Planner1 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Do make your mind up dear chap. In the same post you claim to have knowledge of a vital commerical part of the contract regarding repurchase prices and at the same time say "We don't know the terms of the contract and we aren't likely to, so what's the point in speculating?" Which is it? Do you claim to know this one specific part of the contract but not the rest of it and if so why is this vital part not commercially sensitive but the rest is? If you are that interested, send an FOI and see what you get. I've never seen the contract, I'm just relating what I have been told. Option to buyback at market rate seems to me a pretty standard clause that anyone would expect to be in there. Hardly a major secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 If you are that interested, send an FOI and see what you get. I've never seen the contract, I'm just relating what I have been told. Option to buyback at market rate seems to me a pretty standard clause that anyone would expect to be in there. Hardly a major secret. So what we have is clause 1 REDACTED COMMERCIAL CONFIDENTIAL clause 2 REDACTED COMMERCIAL CONFIDENTIAL clause 3 REDACTED COMMERCIAL CONFIDENTIAL clause 4 Hell I shouldn't probably mention this but my mate told me the council have option to buyback at market rate if it falls through clause 5 REDACTED COMMERCIAL CONFIDENTIAL It seems you are struggling with the concept of confidential. If the contract is confidential as you say, and i quote "I've never seen the contract, I'm just relating what I have been told" the person who told you is breaching the confidence element of the contract by telling you as you claim (and I have no reason to doubt that claim) that you have nothing to do with this contract and you further breach it by publishing it on here. Who was the person legitimately party to the contract that disclosed it's contents to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 So what we have is What we have is a load of aimless speculation as usual. Send an FOI if you want to know more. You moan when people tell you nothing and you moan again when people tell you what they've heard. Seems you just want to moan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 Neither you nor I know what was said in the discussions which took place, so anything you say on this is pure speculation and therefore pretty meaningless. You don't know how these things work do you? The Council serve compulsory purchase orders on the property owners and buy them up. then they sell them to the developer, who gives them back what it cost. If indeed Hammerson are dropped, SCC get the option to buy back the property at MARKET price. Market price is now well below what Hammerson paid them for it, so SCC potentially stand to come out of it quite well. Are Hammerson obliged to sell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 Are Hammerson obliged to sell? That will depend on the terms of the transactions into which all concerned entered. It's all usually 'commercially sensitive' and therefore not disclosed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewC Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 8 years mate, 8 years. Countries have been at war, liberated and renamed in that time. This is not a constructive argument. It doesn't address any of the real issues I'm asking about. It's taking a long time; partly it has been delayed by the council not doing things right, partly by the retail markets and partly because these things just do take this long sometimes. Hammerson do not own Sheffield & the council stated 6 weeks ago that they will kick them off the project. More interesting. Can you post a link, I'd like to read that? I'm not an expert so still looking to be proven wrong or backed-up but it still seems to me that Hammerson have invested enough time and money in this development (even if only to the extent of where we actually are now, without ground even broken yet) so I suspect that just turning to Hammerson and saying, sorry, we're going to use someone else will result in Hammerson turning straight to their lawyers, and with a very good case behind them to boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 Are Hammerson obliged to sell? I understand they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 If indeed Hammerson are dropped, SCC get the option to buy back the property at MARKET price. Market price is now well below what Hammerson paid them for it, so SCC potentially stand to come out of it quite well. Earlier you claimed the council; would have to find a substantial amount of money to buy back the property sold to Hammerson. Now where is the money the council made from selling to Hammerson in the first place. ? What has that been squandered on ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 Earlier you claimed the council; would have to find a substantial amount of money to buy back the property sold to Hammerson. Now where is the money the council made from selling to Hammerson in the first place. ? What has that been squandered on ? Did you see my post #1118 which answered this question when you first posed it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Did you see my post #1118 which answered this question when you first posed it? Yes , ive read that post , but there is no mention of where the money the council make from the sale of the properties went. What was it spent on ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts