The Club have informed us that at this moment in time, our request for an EGM has not been accepted.
We received a letter from the Club on Wednesday evening that stated that our call for all four Directors to stand for re-election contradicted the Club’s Articles from 1907 that demands a minimum number of Directors at the Club. With our resolutions involving all four directors standing for re-election, there was a risk that following an EGM, the Club would be left below the minimum number of Directors. It stated that a further resolution may be required whereby replacement Directors were proposed.
This is the second time that the Club has written to us regarding our call for an EGM. We were originally contacted last week by the Club asking us to clarify the single resolution that we called for in our request for an EGM but that failed to mention the additional legal requirements contained within the latest letter we received from the Club.
The original email from the Club accepted that the Trust has the backing of the requisite number of shareholders and acknowledged that it ‘has clearly set out the general nature of the business to be dealt with at the meeting’ by which we understand to be the three bullet points set out in our statement on the website on 14 April which formed part of our letter of 16 April. Key bullets repeated here for ease of reference
- The allegations of “serious internal issues” made about the running of the Club from two of the Club’s leading Shareholders, and a subsequent lack of dealing with them, which has led to their decision to step back from any involvement in the Football Club
- The circumstances behind the awarding of a new contract to the First Team Manager and the subsequent withholding of this information
- The future of the Football Club following Interim Chairman Andrew Kelly’s expected departure from the Club
This clarification stated that our request for all four Directors to stand for re-election “in line with the Club’s rotation policy” was contradictory. We were very satisfied that this was a genuine request for clarification by the Club, and they informed us that this would have no impact on any timescale for the meeting.
We consulted with the legal department at the Football Supporters Association and resubmitted our request for the EGM to the Club with the resolutions that had been redrafted by the FSA’s Solicitors.
We have spoken to the Club’s Solicitors this afternoon and we are currently in the process of speaking to the Legal team at the Football Supporters Association. We are confident that following these conversations we are close to a solution that satisfies the legal concerns of the Club.
We remain extremely committed to the EGM that we believe to be the only platform whereby the concerns listed above can be discussed with the necessary accountability. As soon as the situation is resolved, we will update everyone through our website and social media channels.
Also, as you are aware, we wrote to the Club last month with a number of questions from Trust members relating to Chris Dunphy’s interest in the Club and any alternatives that the Club may have. We were informed that the questions could not be answered until after the Club’s Board Meeting on Monday April 19th.
The Club emailed us the morning after the Board meeting to inform us that this had been discussed at the Board Meeting but received no direct answers to those questions. However, we later met with Interim Chairman Andrew Kelly who was pleased to provide replies to the three questions we submitted :
1) Has there been any approach to the Club from Chris Dunphy so far? An approach had been made to the Club.
2) Has this approach been welcomed? Would an approach be welcomed? Andrew Kelly confirmed that a meeting had taken place between him and Chris Dunphy, in addition to meetings taking place with other prospective investors.
3) Do the Club have any alternative plans to replace Andrew Kelly’s interim chairmanship should you decide to reject the interest from Chris Dunphy? Andrew Kelly confirmed that, dependent on his health, he would continue as Interim Chairman until a suitable alternative replacement was confirmed.