As I have mentioned before Marc Green did similar at the Bulls. Put it off as long as he could. Said was paid and false etc.

I hope Fax aren't heading the same way.
If the debt was incorrect it wouldn't of got past this point in court.

Another press release from the board that tells us absolutely nothing - I may be an old cynic but you would think if they had anything positive to announce they'd be shouting it from the rooftops. I will be absolutely delighted to be proved wrong.

Statement out from Fax saying positive progress. Again my worry with this is that if it were a mistake then we have had a lot of time to put together our case and on actually making the hearing it has not been thrown out which suggests its not as cut and dried as we were originally lead to believe. Can't say I am overly keen with the part that says "The judge has adjourned the case to 29th January 2025, recognising the merit of our stance". It makes it sound like we are trying to play games with HMRC.

None of this makes sense.

If it wasn’t our ‘board’ I would agree...

My understanding now after speaking to someone involved ( non executive director) the dispute is the amount owed , for example, hmrc calculate we owe 100k halifax say its 50k , the adjournment is to allow the two parties to come to an agreement on that through their legal representatives then the agreed sum will be paid .

Oh BTW, for all you ridiculous shaymen fans who pop on here then pop back on shaymen.net spouting malevolent crap , ie itman , (yeah I've read your post about why i was banned 5 times) whilst hoddie might want to have a totalitarian forum where the only dialogue is dishing up articles from decades ago about faxs' struggles some people want the truth here n now , n flea saying fax are kicking the can down the road and good things come to those who wait ( hoping for faxs' demise ) it's all false narrative nonsense. Comparing damian Clayton to lord haw haw it's pathetic and toxic , sad little man .

Anyway rant over , many conversations happening with regards the stadium.

As usual i see both sides of these squabbles..but I must say having endured DC speeches and narrative on several occasions i find the comparison hilarious..

I still don't get how the amount owed is in dispute. It is what it is. It's like going into a pub, ordering a pint for £4 (which is clearly shown on the price list), and then arguing that you don't owe £4.

Playing devil's advocate if we did owe what the hmrc is stating then we would have either been wound up or paid it by now .