For BB - Bramall Lane Freehold & Debt

[derrywan]

Right - I got sick and tired of BB's inuendo, so did some digging (at my own cost). BB was wrong about the ownership.

BUT I discovered something else - the ground is owned by the club, but McCabe is taking his money back early ...

Freehold Title Absolute: The Sheffield United Football Club Ltd.
Mortgaged to bank of Scotland PLC
In June 2009 a charge (debt secured against the property) was entered for Sheffield United Football Club Ltd. to pay Scarborough Ventures Ltd: £1m on 15/01/2010; £1m on 28/05/2010; £1m on 13/08/2010; £1m on 14/01/2011; £1.5m on 27/05/2011 and £1.5 M on 12/08/11

Scarborough Ventures Ltd has the 2 younger McCabes as directors alongside Esplanade Directors Ltd.

Esplanade Directors Ltd was dormant until just recently. Its directors are the 2 younger McCabes, Sandra McCabe and Paul Richardson, Finance Director at Scarborough group.

(all the above available from the land registry and companies house)

So the upshot is that over the next 2 years, Scarborough will be repaid £7m by the club.

(edit: worth reading vistoma's comments at top of page 2 for reassurance on this and the timing of West Ham money coming in)

 

[beightonblade]

do sum more digging !

oh an as far as ULTIMATE ownership goes...... i thought i was just asking a question !

Tell everybody the interest rate charged anall.

 

[Darren]

Right - I got sick and tired of BB's inuendo, so did some digging (at my own cost). BB was wrong about the ownership.

BUT I discovered something else - the ground is owned by the club, but McCabe is taking his money back early ...

Freehold Title Absolute: The Sheffield United Football Club Ltd.
Mortgaged to bank of Scotland PLC
In June 2009 a charge (debt secured against the property) was entered for Sheffield United Football Club Ltd. to pay Scarborough Ventures Ltd: £1m on 15/01/2010; £1m on 28/05/2010; £1m on 13/08/2010; £1m on 14/01/2011; £1.5m on 27/05/2011 and £1.5 M on 12/08/11

Scarborough Ventures Ltd has the 2 younger McCabes as directors alongside Esplanade Directors Ltd.

Esplanade Directors Ltd was dormant until just recently. Its directors are the 2 younger McCabes, Sandra McCabe and Paul Richardson, Finance Director at Scarborough group.

(all the above available from the land registry and companies house)

So the upshot is that over the next 2 years, Scarborough will be repaid £7m by the club.

Thanks for that. It would be interesting to know why, KM in the guise of Scarborough ventures Ltd feels the need to secure the debt owed by KM, in the guise of SUFC, on the freehold of BL. In theory, of course, if SUFC did not pay the debts on time, then Scarborough Ventures could foreclose on Bramall Lane - i,e sell the ground to pay the debt, which is maybe what BB was hinting at in his weird way.

However, why on earth KM would do that when, as effective owner of SUFC, he could just pay the debt any time he felt like it is beyond me. I suspect that the need to secure Scarborugh's debt on the ground is probably to do with ensuring that the lending of the money to SUFC satisfies accountants and lawyers and complies with company law - i.e. KM is fulfilling his duties to the Scarborugh shareholders (whoever they may be) in ensuring that money lent out by the company has effective security.

Though no doubt people who know more about accounts and company law could enlighten us further.

 

[Darren]

do sum more digging !

oh an as far as ULTIMATE ownership goes...... i thought i was just asking a question !

Tell everybody the interest rate charged anall.

That £50 bet still stands.

Money? Mouth?

 

[beightonblade]

eeee bye gum ............... that McCabes a shrewd owd bugger ...aint he?



wake up smell the coffee.... is that what the Americans say ?

 

[Houso]

eeee bye gum ............... that McCabes a shrewd owd bugger ...aint he?



wake up smell the coffee.... is that what the Americans say ?

Does McCabe own the freehold then?

 

[derrywan]

Does McCabe own the freehold then?

No. SUFC Ltd does.

 

[JJ Sefton]

Hopefully Crouch End Blade will take a look and share his thoughts. Always found him quite illuminating on this stuff on BU.

 

[SotonBlade]

wake up smell the coffee.... is that what the Americans say ?

No...they say Cwoffee!

 

[Micalijo]

Great stuff Derry.

Seems to me that Bank of Scotland effectively own the freehold - in much the same way as Yorkshire Building Society own my house.

Effectively, the overdraft with Bank of Scotland is maintained on the basis that the bank can at anytime force SUFC Ltd to sell the freehold or pass it to Bank.

I would imagine that the value of the freehold is more than the overdraft and this allows a second charge - the one held by Scarborough. I don't think Scarborough could force any sale of BDTBL without Bank having first say.

I am surprised that Bank have allowed Scarborough to take cash out but I suppose this is a reflection of the 'good' job McCabe has done in reducing the club debts - ie Bank aren't concerned about cash to Scarborough because OD is manageable and they have first charge via mortgage.

All of the above could be rubbish of course. I do work and mix in financial circles at times and all of above seems perfectly normal practice in terms of a business owner looking after his investment - I just get the impression that he wants out and I can't blame him, especially after collapse of Valad.

Does all of the above help the first team? Not in my opinion. Should McCabe be taking the cash out? Not an easy one. I can't blame him for doing so - he is the one who put alot in in the first place and I think he will see the Tevez wedge as being partly due to him.

 

[Vistoma]

I worked for Bank Of Scotland until very recently and this sort of deal was exactly my field. Most Banks will insist on debt of any magnitude being secured against freehold, just like your home mortgage.

The charge and structuring of the repayments to KM and Scarborough is in line with the time line for payments coming from West Ham so it makes absolute business sense that this schedule would be set up.

It will also leave the club with less debt should it be put up for sale in the next few years. This is only 1 view of course and the flip is that with this debt cleared future funding would be much easier to obtain as the gearing of SUFC would be greatly enhanced.

 

[Darren]

I worked for Bank Of Scotland until very recently and this sort of deal was exactly my field. Most Banks will insist on debt of any magnitude being secured against freehold, just like your home mortgage.

The charge and structuring of the repayments to KM and Scarborough is in line with the time line for payments coming from West Ham so it makes absolute business sense that this schedule would be set up.

It will also leave the club with less debt should it be put up for sale in the next few years. This is only 1 view of course and the flip is that with this debt cleared future funding would be much easier to obtain as the gearing of SUFC would be greatly enhanced.

The fact that the ground is mortgaged to the RBS does, of course, show what utter nonsense BB's suggestion that KM might hold the freehold was. Obviously, there is no way on earth that the bank would allow transfer of the freehold without the debt to them being paid off first.

 

[Vistoma]

The fact that the ground is mortgaged to the RBS does, of course, show what utter nonsense BB's suggestion that KM might hold the freehold was. Obviously, there is no way on earth that the bank would allow transfer of the freehold without the debt to them being paid off first.

I am nit Picking Darren, but its not RBS its BoS, and you are quite correct in your assumption, they would have to underwrite any transfer of freehold.

 

[derrywan]

I am nit Picking Darren, but its not RBS its BoS, and you are quite correct in your assumption, they would have to underwrite any transfer of freehold.

and their mortgage has been on the register since 17/12/2002 in its current form

 

[Isiah]

I am not up to speed with the detailed finances at BDTBL, and they seem to be getting increasingly complex to the point that probably only an inside few are, but if as has been suggested these repayments mirror the payment structure on the West Ham monies why the need for a charge? It may be, as Darren has suggested, that Mr Mc. has to be seen to be covering the Scarborough position to meet his commitments to shareholders, but there is now a certainty that he a.k.a. Scarborough will get £7M from united over the next 2 years come what may. Don't know what the chances are of West Ham failing to meet their commitments - probably very slight so in practice no big deal - but it does give some strength to the arguments of some posters who regularly argue that Mr Mc. isn't actually putting an awful lot of financial risk and commitment into SUFC.

 

[beightonblade]

Anybody heard the expression 'due dilligence'......?

I remeber paying a firm wads of ££££££'s to do it for me !

If only i'd known..... all i had to do was go online and check the Land Registry details to save misen loads of money.... yer learn sumat new every day !

 

[derrywan]

last due diligence i depended on didn't spot half of the problems I've had to sort out ... would've been better doing it meself

 

[beightonblade]

Oh an if it were me the freehold of BDTBL wud be placed in a life rent trust with the Blades being main benificeries.
The trust wud rent the ground to the Blades who wud be the 'operating company' ..... and if dun reight the asset of BDTBL wud be well protected.

but thats just my opinion and i know nowt.

 

[beightonblade]

last due diligence i depended on didn't spot half of the problems I've had to sort out ... would've been better doing it meself

well i think the BBC wud have a field day doing a rougues programme on bad lawyers,accountants and bankers..... cause sum of em make politicians and used car salesmen look honest.

The Bank of Scotland wrote of a large amount of cash for little owd me because they fc uked up !....... or may be it was just because they liked me

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

Oh an if it were me the freehold of BDTBL wud be placed in a life rent trust with the Blades being main benificeries.
The trust wud rent the ground to the Blades who wud be the 'operating company' ..... and if dun reight the asset of BDTBL wud be well protected.

but thats just my opinion and i know nowt.

I'm not sure of the regulations around football clubs and assets, but this would seem to be the best way of protecting the asset and ensuring the Blades gained maximum benefit. In these situations a 'peppercorn' rent is usually charged, not sure how that would sit with the football authorities.

 

[Darren]

Anybody heard the expression 'due dilligence'......?

I remeber paying a firm wads of ££££££'s to do it for me !

If only i'd known..... all i had to do was go online and check the Land Registry details to save misen loads of money.... yer learn sumat new every day !

What are you on about?

Of course, when any property is conveyed, there are various checks that the buyer needs to do. But one of the checks he doesn't need to do, other than to check with the Land Registry, is that the seller owns the property.

In the old days, before compulsory land registration came in, one of the checks that did indeed have to be carried out was an investigation in to title to ensure that the seller did actually own the property he was selling.

Now we have compulsory land registration, evidence of ownership registered at the Land Registry is conclusive proof of title.

Are you up for that £50 bet?

 

[Wards]

What are you on about?

Of course, when any property is conveyed, there are various checks that the buyer needs to do. But one of the checks he doesn't need to do, other than to check with the Land Registry, is that the seller owns the property.

In the old days, before compulsory land registration came in, one of the checks that did indeed have to be carried out was an investigation in to title to ensure that the seller did actually own the property he was selling.

Now we have compulsory land registration, evidence of ownership registered at the Land Registry is conclusive proof of title.

Are you up for that £50 bet?

Course he's not. This is BB we're talking about, you've more chance of seeing rocking horse shit.

The man who spouts blatent lies and propaganda to somehow 'prove' his unfounded allegations.

Pathetic.

I wish there was an ignore button.

 

[beightonblade]

What are you on about?

Of course, when any property is conveyed, there are various checks that the buyer needs to do. But one of the checks he doesn't need to do, other than to check with the Land Registry, is that the seller owns the property.

In the old days, before compulsory land registration came in, one of the checks that did indeed have to be carried out was an investigation in to title to ensure that the seller did actually own the property he was selling.

Now we have compulsory land registration, evidence of ownership registered at the Land Registry is conclusive proof of title.

Are you up for that £50 bet?

do you want to Paypal me the £50 ?

as you know Her Majesty The Queen is the ULTIMATE owner !

 

[derrywan]

do you want to Paypal me the £50 ?

as you know Her Majesty The Queen is the ULTIMATE owner !

actually its The Crown Estate, but there you go

 

[beightonblade]

actually its The Crown Estate, but there you go

and whose the head?

 

[Darren]

do you want to Paypal me the £50 ?

as you know Her Majesty The Queen is the ULTIMATE owner !

But she doesn't own the freehold does she? Which is what we were arguing about.

 

[SheepdipBlade]

Course he's not. This is BB we're talking about, you've more chance of seeing rocking horse shit.

The man who spouts blatent lies and propaganda to somehow 'prove' his unfounded allegations.

Pathetic.

I wish there was an ignore button.

If I remember correctly BB was voted "Forum Member of the Year" in the poll last Christmas. Not likely for someone who just posts "blatent lies and propaganda."

 

[derrywan]

and whose the head?

The Crown Estate is not the personal property of the Monarch. It cannot be sold by the Monarch, nor do any profits from it go to the Sovereign.

The Crown Estate is managed by an independent organisation, headed by a Board, and any profits from the Estate is paid every year to the Treasury for the benefit of all UK taxpayers. http://www.royal.gov.uk/TheRoyalHousehold/Royalfinances/CrownEstatesxyz.aspx

this is getting boring now BB :fishbowl:

 

[Ollessendro]

Enough of this due dilligence and freehold stuff ....... what does it mean for cheaps as chips???!!!

 

[Wards]

If I remember correctly BB was voted "Forum Member of the Year" in the poll last Christmas. Not likely for someone who just posts "blatent lies and propaganda."

The sherry must've been flowing that year!! :thumbup: