Notts County FC caught offside in wrangle over unpaid invoices

  • Print
  • Comments (6)

Readers' comments (6)

  • 7months work for £333,485.00 this is disgusting ! how many actual working hours is this for ? and how much an hour are these people paid.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • erm, I think I got a bit more for the same number of months. Some of my players got more than that for kicking a ball up and down a field (mainly kicking it up though because a better team cannot score if the ball is 20 feet up in the air). As for the ladies of Nottingham well what can I say?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Typical solicitors, charging ludicrous fees for sod all work. Worse than muggers.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Oh yes, it's all the nasty lawyer's fault.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Oh dear how sad. Quite how a bill was run up for this amount with no interim payments is well, amazing. I would be happy to help apply some sensible WIP & Debtor management processes - that actually work, for a modest and pre agreed fee of course.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Look, if you do the maths the figure comes to 29 hours a week at £400 for the seven months (that's based on a 4 week month I might add).
    Divide that £400 between 3 fee earners and you're looking at £133 an hour.
    Question - with Notts County working through 'interesting times' for those seven months is it a stretch to imagine 3 fee earners each spending 29 hours a week working on their behalf.
    Answer - no.
    Jesus people, come on.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (6)