Liverpool FC Forum

from another forum
So Gillett is going to take Tom Hicks to court for fraud.
Gillett has put a file in saying that Hicks mislead him over he wealth and how much of his own money he was going to put into Liverpool fc and how he was going to cover the costs of any loans .

it also turns out that Gillett was putting his own money into the club and Hicks only ever put money in from loans.

I hope we get to here more about this and if Gillett gets a day in court, but i fear that Hick will pay him off.......money from another loan.

if any of our american members hears more on this lets us know.

who cares what those clowns are up to...so long as they never set foot in liverpool again

Ahh but it is significant becaue if they're busy sueing eachother then I assume they've given up sueing LFC in the US courts?

Remember they promised they wouldn't give up and try via the US courts?

Reg » Tue May 01, 2012 5:47 am wrote:Ahh but it is significant becaue if they're busy sueing eachother then I assume they've given up sueing LFC in the US courts?

Remember they promised they wouldn't give up and try via the US courts?

Hicks has missed to dates he set to put papers in for sueing RBS.

I think what is coming out is that Gillett was a bit silly and was taken in by Hicks lies just as much as us liverpool fans were.Hicks told Gillett that he would put the funds in to start building a new stadium within the the year. (this is what Gillett has set out in his court papers).

being in the UK its hard to get all the info on what is going on in their courts and under their law and how this still could ended up with our club or RBS paying back money to both of them.

What I can't understand is how a businessman like George Gillett could be suckered into Tom Hicks' lies etc? Surely you would ask for crystal clear evidence to show that a person wanting to invest with you has the means to do so? Surely you wouldn't just 'take somebody's word for it?'

Boxscarf » Wed May 02, 2012 11:59 am wrote:What I can't understand is how a businessman like George Gillett could be suckered into Tom Hicks' lies etc? Surely you would ask for crystal clear evidence to show that a person wanting to invest with you has the means to do so? Surely you wouldn't just 'take somebody's word for it?'

In todays world it just dont work like that, someone can show you they have all the money in the world and can mask the fact that its all done by loans and that seems to be the case here.
Hicks handed his own books over to Gillett and Gillett did the same to Hicks. but it seem Hicks did not come clean on where is funds come from and used a company name to cover the fact that the money was a loan, (so it looked like he had made money from a company when in fact it was just a loan).

lakes10 » Sun May 06, 2012 1:23 am wrote:

Boxscarf » Wed May 02, 2012 11:59 am wrote:What I can't understand is how a businessman like George Gillett could be suckered into Tom Hicks' lies etc? Surely you would ask for crystal clear evidence to show that a person wanting to invest with you has the means to do so? Surely you wouldn't just 'take somebody's word for it?'

In todays world it just dont work like that, someone can show you they have all the money in the world and can mask the fact that its all done by loans and that seems to be the case here.
Hicks handed his own books over to Gillett and Gillett did the same to Hicks. but it seem Hicks did not come clean on where is funds come from and used a company name to cover the fact that the money was a loan, (so it looked like he had made money from a company when in fact it was just a loan).

Ya thats what it seems like.  Not to mention the fact Hicks already owned so sports teams if I'm not mistaken, so I don't think Gillett every really questioned if he had the money.

Boxscarf » Wed May 02, 2012 6:59 pm wrote:What I can't understand is how a businessman like George Gillett could be suckered into Tom Hicks' lies etc? Surely you would ask for crystal clear evidence to show that a person wanting to invest with you has the means to do so? Surely you wouldn't just 'take somebody's word for it?'

The guy is a great conman becuase he also suckered David Moores into giving the club away as well. Finally GG admits he was conned as well....... 

Tom Hicks is by far the worst one. Gillette is mostly guilty of being suckered in by his lies. Remember that Gillette is the one that always seemed like a half ok person.

Kukilon » Tue May 08, 2012 11:11 am wrote:Tom Hicks is by far the worst one. Gillette is mostly guilty of being suckered in by his lies. Remember that Gillette is the one that always seemed like a half ok person.

Gillette was the only one to put his own money in, yet he did not know that at the time.....must feel a right mug.