UPDATED- EFL Clubs under transfer embargoes - City not included anymore

[dml1954]

So you reckon the club has included a fee in its audited accounts that the insurers would have to pay?

Are you sure?

Once again you appear to be making things up that I said. Perhaps you should actually read things first.

[The Lone Gunman]

Once again you appear to be making things up that I said. Perhaps you should actually read things first.

I read exactly what you said, which was:

"I believe that it was included in the club accounts two years ago. If City lose the case, it is the insurers who will probably have to pay up."

So are you claiming the club's audited accounts contain a potential financial liability that the club 'probably' won't have to pay anyway even if they lose the case?

[dml1954]

I read exactly what you said, which was:

"I believe that it was included in the club accounts two years ago. If City lose the case, it is the insurers who will probably have to pay up."

So are you claiming the club's audited accounts contain a potential financial liability that the club 'probably' won't have to pay anyway even if they lose the case?

For someone who pretends to be clever, you really come across as quite thick. What I said, as you can clearly see, is that the fee was included in the accounts - already corroborated by one other but check if you really want to and also that the transfer fee would probably be covered by the insurance company. That is of course if it was proven that he was actually a City player at the time of his death, which is disputed by City, presumably because the insurance company have instructed them to do so to avoid liability. I don't know why City put it in the accounts but they did - speak to an accountant if you want further advice.

[Rjk]

For someone who pretends to be clever, you really come across as quite thick. What I said, as you can clearly see, is that the fee was included in the accounts - already corroborated by one other but check if you really want to and also that the transfer fee would probably be covered by the insurance company. That is of course if it was proven that he was actually a City player at the time of his death, which is disputed by City, presumably because the insurance company have instructed them to do so to avoid liability. I don't know why City put it in the accounts but they did - speak to an accountant if you want further advice.

there's a lot of guess work going on there though, none of us really have a clue what goes on with the insurance etc

[dml1954]

there's a lot of guess work going on there though, none of us really have a clue what goes on with the insurance etc

Agree. Just how I see it thats all. Players usually become covered by a clubs insurance against injury/death as soon as they sign but whether this happened in this case is probably one of the main issues. City wouldn't be fighting it if they were being advised to pay up.

[The Lone Gunman]

For someone who pretends to be clever, you really come across as quite thick.

I'm a right old thicko, me.

I was just surprised to see you accusing the club of fraudulent accounting, that's all.

[dml1954]

I'm a right old thicko, me.

I was just surprised to see you accusing the club of fraudulent accounting, that's all.

Glad that you acknowledge your thickness - it is the first step to recovery. Once again you are putting your own incorrect interpretation of someone else's post presumably in order to create an argument. You obviously are a real saddo of an individual with nothing better to do. If you want to make yourself look even more stupid, why don't you explain where exactly in my post you saw me accuse the club of fraudulent accounting.

[splott parker]

Just our luck we weren’t under an embargo when Warnock was manager