|
|
Post by shrewspotter on Nov 29, 2016 12:49:08 GMT
So did Pulis ever buy this land??? I take it you haven't read the transcript on the links on the top of the thread. Put it this way, TP has been unable to convince either the tribunal or the judge hearing his appeal, that there ever was any land let alone that he ever tried to buy it. You'd think if there were £millions at stake in the original tribunal and later, in his appeal, then TP would not have found it too difficult to demonstrate that there was a plot of land and that he had tried to buy it. The fact that he didn't manage to come up with any evidence suggests it was all a product of his fertile imagination. I don't see how it can be described as anything but fraud. You are quite correct..........I didn't read it 
They will use this 3m to outbid us now for Berahino
|
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 29, 2016 12:56:45 GMT
When he sells his story to the highest bidder it could make a good read? I must remember to buy his biography from a charity shop, not a book seller.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jug Bank Stokie on Nov 29, 2016 12:59:39 GMT
If Pulis believes he is innocent of any wrongdoing he should take Place to court-he might make himself a few extra quid in the process! That is what he has just done. And will be about £5m worse off at the end of it  |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 29, 2016 13:11:57 GMT
When he sells his story to the highest bidder it could make a good read? I must remember to buy his biography from a charity shop, not a book seller. You can get if from a book seller but reading what the judge has said look under Fiction first  |
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Nov 29, 2016 13:29:40 GMT
Can't really see how he could be done for fraud, he's been done for breach of contract.
If I hit my targets at work and am contractually due a bonus on 31st December, provided I stay in employment till that date and then go into my employer before Xmas and ask him to pay the bonus early coz I need to buy the missus a present, if he agrees to pay it and I don't buy any present I don't think that's fraud, maybe devious but not fraud. However if I then hand in my notice before 31st December then I'm in breach of contract and not entitled to the bonus whether or not I bought her the new knicker set! Land issue is a red herring and can't see anyway he can be done for fraud. Duplicitous and devious yes but fraud, no.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Nov 29, 2016 13:38:21 GMT
Can't really see how he could be done for fraud, he's been done for breach of contract. If I hit my targets at work and am contractually due a bonus on 31st December, provided I stay in employment till that date and then go into my employer before Xmas and ask him to pay the bonus early coz I need to buy the missus a present, if he agrees to pay it and I don't buy any present I don't think that's fraud, maybe devious but not fraud. However if I then hand in my notice before 31st December then I'm in breach of contract and not entitled to the bonus whether or not I bought her the new knicker set! Land issue is a red herring and can't see anyway he can be done for fraud. Duplicitous and devious yes but fraud, no. He has been described as acting fraudulently in the way he obtained the bonus early, but I'm not sure anyone has suggested he can be prosecuted for fraud. |
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Nov 29, 2016 13:43:01 GMT
Can't really see how he could be done for fraud, he's been done for breach of contract. If I hit my targets at work and am contractually due a bonus on 31st December, provided I stay in employment till that date and then go into my employer before Xmas and ask him to pay the bonus early coz I need to buy the missus a present, if he agrees to pay it and I don't buy any present I don't think that's fraud, maybe devious but not fraud. However if I then hand in my notice before 31st December then I'm in breach of contract and not entitled to the bonus whether or not I bought her the new knicker set! Land issue is a red herring and can't see anyway he can be done for fraud. Duplicitous and devious yes but fraud, no. He has been described as acting fraudulently in the way he obtained the bonus early, but I'm not sure anyone has suggested he can be prosecuted for fraud. Sorry if we're getting into semantics but he was either committing a fraud or he wasn't. He wasn't, it was devious and underhand but not fraud. Ps I'm not condoning it, think it was a shitty think to do |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 29, 2016 13:45:20 GMT
Can't really see how he could be done for fraud, he's been done for breach of contract. If I hit my targets at work and am contractually due a bonus on 31st December, provided I stay in employment till that date and then go into my employer before Xmas and ask him to pay the bonus early coz I need to buy the missus a present, if he agrees to pay it and I don't buy any present I don't think that's fraud, maybe devious but not fraud. However if I then hand in my notice before 31st December then I'm in breach of contract and not entitled to the bonus whether or not I bought her the new knicker set! Land issue is a red herring and can't see anyway he can be done for fraud. Duplicitous and devious yes but fraud, no. It's a civil case and there's a different burden of proof. Based on the court transcript it looks likely that he's committed a fraud but whether he might be prosecuted is up to the CPS. One thing we can say is that it's a bit more than devious. |
|
|
|
Post by thepremierbanksy on Nov 29, 2016 13:54:09 GMT
That's retirement put back about 3 years then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 13:57:50 GMT
All in all, off the pitch at least, we had a lucky escape, it seems. He talked about 'the right DNA' in his players, players who acted and operated in a certain way. Touche, Tone.
|
|
|
|
Post by onepara on Nov 29, 2016 14:05:11 GMT
Will WBA review the new contract that they just gave him though? Will the club want to be associated with him?
|
|
|
|
Post by jimigoodwinsbeard on Nov 29, 2016 16:07:49 GMT
Having read the transcript it seems that TP was his usual arrogant self. CPFC seemed to be fairly reasonable in their dealings with TP offering to assist him in recovering the tax & NI, or deferring this part of the disputed amount for later consideration so as to help TP with his cash flow. This offer was "rejected thunderously" ....now, there's a surprise. So, TP is left with a substantial liability. 2.2MM in bonus plus 1.5MM LD's plus potential costs which I imagine will not be cheap. A costly day in court. Reports suggest around £5m total inc costs. Very expensive day. |
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Nov 29, 2016 16:39:07 GMT
Having read the transcript it seems that TP was his usual arrogant self. CPFC seemed to be fairly reasonable in their dealings with TP offering to assist him in recovering the tax & NI, or deferring this part of the disputed amount for later consideration so as to help TP with his cash flow. This offer was "rejected thunderously" ....now, there's a surprise. So, TP is left with a substantial liability. 2.2MM in bonus plus 1.5MM LD's plus potential costs which I imagine will not be cheap. A costly day in court. Reports suggest around £5m total inc costs. Very expensive day. The transcript also refers to liquidated damages rather than normal damages which suggests that TP must have known the potential cost of any repudiation of his contract. By refusing to take charge of the Arsenal game he was digging a big hole for himself. If he had stayed in charge until 31 Aug he would have at least saved himself himself 2.2MM plus some legal costs. I can't believe he took these decisions without advice from his solicitors. If he was advised by his solicitors then perhaps he needs to hire another set and go after the original lot for negligent advice...spunk some more money up the wall. In for a penny and all that! |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Nov 29, 2016 17:55:51 GMT
Reports suggest around £5m total inc costs. Very expensive day. The transcript also refers to liquidated damages rather than normal damages which suggests that TP must have known the potential cost of any repudiation of his contract. By refusing to take charge of the Arsenal game he was digging a big hole for himself. If he had stayed in charge until 31 Aug he would have at least saved himself himself 2.2MM plus some legal costs. I can't believe he took these decisions without advice from his solicitors. If he was advised by his solicitors then perhaps he needs to hire another set and go after the original lot for negligent advice...spunk some more money up the wall. In for a penny and all that! Then if that plan fails the cap could come in very useful, we might be seeing him outside the Pig Pen.. |
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 29, 2016 19:02:47 GMT
Reports suggest around £5m total inc costs. Very expensive day. The transcript also refers to liquidated damages rather than normal damages which suggests that TP must have known the potential cost of any repudiation of his contract. By refusing to take charge of the Arsenal game he was digging a big hole for himself. If he had stayed in charge until 31 Aug he would have at least saved himself himself 2.2MM plus some legal costs. I can't believe he took these decisions without advice from his solicitors. If he was advised by his solicitors then perhaps he needs to hire another set and go after the original lot for negligent advice...spunk some more money up the wall. In for a penny and all that! Yes...that's what I said on a previous post. Pulis has had some very very bad advice on this matter I reckon. Does he have an agent?🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Nov 29, 2016 19:38:16 GMT
Does anybody seriously believe that Tony Pulis - TONY PULIS!!! - was advised (or at least not discouraged) to attempt to deviously obtain his bonus and then resign just a few weeks before he was legally entitled to it (the date of which it quite clearly stated in his contract).
For heaven's sake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 29, 2016 19:49:43 GMT
Does anybody seriously believe that Tony Pulis - TONY PULIS!!! - was advised (or at least not discouraged) to attempt to deviously obtain his bonus and then resign just a few weeks before he was legally entitled to it (the date of which it quite clearly stated in his contract). For heaven's sake. Does anybody seriously believe that a very wealthy Premier League manager at the peak of his powers didn't have some sort of advisor/solicitor/agent in this episode.? It's as plausible as the other option. Tone's as thick as pig shit. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 29, 2016 20:01:29 GMT
Anybody who's had dealings with a solicitor knows they wouldn’t advise a client to breach his contract, lie about the date of a meeting and use an imaginary property deal to defraud an employer. There's one man responsible for this.
|
|
|
|
Post by eastyorksexile on Nov 29, 2016 20:06:51 GMT
I love this it sums the whole situation up, thanks for the memories but ....... |
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 29, 2016 20:07:49 GMT
Anybody who's had dealings with a solicitor knows they wouldn’t advise a client to breach his contract, lie about the date of a meeting and use an imaginary property deal to defraud an employer. There's one man responsible for this. I'm not suggesting that Pulis is an innocent party or that he isn't a lying, manipulative shit house. But I also find it incredible to believe that he didn't have some form of professional guidance in all of this. Perhaps he did and chose to ignore it ...Haha. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 29, 2016 20:18:31 GMT
wow i am genuinely surprise by the level of hatred on here for our former manager. i am not saying he is an angel but crystal palace and their chairmen have allways been odious little cunts.my only surprise is he aggreed to work their in the first place.when he went there palace where odds on for relegation so was surely due a hefty bonus for keeping them up.i do not understand why there is a date attached to the bonus[aug 31st] surely the bonus should have been due at the end of the season. i am really saddened by some of the words used to describe mr pulis on this mb. we have a lot to thank him for, people have short memories. i doubt we have heard the last of this case. Completely agree. It's sad the bitterness and jealousy that many have against one of the most successful managers in our history. I don't understand the clause either. It should have been at the end of the season or to keep them up for 2 seasons. Making him stay until the end of August if he really wanted to move would have been a hindrance to Palace. Yeah but it wasn't and he knew that, the daft bastard! |
|
|
|
Post by skip on Nov 29, 2016 21:52:43 GMT
One could led to believe that a little dose of narcissism has bitten him on the arse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Nov 29, 2016 22:20:24 GMT
Anybody who's had dealings with a solicitor knows they wouldn’t advise a client to breach his contract, lie about the date of a meeting and use an imaginary property deal to defraud an employer. There's one man responsible for this. Anyone who's had dealings with solicitors knows that SOME would advise a client to do anything he wanted for enough of a fee. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 30, 2016 7:00:25 GMT
Anybody who's had dealings with a solicitor knows they wouldn’t advise a client to breach his contract, lie about the date of a meeting and use an imaginary property deal to defraud an employer. There's one man responsible for this. Anyone who's had dealings with solicitors knows that SOME would advise a client to do anything he wanted for enough of a fee. Yeah. And even in the unlikely scenario that a solicitor did advise a client to defraud his employer for £2 million rather than work an extra couple of weeks, thereby putting the solicitor's own reputation and career at risk, the client still has to agree to do it. The most likely scenario is that Pulis had another job lined up but didn't want to miss out on a bonus payment. Exactly the same as at Gillingham. |
|
|
|
Post by stokiejohnss on Nov 30, 2016 7:55:14 GMT
If we were to finally draw a line under the name of Tony Pulis this is an opportunity ?
The agreement would be something like - 1) Overall he did a good job at Stoke and left at the right time .
2) He is only interested in himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Nov 30, 2016 8:00:23 GMT
If we were to finally draw a line under the name of Tony Pulis this is an opportunity ? The agreement would be something like - 1) Overall he did a good job at Stoke and left at the right time . 2) He is only interested in himself. It can't be done. The moment something, anything, doesn't go as well as we like history is rewritten and his name appears. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Nov 30, 2016 9:18:33 GMT
It's the best news I've read all year.
|
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Nov 30, 2016 9:20:38 GMT
It's the best news I've read all year. Wouldn't go that far but I am finding it quite hilarious :D |
|
|
|
Post by stokiejohnss on Nov 30, 2016 9:52:39 GMT
Just thinking - I wonder if we as Stoke fans are more interested in this rather than Palace or West Bromwich fans who are directly involved ? !
I haven't followed this latest Pulis saga ( until yesterday ) but am now rather sadly keeping a close eye on developments...
|
|
|
|
Post by 3putts on Nov 30, 2016 9:54:44 GMT
wow i am genuinely surprise by the level of hatred on here for our former manager. i am not saying he is an angel but crystal palace and their chairmen have allways been odious little cunts.my only surprise is he aggreed to work their in the first place.when he went there palace where odds on for relegation so was surely due a hefty bonus for keeping them up.i do not understand why there is a date attached to the bonus[aug 31st] surely the bonus should have been due at the end of the season. i am really saddened by some of the words used to describe mr pulis on this mb. we have a lot to thank him for, people have short memories. i doubt we have heard the last of this case. You obviously think a bit like him. I doesn't matter a damn whether there was a point in the date clause being in the contract, the fact is it was there he knew it was there and was underhand in trying to take what he wasn't entitled to. Paedophiles don't see why they can't sexually abuse kids, maybe thats ok too? what are you accusing me of here? maybe you should think before you next post. cretin |
|
