OFFICIAL SITE - CLUB STATEMENT RE HMRC

Short and sweet.......

http://www.cardiffcityfc.co.uk/page/New ... 28,00.html

Short and sweet.......

http://www.cardiffcityfc.co.uk/page/New ... 28,00.html

My Opinion on that, they thought they would of Sold a player by now.

To me, that means we can't be under a transfer embargo. If we're due to pay it back by the end of the month, they can't punish us until we miss that date, can they?

To me, that means we can't be under a transfer embargo. If we're due to pay it back by the end of the month, they can't punish us until we miss that date, can they?

Good point, there is no winding up order made at present, merely a winding up petition has been issued.

To me, that means we can't be under a transfer embargo. If we're due to pay it back by the end of the month, they can't punish us until we miss that date, can they?

sounds right to me... but if we get loan players during the transfer window they would have to go back if we got embargoed

The FL issue an embargo as soon as HMRC or others issue a winding up petition. Are Cardiff City any different?

Jones' is talking nonsense about loan players having to go back straight away once under embargo. If their initial loan period expired while under embargo that would happen. In Etuhu's case he signed on loan for the season.

Pompey had a transfer embargo imposed months ago. O'Hara only returned to Spurs when his initial period was up and then Pompey couldn't renew..

Likewise at Plymouth. They had a transfer embargo put in place in early December, now lifted. They did not have to send Darcy Blake back immediately but only at the end of his intial loan period.

The FL might be remaining tightlipped but until we settle our debts I firmly believe we have an embargo in place.

To me, that means we can't be under a transfer embargo. If we're due to pay it back by the end of the month, they can't punish us until we miss that date, can they?

Good point, there is no winding up order made at present, merely a winding up petition has been issued.

Actually that's an extremely good point/points.

When the original winding up petition was issued on 25 November we were all told the club had 70 days to pay (3rd February).

Therefore why would we need to pay anything before then?

Also you don't face an embargo until you fall behind with payments and that wouldn't have happened until 3rd February.

To me, that means we can't be under a transfer embargo. If we're due to pay it back by the end of the month, they can't punish us until we miss that date, can they?

Good point, there is no winding up order made at present, merely a winding up petition has been issued.

Actually that's an extremely good point/points.

When the original winding up petition was issued on 25 November we were all told the club had 70 days to pay (3rd February).

Therefore why would we need to pay anything before then?

Also you don't face an embargo until you fall behind with payments and that wouldn't have happened until 3rd February.

tony

we fell behind with the payments december 22nd when we dident pay as the agreed schedule with the hmrc when they stopped the winding up order on 16th december

tony

we fell behind with the payments december 22nd when we dident pay as the agreed schedule with the hmrc when they stopped the winding up order on 16th december

Steve we may have been due to pay an 'installment' on 22nd December but if we didn't it might have been with the agreement of the HMRC. Also there this '70 days to pay' from the winding up order dated 25 November.

Why give 70 days if you then demand payment within 28? It doesn't really make sense

tony

we fell behind with the payments december 22nd when we dident pay as the agreed schedule with the hmrc when they stopped the winding up order on 16th december

Steve we may have been due to pay an 'installment' on 22nd December but if we didn't it might have been with the agreement of the HMRC. Also there this '70 days to pay' from the winding up order dated 25 November.

Why give 70 days if you then demand payment within 28? It doesn't really make sense

That's why this speculation can go on and on. If the original date for payment was 70 days then courts would not expect that to be shortened unless by specific court order or by agreement of both parties.

Without us seeing the wording of the orders of adjournment we are just guessing. What I do know is that issuing a winding up petitionand having a "back stop" hearing date is common practise to ensure that there would be no further delay should the deadline not be met.

Just wish someone could confirm that 70 day payment date, it could ease a few immediate worries