Portman Road Ground Rent Talks Continue
Tuesday, 3rd Jan 2012 23:11

Town chief executive Simon Clegg says discussions are continuing with Ipswich Borough Council regarding the back rent owned on the land on which the Blues' Portman Road stadium stands. At an IBC executive meeting in October last year Town were given until December 31st to accept a new payment schedule which would see them begin repaying the £654,702 the council claim they are owed from June 1st in quarterly payments over four years.

Clegg told TWTD that although no agreement had been reached by the deadline, the parties are talking: “I had a meeting with the leader [David Ellesmere] and the chief executive [Russell Williams] before Christmas and we’re making some progress. Discussions are ongoing.”

At the October meeting, Ellesmere said that if the situation remains unresolved, IBC would not take the matter to court until after the end of 2011/12: “If the club continues to refuse to pay what it owes and we do need to proceed to a winding-up order, we would not take the final steps to place the club into administration [which would lead to a 10-point deduction] until after the end of the season.”

However, it appears inconceivable that either party would allow the issue to reach that stage.

In March, it was revealed that the annual rent on the land had jumped by 643% from £15,000 to £111,500, backdated to 2004, the council having initially targeted a rise to £250,000.

While Town have paid the new sum since the rent review was carried out in 2010, they have dug their heels in regarding the additional £654,702 owed from the period back to 2004 when the rent review was initially due, an independent arbitrator having set the new figure, a process which cost the Blues £98,500.

Town argue that IBC’s former chief executive James Hehir, who died in November 2009, made a verbal agreement not to claw back any additional cash from before the initiation of the review, but current chief executive Williams has said there is no evidence of such an agreement.

Clegg has said that the club would ultimately like to own the freehold of the ground, having had previous offers rejected by IBC, with the Ipswich Independent Supporters Trust speaking out against the proposed purchase.

Meanwhile, regarding the opening of the transfer window, Clegg said he didn’t expect any early deals to go through at Portman Road: “There’s nothing imminent but that doesn’t mean that things can’t change soon.”

The window has started slowly on the Town target front. Aside from the weekend links with Alan Smith and Fleetwood frontman Jamie Vardy, the Blues are claimed to have renewed their interest in Millwall midfielder James Henry, at least according to rumours on Lions’ supporters sites and Twitter.

A move for the 22-year-old wouldn’t be a surprise with Town having had two bids for the former Reading trainee rebuffed in the summer.

Millwall manager Kenny Jackett dismissed those offers as “laughable” but since then Henry has been reported to have been involved in a pay dispute with his club.

Meanwhile, Bristol City’s 1-0 victory over Millwall on Tuesday night saw the Blues drop to 20th in the Championship.

Photo: Action Images

Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.

Page:
1
2

AlanMahon2011 added 23:58 - Jan 3 Clegg Out.
0

portman23 added 23:59 - Jan 3 Winding up order!! Administration!!!
0

RetroBlue added 00:07 - Jan 4 Just WTF is going on at this once great Club???? Sir Bobby Robson and Sir Alf Ramesy would be turing in their graves if they could what is happening to Ipswich Town FC now. R.I.P. Ipswich Town FC. !
0

Garv added 00:12 - Jan 4 Does seem ridiculous when we're giving Chopra 250k to pay off gambling debts. Chopra we must be on a fair whack, why are TECHNICALLY funding his (bad) habit?
0

TractorBoy666 added 00:15 - Jan 4 Oh, its getting worse! This is turning into a nightmare...
0

Frase1987 added 00:16 - Jan 4 Can we just sack everyone and sign 20 players from the lower leagues? We'd save millions and probaby finish midtable.
0

davidsc1971 added 00:20 - Jan 4

Well it's now got to a stage where neither side can be seen to be backing down.

Personally I'm on the Club's side here on moral grounds, unless it is stated in the contract that IBC can forget to put the rent up for 6 years then correct their error and backdate it. If my landlord did that to me I'd tell him to do one too. Presumably it's in the contract though hence IBC think they have a case.

Dodgy contract though, could be ruled unfair by a judge?

Evans will not allow the club to be put into administration as if this happened then the Club wipe out all their debts. Which in the main are back to Evans aren't they. So this will get paid ahead of any winding up order but let's not forget it's IBC who have caused this situation by casually managing their finances.

davidsc1971 added 00:22 - Jan 4 Frase1987, that thought had occurred to me too. Spot on sir, sack 'em all!
0

NSL added 00:27 - Jan 4

davidsc1971 Moral grounds? What moral grounds? ITFC have a contract which says a rent review is due in 2004. Not the Councils problem that ITFC have only just pulled their finger out of their a%se to deal with it. A rent review clause is a mutual condition which either party can instigate. It is currently a common strategy for the landlord to 'ignore' the rent review in the hope that some evidence crops up to increase it in the future. The tenant can of course protect it's position by negotiating and recording a nil increase at the time of review.

Why cannot people just wake up to the fact this club is being run into the ground?

Nevadablue added 00:50 - Jan 4

I am in full support of IBC's stance on this. They quite rightly have to treat ITFC as they would any other local business, in terms of its obligations to them. Indeed, I suspect that preferential treatment may have already been given to the club, because it clearly was not being presented with the rate rises it probably should have faced when the situation at the club was financially dire (although one can still not be sure we're on safe ground even now). IBC will no doubt look at the kind of salaries being paid at Portman Road and deducing that the ability to pay is indeed in place, if the club so desires. This whole very ugly affair amply demonstrates that the club is no longer maintaining the sort of links Mr Sheepshanks and his predecessors worked so hard to achieve. And as for verbal promises by the late Mr Hehir, well imagine what the club would say if I told them that a deceased member of staff had promised me a free season ticket. So ugly.

Guthrum added 01:10 - Jan 4 Meh. They're still talking. Both sides are being fairly reasonable. It'll be sorted out or postponed still further.
0

Tractamatt added 01:18 - Jan 4 Forget Clegg out and Jewell out it could soon be all out,it's nice also to see that we're doing all we can to sort out our obvious on field problems as soon as we can in the window.Don't it just fill you with confidence.Would the last one leaving please turn out the light.
0

tearle1974 added 02:03 - Jan 4

I am sorry to say this everyone but this club needs to sort this out asap, The IBC has the right to but the padlocks on the gates and evict the club from it's premises. It's like any company if you don't pay the rent your out.

However when politics and football comes together you know someones going to get something out of it???? The IBC will not evict town as the councillors will worry about there votes at the next election????

ITFC will pay up in the end, we will not go into administration as the board wont let it happen and more important to the town of Ipswich would suffer if the club did a Plymouth and fall a couple of leagues. The amount of income from visiting supporters and on matchdays when the wife is shopping and the old man and son is at the match the IBC would worry about the state of the shops too.

Finally ME & Clegg needs to sit down and get this resolved soon before we are laughing stocks. There is nothing stopping the fans writing to IBC asking for the accounts under the freedom of information act and writing to the chairman of IBC questioning them why has it taken them so long?????

It's NOT just the clubs fault??????

piersmorganisatool added 06:19 - Jan 4 ah, so here it is, this being the first snippet to finally lead to an increase in season ticket prices for next season, oh so predictable from Clegg and Evans.
0

ericgates added 06:20 - Jan 4

Compare how the Cobbolds ran our club and compare it to today. Its a disgrace from top to bottom. Its nothing really like the Blackburn situation here because I don't believe we despise Evans, Clegg and Jewell like Blackburn do Venkys and Steve Kean, but I'm so sad at the state of our once proud club. In fact I'm devastated and something more than removing the manager needs to be done.

ozzydog added 06:50 - Jan 4 In any other era I would have been on the side of ITFC but smeghead and ME have no class and have shown nothing but poor leadership Nevadablue summed it up exactly
0

Benters added 06:55 - Jan 4 I for one will not be going anymore this season or renewing my season ticket until this mess is not sorted out
0

blrmy added 07:05 - Jan 4 Bleurgh, news filler story, people should really not get so excited at every word that is mentioned at press sessions.
0

Mark added 07:38 - Jan 4

It is important that the club are NOT allowed buy the freehold of the ground, as the Council are a protection against future owners who might want to sell the ground for development or be forced to do so in the event of adminstration/bankruptcy. I hope this is sorted out ASAP because as an ITFC season ticket holder and IBC Council Tax payer I would rather both organisations spend their time on more important things than arguing with each other.

SilentMajority added 07:54 - Jan 4

I don't know about anyone else, but in my household Mortgage/Rent comes first. Then Taxes. Then everything else. If you can pay £20,000 a week for footballing services to someone, you can pay your rent. Pay unto Caesar like the rest of us, and DON'T give anyone any reason to tamper with the Freehold, that leads to a horrid place.

Is there any benefit to both parties if they both wanted to sell the land or relocate the club?

roytheboy added 08:07 - Jan 4 Well at least this story diverts supporters attention from the disappointing performances on the pitch of late !
0

bluelady added 08:08 - Jan 4 So you lot would all be happy if your council tax went up 643%?
0

muncer added 08:09 - Jan 4 Clegg and his over-inflated ego both need to leave this club. He can't even agree a fee for this let alone a fee with regards to signing players we NEED. We can't be held to ransome but sometimes you just have to pay what's necessary. This man irritates me beyond belief. He has no clue.
0