Court date set for March for firm suing for £1.3m over axed Ibrox Disaster memorial

[supersonic]

I don't see the problem, too much panty wetting on here. The club were shown plans, we didn't like it, now the company has taken the hump. Hardly our fault. I think you might care to much what the media/dhims think.

but if it was that simple, then surely we wouldn't be in court? the company must have something from us (e.g. signed contract) that makes them think it's worth going to court over. RE your 2nd point, PR like this is completely embarrassing for the club, especially given the subject matter. how did we manage to get ourselves in this position?

 

[highlandloyalKW10]

Can you take someone to court just because they have taken the hump?

They can take you to court of they have enough reason to, it doesn't mean they will be right in the end. If that was the case, everytime a company took someone/another company to court, they would win.

 

[supersonic]

this from our solicitors portfolio

"Memorial Walls Ltd v The Rangers Football Club Ltd: litigation re the leval of damages due following breach of contract"

suggests that we have signed a contract.

 

[bluetonic]

Stewart Robertson seemed very enthusiastic about it.

I thought it was a good idea.

Wonder what went wrong

Is it another example if signing a contract without looking at the detail or terms and conditions?
We must have signed a contract for it to go to court for damages

 

[Del]

We might have signed a contract but are they capable of delivering what we were sold. My guess is the dispute will be over the end product which don't meet our expectations.

 

[Laudrup1]

surely it wouldn't reach this stage if it was a clear cut stage? it makes me think they must have signed some contract at least otherwise they are chucking away their money going into this.

Could well be one of those situations where everyone is in the wrong.

We might have signed a contract. Goodness knows the board have previous for it.

Still think that company are both at it niw and someone we would have been disappointed in their work if it had gone ahead.

 

[Crispy Bacon]

Always find it funny how quickly folk can brand our club embarrassing whilst knowing about 3 sentences of what’s probably a complex issue.

Who needs enemies and all that shite.

 

[The Ranger]

Why are people embarrassed, why do people automatically always start blaming the club when the full story isn't out yet. Surely we can at least give our own club the benefit of the doubt for a change. At least till we find out what's happened first

 

[Johnny Boyd 2]

Can you take someone to court just because they have taken the hump?

Of course not , clearly a contract was signed

 

[Amstel]

I don't see the problem, too much panty wetting on here. The club were shown plans, we didn't like it, now the company has taken the hump. Hardly our fault. I think you might care to much what the media/dhims think.

I think you don’t know the full story either and are guessing and trying to defend the club. You have your opinion and I’ll have mine.

 

[Teddypicker87]

Surely we seen the plans and agreed before signing the contract??

 

[Yosser]

Yet more club cash going to lawyers. They must love dealing with us.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

It would have been a commercial flop

 

[tazzabear]

Embarrassing from the board, nothing more can be said than that.

Should we not wait for both sides of the story here?

 

[supersonic]

Could well be one of those situations where everyone is in the wrong.

We might have signed a contract. Goodness knows the board have previous for it.

Still think that company are both at it niw and someone we would have been disappointed in their work if it had gone ahead.

could be a case of we signed an initial contract, they came back with bogging designs and instead of telling them to go back to the drawing board to redesign them we have tried to pull out.

 

[Del]

One look at their website tells me they are fecking hopeless. No wonder the club chased them.

Check out their home page.

Home

 

[TPP]

It was an utterly horrific design and placement from the start. Fairly symbolic of the operational board.

 

[supersonic]

One look at their website tells me they are fecking hopeless. No wonder the club chased them.

Check out their home page.

Home

see but that's not how you should look at it. you should look at it "their website is a fucking shambles, why did we even begin talks with them?"

 

[Deleted Account]

Anyone giving out such a ludicrous contract like that should be chased from Ibrox.

He was.

 

[supersonic]

He was.

Why was said employee allowed to sign this off, why didnt a board member ? All good firing him, but come on FFS

 

[El Bufalo]

One look at their website tells me they are fecking hopeless. No wonder the club chased them.

Check out their home page.

Home

they’ve got their Rangers designs at the bottom of that page.

Edit: just seen the header on the page, “Coming soon to Ibrox Stadium”

 

[BunkMoreland]

Stewart Robertson seemed very enthusiastic about it.

I thought it was a good idea.

Wonder what went wrong

The design they suggested was not fitting for a memorial.
Hence why the club told them to bin it.

 

[Blue Tack]

All comes down to contracts and what is down in black and white ,forget what was said,the contracts (if any) and the detail in them will settle this.

 

[GimmeShelter]

We love a court case!

It’s brutal, I could pick a 5 a side team made up of Scottish law lords and I’ve never set foot in a courtroom in my life.

 

[CupidStunt]

I'm pretty sure this is about us not being impressed with their first draft design, asking for another - not being impressed with that either then losing faith in their ability to to what we wanted.

 

[texas_pedro]

I know we all like to think everyone is against us, but we signed this contract and then tried to get out of it. We’ve admitted a breach.

Having been involved in legal contracts through work even basic ones are ran past our legal representatives. So either we’ve ignored their advice, didn’t get legal advice, or have just winged it hoping we could get out of contract. We really do spunk money on court cases. It’s mental

 

[Ger572]

I can't say I was a fan of this bizzare idea from the off, the money could have went elsewhere to improve the stadium/surrounding areas and now we are potentially being left to cough up yet more cash due to a senior figures unprofessionalism.

 

[Jelle1880]

We entered into a contract with them, and then backed out when the whole memorial thing was looking like an embarrassing affront to the memory of those who died, now we are being dragged through the courts again when we shouldn’t be.

It’s a hugely sensitive subject and could and should have been handled way better.

If it was indeed so bad why should the club continue with it ?
I'm sure contracts like this will have clauses allowing either one of the parties to get out of the deal if they ar eunhappy.

 

[Gringo]

If it was indeed so bad why should the club continue with it ?
I'm sure contracts like this will have clauses allowing either one of the parties to get out of the deal if they ar eunhappy.

Why enter into a contract in the first place would be the obvious question?

 

[Jelle1880]

Why enter into a contract in the first place would be the obvious question?

These things are always done on contract... Especially if the reports are true about the scale of it.

I do think that the company should have first been asked to provide details on what it would make before the club agreed, but I still don't think the club did much wrong here. Let's remember, this is the one where they wanted to make a statue for the Ibrox disaster which people could high five...