Lee Sinnott Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 If West Ham were aware of whatever the incident is about when they sold him to us and they hadn't mentioned it when we bought him i would have thought Latics could claim the transfer fee back and any wages paid out since then. The Daily Mirror has the alleged assault as taking place in July 2012... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 You can't give an unfavorable employment reference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nohairdontcare Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Great to be rid of the dispicible little gob:censored:e. The club have done well to surgically remove this cancer to football swiftly and efficiently. I couldn't care less what happens to him from here on in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 (edited) You can't give an unfavorable employment reference So Dean Smalley would have known of him...surely his last loan club would have provided or declined Latics a reference, that's if one was asked for, there's quite a loan spell spanning back... Edited December 17, 2013 by tangerinedreams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Agree he's no loss but don't get it when people say someone only performs when he wants to. Why would they? What purpose is there for them to have that mindset? Sometimes a player is just :censored:, doesn't have to be a reason for it. He's not :censored: though, he can be fantastic. There are plenty of people in this world who are inconsistent, who for whatever reason cannot apply themselves on a regular basis.. My bet is that him and many other footballers of his ilk are showing the same behavioural issues as certain school kids with poor behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 The Daily Mirror has the alleged assault as taking place in July 2012... Chances are that he probably didnt get charged until after we purchased him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 He's not :censored: though, he can be fantastic. There are plenty of people in this world who are inconsistent, who for whatever reason cannot apply themselves on a regular basis.. My bet is that him and many other footballers of his ilk are showing the same behavioural issues as certain school kids with poor behaviour. He was mainly :censored:. Anyway, big few days coming up on the pitch, be great to get a win tonight for all that will bring, and then with two tough away games to follow, think it's crucial we get three points vs Colchester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeroyboy Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 "You can't give an unfavourable employment reference" It is a legal requirement to disclose any information that could be deemed relevant to another employer making a sound and rational judgement on a persons suitability, warts and all. You would also be suable for damages relating or connected to any such omission. Example; dishonesty would cover a multitude of stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Not strictly true. You can simply refrain from providing the information. A lot of companies only provide start date, job title and leaving date, regardless of what request was made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 "You can't give an unfavourable employment reference" It is a legal requirement to disclose any information that could be deemed relevant to another employer making a sound and rational judgement on a persons suitability, warts and all. You would also be suable for damages relating or connected to any such omission. Example; dishonesty would cover a multitude of stuff. Generally speaking, an employer does not have an obligation to provide a reference at all. As Zorrro says, they are within their rights to simply provide the briefest of detail. The danger for the employer is the employee suing if they miss out on a job on the basis of anything negative said in the reference which cannot be substantiated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeefoldham Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Just been into the club shop asking for a montano shirt for my "alleged" criminal based fancy dress party on NYE...they said no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayItLivo Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Surely since we paid money for him they had some sort of requirement to inform us if they did know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 (edited) Surely since we paid money for him they had some sort of requirement to inform us if they did know? Assuming that the seller club had not notified us, as a business to business transaction, it probably comes down to whether the buyer club has put a clause in the contract requiring the seller club to inform them of such matters. However, we'd probably have to prove that we had lost out as a result - as he's been sacked already in regards to an unrelated matter, my feeling is that it would be hard to prove that we have been impacted as a result of the seller club not informing us. Edited December 17, 2013 by jimsleftfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckshawlatic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 (edited) Just on sky sports news statement from Montano's solicitor that he will appeal the sacking Edited December 17, 2013 by JWhite101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 (edited) If the club have given him leave to appeal then not surprised he's said that. If not and he's sizing up a claim for wrongful dismissal then even if the solicitor thinks the chances of success are limited then it still may be worth making these sorts of noises at this point. Edited December 17, 2013 by jsslatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckshawlatic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Also said that contrary to reports from the club he's been being paid in full while suspended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11730/9077917/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter Montano appealing the sacking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Either our solicitor or his has dropped a bollock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFC_Ryan Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I thought it was over, can't the :censored: just move on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShakerT Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 "He vehemently denies being involved in spot-fixing and welcomes the criminal allegation with which he will fully co-operate." LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 (edited) Either our solicitor or his has dropped a bollock. How? The club's solicitor may have said to give him leave to appeal to strengthen a defence in the event of a claim for wrongful dismissal. If not and he's considering a claim for wrongful dismissal then it makes sense for the solicitor to be saying this now to perhaps worry the club into a settlement before proceedings are issued and he risks being liable for the club's legal costs. Edited December 17, 2013 by jsslatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4froale Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 "He vehemently denies being involved in spot-fixing and welcomes the criminal allegation with which he will fully co-operate." LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Everyone has the right to appeal any form of disciplinary action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 How? The club's solicitor may have said to give him leave to appeal to strengthen a defence in the event of a claim for wrongful dismissal. If not and he's considering a claim for wrongful dismissal then it makes sense for the solicitor to be saying this now to perhaps worry the club into a settlement before proceedings are issued and he risks being liable for the club's legal costs. If I understood any of that I'd probably say I hope you're right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 (edited) Everyone has the right to appeal any form of disciplinary action. Would whoever loses the case have to pay the other sides costs? - which could be quite substantial. Edited December 17, 2013 by BP1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts