With apologies for the delay these are our groups questions and answers from the fans forum, the PDF of the advance Q&A's is attached again for completeness.
CCJ issued against CFC Football Development School Ltd on 23/08/16 totalling £4,334.
It is understood that the judgment relates to work carried out by a South Yorkshire based electrician. During a meeting in March, a supporter had previously asked Liam Sutcliffe & Chris Turner about this debt and he was told that the amount owing had already been paid.
When the supporter became aware of the judgment, he took the opportunity to raise the subject once again with Ashley Carson, Chris Turner & Liam Sutcliffe at a fans’ forum on 01/10/16 highlighting the judgment and that it had not been paid. Again, he was assured that the debt had been settled and Liam Sutcliffe confirmed that he would be happy to provide proof, however this was never forthcoming.
At the fans’ forum on 09/11/16, Chris Turner and Ashley Carson confirmed that the debt had been paid three or four days earlier, firmly putting the blame on Liam Sutcliffe.
Subsequent checks confirm that the CCJ dated 23/08/16 for £4,334 was paid on 31/10/16.
Postscript - A further CCJ was issued against the company on 14/11/16 for £12,870, which remains unpaid.
Action point – CT confirmed that he would speak with LS and produce proof of payment.
Running at Great Profit – CFC Football Development School Ltd
The minutes from the fans’ forum on the 25th April 2015 read as follows, when asked about the development centre, CT said that it was running at great profit, which will reduce the costs of the academy. However, just over 9 weeks later, the accounts for CFC Football Development School Ltd (year end 30/06/15) showed that the balance sheet had deteriorated from -£47,563 to -£77,630, equal to a £30,000 loss for the year.
Does this demonstrate a total lack of understanding of what was happening in your own business or did something happen in the nine weeks that turned a business which was operating at great profit to one which generated a £30,000 loss? If so, what?
Chris Turner believed the development school was trading at great profit because Liam Sutcliffe had told him it was. CT went on to emphasise the point that the concept was/is a great idea and that LS was a great coach. Mindful of the damage caused by the development centre and its impact on the club’s reputation, CT suggested that this was offset against the benefits the centre generates for the club and LS’s coaching abilities.
There was also a suggestion by Ashley Carson that he was in the process of removing the club’s badge from the development school.
CFC 2001 Accounts, Directed to John Croot & Chris Breeze
Chris Turner has said on many occasions that CFC Football Development School Ltd / CFC International Football Academy Ltd have never been a debtor in the CFC 2001 accounts, do you agree?
Answer – Yes
Action point – Dimview to make further enquiries and report back.
PSG Trip, Directed to Chris Turner
In a meeting with Liam Sutcliffe on the 5th August, it was pointed out that Liam had been asked if the PSG trip had been booked and paid for. Liam’s response, which was witnessed by Nick Johnson, was that he was unable to answer the question.
Given the emails that Liam has sent to parents telling them that they were not entitled to a refund and the press release which the club put out on 23/05/16 ([
http://www.chesterfi...nt-3123049.aspx) suggested similar, was the trip booked and paid for and are you prepared to issue documentary evidence into the public domain confirming it was?
Action point – CT to speak with LS and release booking confirmation into the public domain.
Rafflegate
It was suggested to the representatives of CFC that Kevin Fitzgerald had been made a scapegoat over the invented raffle winner and that other individuals within the business must have been aware of the issue before it became public knowledge. This point was reinforced by the suggestion that the cost of the trip and the financing of it (raffle sales) would have been discussed in management and board meetings and therefore questions asked in relation to how sales were performing, etc.
Chris Turner stated that he was against the idea of raffle and told Fitzgerald that the financing of the trip (£28k) should be through sponsorship. He wasn't in agreemement to fans or sponsors being part of the travelling party. Pinders had allegedly offered £7,000 towards the trip and Fitzgerald had informed CT that a further four sponsors had been contacted and were possibilities, however none materialised. Pinders were later asked about their alleged contribution and why it was not forthcoming, they were unaware of the agreement and the figure mentioned related to other sponsorship which they had with the club.
CT said the first he knew about the raffle was the day after he and the players has returned when Fitzgerald asked him at the Sheffield Wednesday game if he was going to be sacked.
It was confirmed that Fitzgerald had received 3 months’ severance pay following his dismissal from the club.
CFC representatives were also asked to confirm two rumours. The first one, that Fitzgerald was working for Blackpool FC, which was incorrect. The second rumour was that Fitzgerald was working for FBT (the shirt manufacturer) who have linked up with Liam Sutcliffe, this was also denied. However after further probing, it was confirmed that Fitzgerald was working for a workwear company, called Romiro, a company under the control of Sir Rodney Walker (who also controls FBT Europe).
Ashley Carson was also asked about Chesterfield Borough Council’s investigation into the raffle, AC confirmed that he had not heard anything, but that he had tried to call them today (09/11/16) and was promised an update the following day. AC was reminded that he had promised to release CBC’s findings into the public domain.
Action point – AC to make enquiries and release information.
Finances Versus Other Clubs
It was pointed out that in Chris Turner’s programme notes for the Scunthorpe game, he stated that he had been taking note of the accounts of other clubs in our division and that you could see why some are making huge losses.
The suggestion was made that when you compare CFC’s accounts to those club who are generally considered to be well-run, we perform badly. Walsall was quoted as an example, profits of £416K, Burton who were promoted to the Championship last year confirmed profits of £162K on the back of £4.2M of turnover and Rochdale, who during the 2014/15 season sold Donnelly to Tranmere, Hogan to Brentford and Done to Sheff U, finished 8th in Division 1 and reported a £1.4M profit.
Chris Turner was glad that Walsall had been mentioned as they have much bigger conference and banqueting facilities, with the venue regularly hosting Asian weddings. Plus they receive over £500K for an advertising spot, an area that faces the M6.
It was pointed out that Walsall, Rochdale and Burton have inferior turnover to CFC, but their total wage bills are significantly less too. CT & AC confirmed that Dave Allen will not cut the playing budget.
Employee Remuneration – Directed to Chris Breeze
Wanting to draw a line under the past, Chris was asked to dispel the rumours that had been circulating on various forms of social media that certain members of senior management receive a percentage of income generated by player sales.
It was confirmed that both Chris Turner and Paul Cook had received bonuses based on the profit associated with player sales. CB added, that he believed CT had negotiated hard in the deals and had managed to secure fees beyond what the board considered possible.
It was also confirmed that some of the bonus payments which are due to CT are still owed to him.
CB also clarified that that agreement had not been extended to Paul Cook’s successors.
Questionable Characters – Directed to Chris Turner
It was pointed out that CT had embraced a number of characters, over an extended period of time, all of whom had been easily exposed as unsuitable by supporters of the club, to the point where the club had abruptly terminated those relationships.
CT was asked if any due diligence had been conducted on the individuals concerned and if pursuing these relationships constituted poor judgement on his part.
CT confirmed that no vetting had taken place.