From Teamtwaddle The six soccer fans who took the club to court over the infamous seats row are being threatened with a bill for millions of pounds by Newcastle United.
One Sunday tabloid has revealed that the Magpies intend to sue the supporters for revenue lost while a High Court appeal holds up the #45m redevelopment at St James Park.
One of the aggrieved fans, councillor Geoff O'Brian, vented his rage by saying: "There is no way I can raise the money they are talking about. "I will have to sell the home I live in. This will bring hardship to us all."
Toon are also demanding the supporters pay a massive #197,284.13 in terms of costs to the club's lawyers.

-- Anonymous, March 19, 2000

Answers

This situation is getting totally out of hand, and its about time it the Club got it sorted - this legal farrago does nobody any good, apart from the lawyers that is.

There doesn't seem to the will to reach for a compromise, with both parties going for total victory - something that is seldom achieved. In this case both sides stand to lose. What a bloody mess!

-- Anonymous, March 19, 2000

The SoS should back down. They lost. They won't win the 2nd round. Get on with moving the club forward and get the extra seats in for those of us without an ST.

-- Anonymous, March 19, 2000

Talking to my brother today, the latest word around the pubs and clubs in the Toon is that regardless of what now happens, and regardless of who wins the court cases, as soon as the bonds run out ALL - and that word was ALL - 2000 that are being 'moved' will have their season ticket renewals rejected.

Anyone else in the Toon heard that and is there anyone on this board that will be affected, interested to know their views if there are.

The whole thing is one complete PR nightmare from BOTH sides of the fence.

-- Anonymous, March 19, 2000

Rejected the bond holders' season ticket applications doesn't make any sense. What good would it do NUFC? It sounds like rumour.

On the appeal, forget the big club/little person polemic. Allowing appeals can just be used as a legal loophole for inflicting pain on the defendant even though you know you can't win. NUFC can only claim for reasonable expenses of the appeal to be put aside upfront, and even if NUFC win again, I bet they won't cover all their expenses. So it's not so terrible, any you or I would do exactly the same if we were taken to court, had won the case and then had the threat of an appeal. Why should you then subsidise their appeal? SOS's lawyers will want to make sure they're going to be paid too. Or is it reasonable for someone to continue legal action with no downside to themselves (apart from being re-seated), but forcing the other party to shell out hundreds of thousands on legal fees, and even more due to the project overrunning and a possible impact on revenue? What are SOS hoping to achieve anyway? To stop re-development?

At this stage it's not doing anyone any good, and it's time to move on.

-- Anonymous, March 20, 2000