BPAS PODCAST: 17th May '21 Episode 35: Barry Owen

[Dave_Og]

6 minutes ago, PeteG said:

Do you actually know there is no evidence? You are not exactly going to put the evidence all over social media or disclose it on a podcast. I'd bet any potential investigation still has legs or have you evidence there is no investigation? Blitz said some pretty questionable things regarding the transfer of the stand to Brassbank at the Q&A so much so his lawyer had to interject.

 

 

Of course we don't know but if there is any then it's taking a long time to convince anyone of its validity.  Seems pretty clear that the club could never have afforded to build or acquire it so I'm struggling to see how they could own it.  

[GlossopLatic]

17 minutes ago, PeteG said:

Do you actually know there is no evidence? You are not exactly going to put the evidence all over social media or disclose it on a podcast. I'd bet any potential investigation still has legs or have you evidence there is no investigation? Blitz said some pretty questionable things regarding the transfer of the stand to Brassbank at the Q&A so much so his lawyer had to interject.

 

 

Well if he had evidence he should have given it to the police in their investigation which found nothing.

 

Barry will have no doubt told you We have an innocent until proven guilty system of law in this country and so far no evidence has been found by Barry or anyoneelse that Blitz broke the law. 

 

You must be a very naive man if you trust Barry Owen

 

[PeteG]

15 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Well if he had evidence he should have given it to the police in their investigation which found nothing.

 

Barry will have no doubt told you We have an innocent until proven guilty system of law in this country and so far no evidence has been found by Barry or anyoneelse that Blitz broke the law. 

 

You must be a very naive man if you trust Barry Owen

 

And if you believe the Police are the only road open to such investigations then you too are indeed very naive. Nobody has said that Blitz broke the law, that doesn't mean that something untoward has possibly occured which may or may not involve the council and other authorities.

[PeteG]

24 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

 

Of course we don't know but if there is any then it's taking a long time to convince anyone of its validity.  Seems pretty clear that the club could never have afforded to build or acquire it so I'm struggling to see how they could own it.  

Blitz admitted the club owned it but transferred it to Brassbank to pay off a loan of £3.8 million i think he said. However, what were the terms of that loan and could it be possible the club could have mortgaged said stand in order to repay Blitz? Also, was the value of the stand really £3.8 million. was that a fair valuation? Also, would the Council have been happy with the transfer having put public funds into providing the stand to benefit the club and the wider community not a private company? Fair questions i'd have thought. I don't understand fans just wanting to sweep in under the carpet when it really is our only lifeline. 

[Dave_Og]

1 minute ago, PeteG said:

Blitz admitted the club owned it but transferred it to Brassbank to pay off a loan of £3.8 million 

 

When and where?

[PeteG]

Just now, Dave_Og said:

 

When and where?

At the Q&A he did last year in the OEC. He said the club transferred the stand to Brassbank to pay off a debt of £3.8 million the club owed to Brassbank.

[GlossopLatic]

6 minutes ago, PeteG said:

And if you believe the Police are the only road open to such investigations then you too are indeed very naive. Nobody has said that Blitz broke the law, that doesn't mean that something untoward has possibly occured which may or may not involve the council and other authorities.

 

Again where is the evidence? And if knowone said Blitz broke the law why were the police contacted? Surely you only get them involved if you are pursuing criminal prosecution?

 

 

[Dave_Og]

2 minutes ago, PeteG said:

At the Q&A he did last year in the OEC. He said the club transferred the stand to Brassbank to pay off a debt of £3.8 million the club owed to Brassbank.

I suspect you have extrapolated the answer to one question into the answer to several unasked ones.

[PeteG]

7 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

I suspect you have extrapolated the answer to one question into the answer to several unasked ones.

Look, the club owned the stand, hence why there is a transfer of the deed. What is questionable is that transfer and whether the board of directors were aware of it because they would have had to have been and whether the loan of £3.8 million from Brassbank to the club was indeed that, what interest was involved, what were the repayments terms etc. Also, the 3 grants given from the council  to the club were dependent on that money being used to build the stand and in fact grants were to be paid in stages once building of the stand had commenced. There is definite evidence of that as i've got the correspondence from Jim McMahon confirming to me in an email quite some time ago.

[Chaddyexile84]

27 minutes ago, PeteG said:

 Nobody has said that Blitz broke the law

Calling BS on that one - why else did they call the police? 

[Dave_Og]

7 minutes ago, PeteG said:

Look, the club owned the stand, hence why there is a transfer of the deed. What is questionable is that transfer and whether the board of directors were aware of it because they would have had to have been and whether the loan of £3.8 million from Brassbank to the club was indeed that, what interest was involved, what were the repayments terms etc. Also, the 3 grants given from the council  to the club were dependent on that money being used to build the stand and in fact grants were to be paid in stages once building of the stand had commenced. There is definite evidence of that as i've got the correspondence from Jim McMahon confirming to me in an email quite some time ago.

Simple question; how did the club get to own the stand.  I'm damn sure they didn't pay for it to be built.  If you've got evidence send it to someone who can do something with it.

[PeteG]

2 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

Calling BS on that one - why else did they call the police? 

Probably to see if any laws had been broken either by the people in charge of the club at the time of the transfer of indeed Brassbank. Nobody has mentioned Blitz really, it's a transaction between 2 private companies and the council. What i don't understand is a reluctance from fans to want to get to the bottom of it. The truth is the club hasn't benefitted one bit from the stand as it was supposed to do. If all is above board fair enough, we can all move on but I think there are some questions to answer. People seem to want to defend Brassbank in this matter due to the fact they want Abdallah out. They are separate issues in my opinion. I just want the club to benefit from the stand and if they have a right to ownership or part ownership i'd like it looking into.

[PeteG]

3 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

Simple question; how did the club get to own the stand.  I'm damn sure they didn't pay for it to be built.  If you've got evidence send it to someone who can do something with it.

They paid for it with the 3 grants the council paid to the club. Why don't you want to believe the club owned the stand when even Simon Blitz said they did before transferring it to Brassbank to pay of a debt owed to them? 

[Chaddyexile84]

5 minutes ago, PeteG said:

Probably to see if any laws had been broken either by the people in charge of the club at the time of the transfer of indeed Brassbank. Nobody has mentioned Blitz really, it's a transaction between 2 private companies and the council. What i don't understand is a reluctance from fans to want to get to the bottom of it. The truth is the club hasn't benefitted one bit from the stand as it was supposed to do. If all is above board fair enough, we can all move on but I think there are some questions to answer. People seem to want to defend Brassbank in this matter due to the fact they want Abdallah out. They are separate issues in my opinion. I just want the club to benefit from the stand and if they have a right to ownership or part ownership i'd like it looking into.

Im defending no one - I want everyone of the toss pots out and as far away from the place as possible but the club made themselves look like clowns (funnily enough) with their big “we’ve gone to the police” statement and it amounted to cock all - considering Barry was a Detective Superintendent he seems to be a bit thick when it comes to how these things work 

 

You ring the police just for some advice on if something is a crime but try not to go to the press with it won’t you?

[PeteG]

2 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

Im defending no one - I want everyone of the toss pots out and as far away from the place as possible but the club made themselves look like clowns (funnily enough) with their big “we’ve gone to the police” statement and it amounted to cock all - considering Barry was a Detective Superintendent he seems to be a bit thick when it comes to how these things work 

 

You ring the police just for some advice on if something is a crime but try not to go to the press with it won’t you?

I agree with you about going to press with it, I certainly wouldn't have done but maybe the club were trying to let the fans know, I don't know the reason for it. I'd hazard a guess the police haven't got the resources to take on the investigation, just as they wouldn't carry out an investigation if you reported you'd have your house broken into and had a TV stolen. They'd come round give you a crime number for you to claim off the insurance and get on with what they believed were more important issues. I'd bet if we were in London, where the Met Police have a dedicated team to deal with reports of financial fraud because the city of london is the financial capital, it just may well have been investigated. Anyway, they are other authorities who can look into these matters.

[OASF1895 Lottery]

.

 

[singe]

18 minutes ago, PeteG said:

They paid for it with the 3 grants the council paid to the club. Why don't you want to believe the club owned the stand when even Simon Blitz said they did before transferring it to Brassbank to pay of a debt owed to them? 

What 3 grants? Total deal qas £5.7m

1. Grant £700k incl funds for Community Trust

2. Bought Lancaster Club. They still own hat asset.

3. Rengeotiate lease on Chapel Road.

 

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/oldham-athletic-seal-57m-deal-867028

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/funding_for_oldham_athletics_sta#incoming-1199027

 

No one wants to hide it under the carpet, all the public domain evidence points to a legitimate if convoluted transaction, nad the police, Council, HMRC and legal teams have taken no action in a decade.

The person "hidiing" most of the evidence is Barry. If he publishes is it and it's credible then people will side with him and press for a full investigation. He's revelaed nothing in 10 years. His shenanigans with the North stand are not someone with irrefutable evidence.

[PeteG]

3 minutes ago, singe said:

What 3 grants? Total deal qas £5.7m

1. Grant £700k incl funds for Community Trust

2. Bought Lancaster Club. They still own hat asset.

3. Rengeotiate lease on Chapel Road.

 

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/oldham-athletic-seal-57m-deal-867028

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/funding_for_oldham_athletics_sta#incoming-1199027

 

No one wants to hide it under the carpet, all the public domain evidence points to a legitimate if convoluted transaction, nad the police, Council, HMRC and legal teams have taken no action in a decade.

The person "hidiing" most of the evidence is Barry. If he publishes is it and it's credible then people will side with him and press for a full investigation. He's revelaed nothing in 10 years. His shenanigans with the North stand are not someone with irrefutable evidence.

Don't really see the point of you putting in those links, there's so many holes in that article but even that suggests the council were in fact dealing with the club and not brassbank!

[singe]

49 minutes ago, PeteG said:

I agree with you about going to press with it, I certainly wouldn't have done but maybe the club were trying to let the fans know, I don't know the reason for it. I'd hazard a guess the police haven't got the resources to take on the investigation, just as they wouldn't carry out an investigation if you reported you'd have your house broken into and had a TV stolen. They'd come round give you a crime number for you to claim off the insurance and get on with what they believed were more important issues. I'd bet if we were in London, where the Met Police have a dedicated team to deal with reports of financial fraud because the city of london is the financial capital, it just may well have been investigated. Anyway, they are other authorities who can look into these matters.

And that hasn't happened either.

The police would act in a £6m fraud differently to a TV theft.

Barry cited Northampton, a £10m fraud where little Northamptonshire police had 8-13 officers working, spent £1m in a 4 year investigation, interviewed 550 people and prepared 30 cases for the CPS.
They applied for a grant for special grant to mitigate some of the costs from the Home Office on the grouds of public interest and misuse of public funds.

 

[singe]

3 minutes ago, PeteG said:

Don't really see the point of you putting in those links, there's so many holes in that article but even that suggests the council were in fact dealing with the club and not brassbank!

Both are private companies. There is little difference between the two and the stand is still being used by the public when open.

[PeteG]

Just now, singe said:

Both are private compannies.

I said that myself.

[PeteG]

2 minutes ago, singe said:

And that hasn't happened either.

The police would act in a £6m fraud differently to a TV theft.

Barry cited Northampton, a £10, where little Northamptonshire police had 8-13 officers working, spent £1m in a 4 year investigation, interviewed 550 people and prepared 30 cases for the CPS.
They applied for a grant for special grant to mitigate some of the costs from the Home Office on the grouds of public interst and public funds.

 

Have little Northamptonshire police been placed under special measures for failing to report a fifth all reported crimes?

[Dave_Og]

42 minutes ago, PeteG said:

They paid for it with the 3 grants the council paid to the club. Why don't you want to believe the club owned the stand when even Simon Blitz said they did before transferring it to Brassbank to pay of a debt owed to them? 

Well Barry said the grants were around £700k.

[singe]

Just now, PeteG said:

Have little Northamptonshire police been placed under special measures for failing to report a fifth all reported crimes?

You're going to have to explain the relevance of that red herring. No wonder people are disbelieving if that's the stength of the argument.

[kowenicki]

None of us know the details.  However, the idea that people can point to Blitz’s words as entirely honest and transparent, effectively defending him, is bewildering. 
 

edit. I include the FLG and (particularly) the current management of the OEC in that too.