed it.. people accept VT being owed cash ..
as for Sams time here.. he pushed the club forward like it hadn't been for years.. and I will always be grateful for that. VT wouldn't even have heard about us let alone bought us without Sams enthusiasm and ambitions for the club.
he did a hell of a lot more good than harm here.

So it’s sams fault the mess we in? He pushed for the Malaysians?
For me personally I’m grateful that both have been invoked in our club. But can never forgive Sam for wanting to kill our club.

What mess are we in ?

This little spat of two white knights protecting they princess.

ah right.. nice one.. and I thought he was asking genuinely..
didn't realise it was just your spud peeler.

no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez

You asked about the debt it's there in black and white

and that's acceptable to you as not being a mess after all these years ?
ive never been one of these tan out merchants.. and ive defended him loads. but you cant be having a go for how Sam run things and just pretend this enormous amount don't exist and in some way it happened without Tan knowing..

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it
no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez[/quote]
You asked about the debt it's there in black and white[/quote]


and that's acceptable to you as not being a mess after all these years ?
ive never been one of these tan out merchants.. and ive defended him loads. but you cant be having a go for how Sam run things and just pretend this enormous amount don't exist and in some way it happened without Tan knowing..[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Difference is tans writing off his mistakes ,sam made the mistakes but wanted all his money back ,sam took money out of the club in the form of wages for himself and his brother , tan hasnt ,sam lied to us saying he wasnt Langston then he admitted he was just to get his final settlement, 79.1 million is the official figure we are in debt not bad really considering as the 139 doesnt take into account of any income in the 2018/19 season ,most other clubs in our league are in alot worse position than us , we will probably be debt free by the end of this season if tan converts the same amount which he did in the last set of accounts

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it
no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez

You asked about the debt it's there in black and white[/quote]


and that's acceptable to you as not being a mess after all these years ?
ive never been one of these tan out merchants.. and ive defended him loads. but you cant be having a go for how Sam run things and just pretend this enormous amount don't exist and in some way it happened without Tan knowing..[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Difference is tans writing off his mistakes ,sam made the mistakes but wanted all his money back ,sam took money out of the club in the form of wages for himself and his brother , tan hasnt ,sam lied to us saying he wasnt Langston then he admitted he was just to get his final settlement, 79.1 million is the official figure we are in debt not bad really considering as the 139 doesnt take into account of any income in the 2018/19 season ,most other clubs in our league are in alot worse position than us , we will probably be debt free by the end of this season if tan converts the same amount which he did in the last set of accounts[/quote]



honestly mate I don't see this as a Sam v Tan thing..
and you have no more idea how this will end than I do..
as for what you've said, yes VT is paying himself back/writing off.. im not sure Sam ever had the sort of money to do that.
but the amount we managed to get in debt is insane. and therefore it looks like self sustaining is a pipe dream, we never ever get debt free unless we are self sustaining.?

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it
no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez

You asked about the debt it's there in black and white

and that's acceptable to you as not being a mess after all these years ?
ive never been one of these tan out merchants.. and ive defended him loads. but you cant be having a go for how Sam run things and just pretend this enormous amount don't exist and in some way it happened without Tan knowing..[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Difference is tans writing off his mistakes ,sam made the mistakes but wanted all his money back ,sam took money out of the club in the form of wages for himself and his brother , tan hasnt ,sam lied to us saying he wasnt Langston then he admitted he was just to get his final settlement, 79.1 million is the official figure we are in debt not bad really considering as the 139 doesnt take into account of any income in the 2018/19 season ,most other clubs in our league are in alot worse position than us , we will probably be debt free by the end of this season if tan converts the same amount which he did in the last set of accounts[/quote]



honestly mate I don't see this as a Sam v Tan thing..
and you have no more idea how this will end than I do..
as for what you've said, yes VT is paying himself back/writing off.. im not sure Sam ever had the sort of money to do that.
but the amount we managed to get in debt is insane. and therefore it looks like self sustaining is a pipe dream, we never ever get debt free unless we are self sustaining.?[/quote]
If we went up every few years then back down and like a yoyo then we could become self sufficient if we didn't overspend like last season when we go up but no club in the championship is self sufficient all are in debt so I dont know the answer ,I think the club have made mistakes but are getting better at managing those, only time will tell

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it
no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez

You asked about the debt it's there in black and white

and that's acceptable to you as not being a mess after all these years ?
ive never been one of these tan out merchants.. and ive defended him loads. but you cant be having a go for how Sam run things and just pretend this enormous amount don't exist and in some way it happened without Tan knowing..

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Difference is tans writing off his mistakes ,sam made the mistakes but wanted all his money back ,sam took money out of the club in the form of wages for himself and his brother , tan hasnt ,sam lied to us saying he wasnt Langston then he admitted he was just to get his final settlement, 79.1 million is the official figure we are in debt not bad really considering as the 139 doesnt take into account of any income in the 2018/19 season ,most other clubs in our league are in alot worse position than us , we will probably be debt free by the end of this season if tan converts the same amount which he did in the last set of accounts[/quote]



honestly mate I don't see this as a Sam v Tan thing..
and you have no more idea how this will end than I do..
as for what you've said, yes VT is paying himself back/writing off.. im not sure Sam ever had the sort of money to do that.
but the amount we managed to get in debt is insane. and therefore it looks like self sustaining is a pipe dream, we never ever get debt free unless we are self sustaining.?[/quote]
If we went up every few years then back down and like a yoyo then we could become self sufficient if we didn't overspend like last season when we go up but no club in the championship is self sufficient all are in debt so I dont know the answer ,I think the club have made mistakes but are getting better at managing those, only time will tell[/quote]


overspend when we went up ? bloody hell how bad do you want us to be..
it wasn't a good championship squad going up ..a phrase that was used a lot was the whole was more than the sum of its parts.. so going up lacking quality , well the budget wasn't near enough..
I really do not get after all these relatively good years we are still in this mess when other clubs seem to get over it and bounce back mate..

im not protective other than trying to be fair.. I don't do this jumping on a bandwagon and taking sides nonsense
im just being honest about it
no idea what point your making in putting that sheet up wez

You asked about the debt it's there in black and white

and that's acceptable to you as not being a mess after all these years ?
ive never been one of these tan out merchants.. and ive defended him loads. but you cant be having a go for how Sam run things and just pretend this enormous amount don't exist and in some way it happened without Tan knowing..

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Difference is tans writing off his mistakes ,sam made the mistakes but wanted all his money back ,sam took money out of the club in the form of wages for himself and his brother , tan hasnt ,sam lied to us saying he wasnt Langston then he admitted he was just to get his final settlement, 79.1 million is the official figure we are in debt not bad really considering as the 139 doesnt take into account of any income in the 2018/19 season ,most other clubs in our league are in alot worse position than us , we will probably be debt free by the end of this season if tan converts the same amount which he did in the last set of accounts[/quote]



honestly mate I don't see this as a Sam v Tan thing..
and you have no more idea how this will end than I do..
as for what you've said, yes VT is paying himself back/writing off.. im not sure Sam ever had the sort of money to do that.
but the amount we managed to get in debt is insane. and therefore it looks like self sustaining is a pipe dream, we never ever get debt free unless we are self sustaining.?[/quote]
If we went up every few years then back down and like a yoyo then we could become self sufficient if we didn't overspend like last season when we go up but no club in the championship is self sufficient all are in debt so I dont know the answer ,I think the club have made mistakes but are getting better at managing those, only time will tell[/quote]


overspend when we went up ? bloody hell how bad do you want us to be..
it wasn't a good championship squad going up ..a phrase that was used a lot was the whole was more than the sum of its parts.. so going up lacking quality , well the budget wasn't near enough..
I really do not get after all these relatively good years we are still in this mess when other clubs seem to get over it and bounce back mate..[/quote]
I didn't say we overspent ,I was replying to how do we become self sufficient, read what I wrote again you asked how we could be self sufficient

Other clubs don't really bounce back up tho ,football is a loss making business apart from a few exceptions ,look at your stokes,Bolton,Sunderlands,swansea ,all with years in the premiership but right in the shit because of over spending in the premiership, then you got derby,Sheffield Wednesday, Blackburn,Leeds in more debt than us ,fulham will be right in it if they dont go back up ,most of the championship clubs are in more financial trouble than us

Other clubs don't really bounce back up tho ,football is a loss making business apart from a few exceptions ,look at your stokes,Bolton,Sunderlands,swansea ,all with years in the premiership but right in the shit because of over spending in the premiership, then you got derby,Sheffield Wednesday, Blackburn,Leeds in more debt than us ,fulham will be right in it if they dont go back up ,most of the championship clubs are in more financial trouble than us

but Fulham and leeds are giving it a go this year, derby have for a few years. and yes Swansea.. in the shit but above us and spent an absolute fortune 2 years ago.. and us ? we were a poor prem side that lost 6 of its best players tried to replace with 15 mill which apparently was way too much according to powers that be .
I just see no end to it …

Other clubs don't really bounce back up tho ,football is a loss making business apart from a few exceptions ,look at your stokes,Bolton,Sunderlands,swansea ,all with years in the premiership but right in the shit because of over spending in the premiership, then you got derby,Sheffield Wednesday, Blackburn,Leeds in more debt than us ,fulham will be right in it if they dont go back up ,most of the championship clubs are in more financial trouble than us

anyway..back to the thread
if Sam is saying he wants 15mill because he is not lifetime president I doubt he will get it .
if it turns out to be money owed he is after .. someone has lied..

From memory part of the settlement was that Hammam would have lifetime club presidency. If that has been reneged then he will have a winning case against Tan, although obviously not for 15m.

In terms of Isaacs, he potentially has a case for 'unfair prejudice' depending on what the shareholders agreement says regarding share issues and first refusal on newly created shares.

Important to not that while Sam's case will be against the club - Isaac's will be against Tan himself.

''Cardiff City and creditors Langston Corporation have announced "an amicable resolution" to the longstanding debt issue at the club.

Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan said he was "grateful and indebted" to former owner Sam Hammam for reaching a settlement.

The debt to Langston - whose spokesman is Hammam - is thought to be about £24m, lent to the club in 2004.

Hammam will become a life president at the club as part of the deal.''

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/23413324

Other clubs don't really bounce back up tho ,football is a loss making business apart from a few exceptions ,look at your stokes,Bolton,Sunderlands,swansea ,all with years in the premiership but right in the shit because of over spending in the premiership, then you got derby,Sheffield Wednesday, Blackburn,Leeds in more debt than us ,fulham will be right in it if they dont go back up ,most of the championship clubs are in more financial trouble than us

anyway..back to the thread
if Sam is saying he wants 15mill because he is not lifetime president I doubt he will get it .
if it turns out to be money owed he is after .. someone has lied..

The only monies owed is the 2 million pound promotion payment everything else is settled ,so it will depend if that's paid or not ,if its paid sam is owed nothing other than a non financial title

''Cardiff City and creditors Langston Corporation have announced "an amicable resolution" to the longstanding debt issue at the club.

Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan said he was "grateful and indebted" to former owner Sam Hammam for reaching a settlement.

The debt to Langston - whose spokesman is Hammam - is thought to be about £24m, lent to the club in 2004.

Hammam will become a life president at the club as part of the deal.''

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/23413324

That article is 2013 another court case was at the beginning of February 2016 where the final settlement was agreed to be paid and was infact paid at the end of February 2016

''Cardiff City and creditors Langston Corporation have announced "an amicable resolution" to the longstanding debt issue at the club.

Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan said he was "grateful and indebted" to former owner Sam Hammam for reaching a settlement.

The debt to Langston - whose spokesman is Hammam - is thought to be about £24m, lent to the club in 2004.

Hammam will become a life president at the club as part of the deal.''

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/23413324

That article is 2013 another court case was at the beginning of February 2016 where the final settlement was agreed to be paid and was infact paid at the end of February 2016

It was the same deal. The second case was because Cardiff had suspended payments from that 2013 deal the year previously to the second case, they did this until they were sure who was behind Langston, when they were satisfied it was SH they settled the remaining £5m and honouring the presidency.

The problem is that the deal was struck under the caveat Sam Hammam would have that title. So if you pay that deal price, then take it away the part of the deal allowing you that discount - it means Hammam can then go after the full amount in lieu of what was discounted based on that deal being honoured in full.

It’s a bit like saying, “Spurs, we just bought Ben Davies off you for £20m.... I will give you £10m and I will give you the pick of our academy products over the next 5 years, anyone you fancy then they are yours - Spurs say deal!”.

Then you say, “Nah you can’t have the academy picks anymore but here is the £10m to settle it”.

Spurs will then have the right to sue you for the other £10m in lieu of what they discounted the debt for in return for something else - something that was reneged on.

If Hammam takes him to court - he wins. It’s that simple.

''Cardiff City and creditors Langston Corporation have announced "an amicable resolution" to the longstanding debt issue at the club.

Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan said he was "grateful and indebted" to former owner Sam Hammam for reaching a settlement.

The debt to Langston - whose spokesman is Hammam - is thought to be about £24m, lent to the club in 2004.

Hammam will become a life president at the club as part of the deal.''

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/23413324

That article is 2013 another court case was at the beginning of February 2016 where the final settlement was agreed to be paid and was infact paid at the end of February 2016

It was the same deal. The second case was because Cardiff had suspended payments from that 2013 deal the year previously to the second case, they did this until they were sure who was behind Langston, when they were satisfied it was SH they settled the remaining £5m and honouring the presidency.

The problem is that the deal was struck under the caveat Sam Hammam would have that title. So if you pay that deal price, then take it away the part of the deal allowing you that discount - it means Hammam can then go after the full amount in lieu of what was discounted based on that deal being honoured in full.

It’s a bit like saying, “Spurs, we just bought Ben Davies off you for £20m.... I will give you £10m and I will give you the pick of our academy products over the next 5 years, anyone you fancy then they are yours - Spurs say deal!”.

Then you say, “Nah you can’t have the academy picks anymore but here is the £10m to settle it”.

Spurs will then have the right to sue you for the other £10m in lieu of what they discounted the debt for in return for something else - something that was reneged on.

If Hammam takes him to court - he wins. It’s that simple.

Sorry but I don't agree if the promotion bonus has been paid ,all monies are settled then cant see that life president having any monetary value at all ,it would depend on the contract tho on the out of court settlement in the 2016

''Cardiff City and creditors Langston Corporation have announced "an amicable resolution" to the longstanding debt issue at the club.

Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan said he was "grateful and indebted" to former owner Sam Hammam for reaching a settlement.

The debt to Langston - whose spokesman is Hammam - is thought to be about £24m, lent to the club in 2004.

Hammam will become a life president at the club as part of the deal.''

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/23413324

That article is 2013 another court case was at the beginning of February 2016 where the final settlement was agreed to be paid and was infact paid at the end of February 2016

It was the same deal. The second case was because Cardiff had suspended payments from that 2013 deal the year previously to the second case, they did this until they were sure who was behind Langston, when they were satisfied it was SH they settled the remaining £5m and honouring the presidency.

The problem is that the deal was struck under the caveat Sam Hammam would have that title. So if you pay that deal price, then take it away the part of the deal allowing you that discount - it means Hammam can then go after the full amount in lieu of what was discounted based on that deal being honoured in full.

It’s a bit like saying, “Spurs, we just bought Ben Davies off you for £20m.... I will give you £10m and I will give you the pick of our academy products over the next 5 years, anyone you fancy then they are yours - Spurs say deal!”.

Then you say, “Nah you can’t have the academy picks anymore but here is the £10m to settle it”.

Spurs will then have the right to sue you for the other £10m in lieu of what they discounted the debt for in return for something else - something that was reneged on.

If Hammam takes him to court - he wins. It’s that simple.

Sorry but I don't agree if the promotion bonus has been paid ,all monies are settled then cant see that life president having any monetary value at all ,it would depend on the contract tho on the out of court settlement in the 2016

All monies were not settled.

The debt was originally much larger. Hammam discounted it in a deal that involved life presidency. If the part of the deal used to discount the owing is then taken away then he is entitled to it all.

I assume that discount is what he is now claiming, maybe Annis can confirm?

If this is the case then the club will certainly owe him the difference. No question at all.

''Cardiff City and creditors Langston Corporation have announced "an amicable resolution" to the longstanding debt issue at the club.

Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan said he was "grateful and indebted" to former owner Sam Hammam for reaching a settlement.

The debt to Langston - whose spokesman is Hammam - is thought to be about £24m, lent to the club in 2004.

Hammam will become a life president at the club as part of the deal.''

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/23413324

That article is 2013 another court case was at the beginning of February 2016 where the final settlement was agreed to be paid and was infact paid at the end of February 2016

It was the same deal. The second case was because Cardiff had suspended payments from that 2013 deal the year previously to the second case, they did this until they were sure who was behind Langston, when they were satisfied it was SH they settled the remaining £5m and honouring the presidency.

The problem is that the deal was struck under the caveat Sam Hammam would have that title. So if you pay that deal price, then take it away the part of the deal allowing you that discount - it means Hammam can then go after the full amount in lieu of what was discounted based on that deal being honoured in full.

It’s a bit like saying, “Spurs, we just bought Ben Davies off you for £20m.... I will give you £10m and I will give you the pick of our academy products over the next 5 years, anyone you fancy then they are yours - Spurs say deal!”.

Then you say, “Nah you can’t have the academy picks anymore but here is the £10m to settle it”.

Spurs will then have the right to sue you for the other £10m in lieu of what they discounted the debt for in return for something else - something that was reneged on.

If Hammam takes him to court - he wins. It’s that simple.

Sorry but I don't agree if the promotion bonus has been paid ,all monies are settled then cant see that life president having any monetary value at all ,it would depend on the contract tho on the out of court settlement in the 2016

All monies were not settled.

The debt was originally much larger. Hammam discounted it in a deal that involved life presidency. If the part of the deal used to discount the owing is then taken away then he is entitled to it all.

I assume that discount is what he is now claiming, maybe Annis can confirm?

If this is the case then the club will certainly owe him the difference. No question at all.

That is complete rubbish ,claiming the whole amount? ,he hasnt got a chance in hell of getting it ,go through all the court dates ,where he was claiming he wasnt Langston then he had to admit it in last one so he could get the settled amount ,if we havnt paid the promotion bonus then city should pay it and get rid of him for good

That is complete rubbish ,claiming the whole amount? ,he hasnt got a chance in hell of getting it ,go through all the court dates ,where he was claiming he wasnt Langston then he had to admit it in last one so he could get the settled amount ,if we havnt paid the promotion bonus then city should pay it and get rid of him for good

Huh? If he’s entitled to most of it then he’s entitled to it all. It was his choice to settle for a lower amount in a deal that saw him get life presidency.

You can’t just take the discounted amount and then later take away your side of the deal.

Perhaps he run out of cash for ice creams? ( That's one for the )

If a post in any business is ceased , such as, president, then there is nothing anyone one can do as said post is seen as unrequired to aid or assist a business.

If we owe the legally proven liar some money ( lawfully )then pay him and move away from under his rotten cloud.

Look how many players we virtually gave away to pay the taxman when others were taking millions out of the club!!!

PS. I am not on any bandwagon or siding with anyone. Yes, it was great fun and crazy days back then BUT would we have been so happy if we knew what was going on ?