Steve Shovlar Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 I hope a prospective promoter will come forward to take over the running of the club next year. The need to change their race night to a Thursday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midland Red Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 Big Al- No Mr Darcy and Mr Machin are not responsible for the rider debts. It is what the BSPA bond is for why would they pay somebody else debts . The problems at Leicester is the reason that there has been only one Sky meeting as every Intention of there being two meetings at Beaumont Park but as the club are not getting any of the Sky payments or shared event pot why would they have Sky in the stadium running on an off night and lower crowd. It is the same with NLRC that's was due to be at Leicester in September the BSPA cannot really run a shared event at a non member track Still showing as Leicester 17/9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Hunter Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 Hemsley actually Owns very little . most of the buildings on the site are portable . So if the rumours are correct about him being chased by the council for the improvements to the area around the stadium are correct .the council could cancel his lease . leaving it open for a promoter with the right set of promises to take on the lease , l would think the council would be keen to see speedway continue and not wind up with egg on their faces for backing the project in the first place , so that leaves the stuff Hemsley does own or owes money on . Independent arbitration could easily set a realistic non Hemsley cuckooland price , failing that the new promotion could insist he removes them and just replace them with new Stuff . all the people Hemsley has pissed off over his timethere are still around, and once he was gone former sponsors and the army of volunteers who built the place would soon re-surface You have got to remember that there are two Hemsley controlled companies involved in this. Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd who lease the land that the track is on and the surrounding land, including the Speedway Bar and car park, from the City Council, and Leicester Speedway Ltd. who run the speedway and, presumably, sub lease the track from Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd. So I assume that the Council are chasing Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd. and not the company running the speedway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 You have got to remember that there are two Hemsley controlled companies involved in this. Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd who lease the land that the track is on and the surrounding land, including the Speedway Bar and car park, from the City Council, and Leicester Speedway Ltd. who run the speedway and, presumably, sub lease the track from Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd. So I assume that the Council are chasing Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd. and not the company running the speedway. Legally I think that's correct. But BSC Ltd has to my knowledge never traded from day one, and Leicester Speedway Ltd has been acting (and allowed to act) as though it is both the leaseholder and speedway operator. Far be it from me to suggest the Council has allowed this to happen, either by failing to understand the difference between the two companies or by just plain turning a blind eye to it. Whatever, the inevitable seems as if it could now be happening,chickens finally coming home to roost, and the Council may become leaseholder and landlord if they go about it in the correct way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Hunter Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 Legally I think that's correct. But BSC Ltd has to my knowledge never traded from day one, and Leicester Speedway Ltd has been acting (and allowed to act) as though it is both the leaseholder and speedway operator. Far be it from me to suggest the Council has allowed this to happen, either by failing to understand the difference between the two companies or by just plain turning a blind eye to it. Whatever, the inevitable seems as if it could now be happening,chickens finally coming home to roost, and the Council may become leaseholder and landlord if they go about it in the correct way. Just in case you have missed it Mr Hemsley resigned yesterday as Director of Leicester Speedway Ltd. The Company Secretary also resigned yesterday. This leaves Yulia Hemsley as the sole director of Leicester Speedway Ltd. Mr Hemsley remains the sole director of Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 Just in case you have missed it Mr Hemsley resigned yesterday as Director of Leicester Speedway Ltd. The Company Secretary also resigned yesterday. This leaves Yulia Hemsley as the sole director of Leicester Speedway Ltd. Mr Hemsley remains the sole director of Beaumont Sports Complex Ltd. Yes, I gather that is the case. The Council's legal department are possibly working on this, if not then maybe they should be.I'm a bit out of date with these things, but if there is no Company Secretary, does a company become illegitimate? It looks as though LS Ltd could have been using one of those "business services" type of companies to fulfil the Company Secretary requirement. Maybe there's a replacement lined up and will be appointed, but normally the resignation/new appointment are both listed as happening on the same day. Which leads you to suspect to these are not normal circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 Doesn't Hemsley need more time to spend on his Cycle-speedway exploits?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shale Searcher Posted September 14, 2016 Report Share Posted September 14, 2016 Still showing as Leicester 17/9 I have just had to confirm my availability for the NLRC on Saturday, so weather permitting, it's being run at Leicester.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert72 Posted September 15, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 15, 2016 I have just had to confirm my availability for the NLRC on Saturday, so weather permitting, it's being run at Leicester.. Charging a whopping £16 is so wrong at Leicester for Saturday's kids meeting as you can see the evening before an Elite League meeting followed by a National League meeting at Coventry for £17 and kids go free plus concession for the elderly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TesarRacing Posted September 15, 2016 Report Share Posted September 15, 2016 Yes, I gather that is the case. The Council's legal department are possibly working on this, if not then maybe they should be. I'm a bit out of date with these things, but if there is no Company Secretary, does a company become illegitimate? It looks as though LS Ltd could have been using one of those "business services" type of companies to fulfil the Company Secretary requirement. Maybe there's a replacement lined up and will be appointed, but normally the resignation/new appointment are both listed as happening on the same day. Which leads you to suspect to these are not normal circumstances. No, not any more Big Al: As from 6 April 2008, unless there is an express requirement in your articles of association, the Companies Act 2006 no longer requires private limited companiesto appoint a company secretary (CA 2006 s270) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flagrag Posted September 15, 2016 Report Share Posted September 15, 2016 I do agree that the NLRC pricing does seem a little high but that price is set by the BSPA as its a shared event and they are running it and are just hiring the Leicester track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted September 15, 2016 Report Share Posted September 15, 2016 In that case the BSPA have got no idea of pricing structures and they're doing more harm than good as there will be a really low attendance. We would have gone if it had been around £10/£12 but no higher than that. Charging a whopping £16 is so wrong at Leicester for Saturday's kids meeting as you can see the evening before an Elite League meeting followed by a National League meeting at Coventry for £17 and kids go free plus concession for the elderly. I think you've got that bit wrong about concessions for the elderly as there is only one price for adults now. Still great value though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert72 Posted September 15, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 15, 2016 In that case the BSPA have got no idea of pricing structures and they're doing more harm than good as there will be a really low attendance. We would have gone if it had been around £10/£12 but no higher than that. I think you've got that bit wrong about concessions for the elderly as there is only one price for adults now. Still great value though. Ah an old boy told me he pays £12 to watch bees that was awhile ago, yes £17 is still good value for Friday night. Yes I would of gone had it been £10/12 but not at that price out of principal. The BSPA will never learn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.