Jump to content
IGNORED

City fans 1-0 West Midlands Police


thatcham red

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, thatcham red said:

Yes, compensation for those involved, plus having spoken with them, the complete vindication that they had done nothing wrong.

For the record, WMP will not formally admit liability and, therefore, apologise. They didn't fancy a court case, which would have been public, risky and expensive. 

This was not without financial risk for the claimants either, even with the Club & Trust backing, so the same applies to them. Having been made an offer, there is no guarantee they would have secured a ruling had they pressed ahead with a court case.

The reason the Supporters Club & Trust got involved was to help right the wrong for the claimants, but also try to bring about a change in the way police forces (especially WMP) use these powers in the future. From speaking with Avon & Somerset Police and the FSA, our view is that policing and the use of these powers is changing for the better.

To quote Amanda Jacks:

"It should also be acknowledged that WMP have totally shifted their approach to football policing in recent years and were the first police force in the country to have a Football Policing Independent Advisory Group comprised of supporter reps from clubs across their region."
 
It may not be down to just this incident, however, we believe it played a part.
 
Stu

 

Thanks Stu, do you know what ball park figures have been mentioned for compenstation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, thatcham red said:

Yes, compensation for those involved, plus having spoken with them, the complete vindication that they had done nothing wrong.

For the record, WMP will not formally admit liability and, therefore, apologise. They didn't fancy a court case, which would have been public, risky and expensive. 

This was not without financial risk for the claimants either, even with the Club & Trust backing, so the same applies to them. Having been made an offer, there is no guarantee they would have secured a ruling had they pressed ahead with a court case.

The reason the Supporters Club & Trust got involved was to help right the wrong for the claimants, but also try to bring about a change in the way police forces (especially WMP) use these powers in the future. From speaking with Avon & Somerset Police and the FSA, our view is that policing and the use of these powers is changing for the better.

To quote Amanda Jacks:

"It should also be acknowledged that WMP have totally shifted their approach to football policing in recent years and were the first police force in the country to have a Football Policing Independent Advisory Group comprised of supporter reps from clubs across their region."
 
It may not be down to just this incident, however, we believe it played a part.
 
Stu

 

Well done Stu and all makes sense

By offering an out of court settlement it is quite clear who was wrong 

 

Have any of those involved actually made a formal complaint to WMP about the actions of the officers involved , (False Imprisonment as a starter , and a criminal offence)

i assume they have ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, JulieH said:

Yes compensation for the 10 that we’re taking them to court in an out of court settlement. 

Stu may be able to add more as to any comment offered 

Can I ask you Julie

1 Were you on duty For this game ? and did you have any direct knowledge of these matters ?

ie were you a witness to any degree ?

2 if so , Did you make a statement ?

3 Were you the officer who provided evidence supporting the fans ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Can I ask you Julie

1 Were you on duty For this game ? and did you have any direct knowledge of these matters ?

ie were you a witness to any degree ?

2 if so , Did you make a statement ?

3 Were you the officer who provided evidence supporting the fans ?

Yes, yes and yes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JulieH said:

It’s what happens with things that aren’t referred to  Iopc, they tend to deal with the more serious stuff, assaults/ criminal offences etc and leave the rest to the local force to deal . 

 

Was a bit surprised that this wasn't tbh- not least owing to all of the obfuscation, stalling etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Thankyou

In that case 

Good on you 

As much as  that’s the way it should be

, it should still be recognised , and You have gone up in my personal estimation 

Well done 

Not sure if that’s a compliment or not, but thank u anyway ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JulieH said:

Not sure if that’s a compliment or not, but thank u anyway ???

I understand what you say !

It wasn’t starting from any damning stance , 

But in terms of trust I’d suggest you’ve done yourself , personally  , and A&S , a big professional service 

Integrity ....nice one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally cannot comment on amounts of compensation, as this is confidential. I have not even told the Supporters Club & Trust board. It would be up to the claimants to disclose if they so wished.

These were individual claims grouped together to form a civil action, given that they all had a common issue to pursue. I am not aware of any criminal action being brought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, RedDave said:

£2k compensation I believe. 

For what they went through. That barely scratches the surface of it. 

I don't know the ins and outs and certainly wouldn't criticise their decision, but if it were me, and with the peanuts settlement, I would have laughed at their offer and pressed on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

For what they went through. That barely scratches the surface of it. 

I don't know the ins and outs and certainly wouldn't criticise their decision, but if it were me, and with the peanuts settlement, I would have laughed at their offer and pressed on. 

Would have been very interesting to see in court, additionally it could have brought about the possibility of setting a legal precedent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is an out of court settlement may make everyone feel a bit better but is in fact the last resort white wash. You actually need to get in to court to actually change something. Otherwise all this amounts to is a bit of cash that may just cover the expenses of the case!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

The problem is an out of court settlement may make everyone feel a bit better but is in fact the last resort white wash. You actually need to get in to court to actually change something. Otherwise all this amounts to is a bit of cash that may just cover the expenses of the case!

At the same time, I can see why they settled- 4 long years, the cost- the risk of significant costs if it reached court and the risk that it'd be held against if they refused a settlement.

However yes, the ultimate way to force change would have been in court- yet there were very good reasons IMO to settle at this time. Also provides a blueprint for fans of other clubs similarly affected in the future.

An encouraging Tweet on this note though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

For what they went through. That barely scratches the surface of it. 

I don't know the ins and outs and certainly wouldn't criticise their decision, but if it were me, and with the peanuts settlement, I would have laughed at their offer and pressed on. 

Thing is, any court award might not be far in excess of what is offered by way of settlement, whilst the (legal) costs implications of potentially having to fund your side's lawyers and the others', in the event of a loss, can be eye-watering. More than likely that costs figure dwarfs damages, in any event. A lot of competing interests at stake, although having a serving police officer in support of the claim must have made it an incredibly difficult decision as to whether 'stick or twist'. Often though, the spectre of costs can be ruinous to a claim, so fairplay in extracting anything from WMP. Ultimately, if these Claimants have gone about securing, systemic lasting change, then who can put a price on that and that arguably is real-life recompense, in contrast to just (relatively insignificant) pounds in the bank. That's the kind of discussion I would be having with my clients. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is definitely all about risk and reward.

Some of the potential court costs quoted were eye watering and the individual is personally liable. Refusing an out of court settlement might work against you. A court settlement, if indeed you secure a win, might even be less, and you have all the risk still.

The advise was to accept the settlement. In my view, these guys showed there mettle in getting this far.

Stu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, phantom said:

May sound odd, but would I be correct in saying all 10 would have to agreed to take the settlement?

If say 1 didn't want to would the others had to go to court too?

Straying into the realms of speculation here, but any offer of settlement from WMP would, I imagine, include the caveat that it is in settlement of all the outstanding claims (those 10 supporters from what I have read on here). Nothing stopping a counteroffer, or back 'n' forth, from the supporters' side or, perhaps, individuals leaving the class and seeking to go it alone (quite possibly v risky). Additional reading, for all you diehards, is Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules - have fun with that ;) Sounds like our lot got sound advice and acted sensibly upon it. Sadly, we don't live in a perfect world where legal costs are minimal/have the tab picked up from elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...