• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Save our Southend Protest Confirmed

what is required is for the club as a stand alone organisation, to own its own ground and facilities... it doesn’t matter who owns it as long as it, and it’s ground belong to SUFC in perpetuity. What happens to the rest of the development is up to Ron and his debtors ..
being entwined in some international tax dodge is never going to end well ..
 
Either, on the cheap or just enough to satisfy the covenant, or both ? Either way, there seems to be no thought gone into the future stability of SUFC. He did say our debts would be cleared, but is he a man of his word ? (he promised us MM would be manager to the end of the season). And what about future revenue streams. We have nothing concrete from him

This convenant. I don't believe it exists. We couldn't track it down when we were going through the same process with Jobson in the 90s. It was just referred to as a thing, but no one had seen it. Back then of course we still had people who were involved in the transfer of the ground to the club! No one since has confirmed they've seen it

It may well be an urban myth or a piece of paper that has long been shreaded.

If anyone has seen it or can verify its existence, it would be really helpful to have sight of it!
 
Approached by who and what plan? Jesus wept...............Am I the only one frustrated with this. A lot of people have been jumping on the band waggon by no plan Stan.

Nothing to do with Stan.

Do you expect interested parties to go public before approaching the club owner and release plans?

Admittedly that may be the best solution in our current position.

Also twisting this around....you stated that no one is interested in running the club. Theres no way possible of knowing that for a fact.

The first problem is Ron has not even entertained the idea. Call him up and ask him you want to discuss buying the club off him. See what response you get.

The second problem, being the big one would be negotiating a deal. How much is Southend United Limited worth? £0 plus £20m Ron's inter-company debt? Would he agree to sell the new ground land or stadium itself once built? If not, can a deal lease be agreed?

I dont know the answer to those. Nor will anyone else if Ron is not willing to even discuss it.
 
This convenant. I don't believe it exists. We couldn't track it down when we were going through the same process with Jobson in the 90s. It was just referred to as a thing, but no one had seen it. Back then of course we still had people who were involved in the transfer of the ground to the club! No one since has confirmed they've seen it

It may well be an urban myth or a piece of paper that has long been shreaded.

If anyone has seen it or can verify its existence, it would be really helpful to have sight of it!

As searched out by @The Big Dady although we never got to the bottom of it,I do believe @Shrimperstrust may know more.

This is the Covenant that is attached to the Roots Hall Title Deed.

Schedule of restrictive covenants


1 The following are details of the covenants contained in the
Conveyance dated 14 February 1898 referred to in the Charges
Register:-

COVENANT by the Purchaser that he would thenceforth duly perform
observe and keep all and singular the stipulations set forth in
the said First schedule thereto.

PROVISO that the last mentioned covenant should only be binding on
the Purchaser during the actual period of ownership but should run
with land.


THE FIRST SCHEDULE above referred to

Spirituous malt or intoxicating liquor should not be sold on any
lot except upon the hotel site No shop should be erected or house
used as a shop except on plots marked for shops on the sale plan

Page 4 of 7 Schedule of restrictive covenants continued

No hut or caravan should be put upon any lot No house or shop
should be built of less value than Two hundred pounds No noisome
or offensive trade or manufacture should be carried on upon any
lot or any operative machinery fixed or used thereon. No soil
should be removed from any lot except for erection of buildings
thereon nor should any right of way be granted or permitted across
any lot Each Purchaser should properly repair the pathway and a
moiety of the road to the extent of its abuttal upon his lot to
the satisfaction of the Vendor In case of non-compliance with
this condition within twenty one days after notice had been sent
or left on the defaulter's plot the Vendor might repair such
pathway and road or any part thereof respectively and recover from
the person making default in so repairing the costs thereof and
incident thereto in such proportion as the Vendor might determine
Each Purchaser should forthwith make and afterwards maintain
boundary fences where marked T within the boundary and fronting
the road No building was to project beyond the building line
shewn on the plan and each purchaser must undertake the care of
his boundary marks.

NOTE 1: The T mark referred to affects the North Eastern boundary
of the land tinted mauve and hatched mauve
NOTE 2: The building line is set back an unknown distance from
Shakespeare Drive.

2 The following are details of the covenants contained in the
Conveyance dated 7 September 1910 referred to in the Charges
Register:-

The Purchaser hereby covenants for himself his heirs executors and
assigns with the Vendor or other the person for time being
entitled to the rents and profits of the adjoining land and to the
intent that such covenant shall bind and run with the land that he
the Purchaser his heirs executors and assigns or other the owner
or Occupier for the time being of the premises hereby conveyed
will within One calendar month from the date hereof erect to the
satisfaction of the Vendors Surveyors and forever thereafter to
the like satisfaction maintain a proper and sufficient fence along
the north western boundary not to be less than four feet or more
than six feet high and also will not get out or work any of the
earth gravel or other mines or minerals lying within an angle of
Forty five degrees taken from a line Three feet within the north
west boundary of the said premises to the intent that the said
earth gravel mines and minerals lying within the distance
aforesaid shall be left as barriers and wholly undisturbed from
any part of the said premises or otherwise permit or suffer any
subsidence or damage to the surface of the adjoining premises
belonging to the Vendor or his Trustees and in the event of any
subsidence or damage will keep the Vendor or other the person
entitled to the rent and profits of the said adjoining land fully
indemnified against any damage or loss which may be occasioned
thereby.

3 The following are details of the covenants contained in the
Conveyance dated 1 February 1911 referred to in the Charges
Register:-

COVENANT by Purchasers with intent to bind all persons in whom the
said hereditaments thereby conveyed or any part thereof should for
the time being be vested but so that every owner should be
personally liable under abstracting covenant only during the
period of actual ownership with the Vendor that they the
Purchasers his heirs and assigns would observe and perform the
said stipulations set out in the first schedule to abstracting
Indenture.

THE FIRST SCHEDULE

1. That no manufactory workshop laundry or any noxious noisy or
offensive trade shall be carried on on any part of the said
premises

Page 5 of 7 Schedule of restrictive covenants continued

2. That is the shops are erected they shall be ordinary shops and
used only for inoffensive trades and not for the purposes of a
fried fish shop or for any other undesirable trade.

3. That the land shall not be used for a dust shoot or deposit of
offensive or unsightly refuse and that no hoarding advertisement
board or the unsightly erection shall be permitted on any part of
the said premises.

4 The following are details of the covenants contained in the
Conveyance dated 11 April 1921 referred to in the Charges
Register:-

"AND the Purchasers for themselves their successors and assigns
hereby covenant with the Vendor his successors and assigns and
also as a separate covenant with the Commissions and their
successors (and so that this covenant shall so far as practicable
be enforceable by the Vicar for the time being of the said Parish
of Prittlewell or other the owner for the time being of the
remaining glebe land now retained by the Vendor or any part
thereof) that the Purchasers and the persons deriving title under
them will at all times hereafter duly observe the stipulations set
out in the Schedule hereto but so nevertheless that this covenant
shall be binding upon the Purchasers and the persons deriving
title under them only during the period of their respective
ownership of any interest in the land hereby conveyed.

THE SCHEDULE

1. No excavation to be made within twenty feet of the wall
forming the boundary between the hereditaments hereby conveyed and
the hereditaments coloured blue upon the said plan. Compensation
to be paid by the Owners or Owner for the time being of the
hereditaments hereby conveyed for all damage done to the said
hereditaments coloured blue or to any buildings hereafter erected
thereon by reason or in consequence of any excavation made by such
owners or owner.

2. The Purchasers within six calendar months from the date of
these presents to remove the gates now existing in the said
boundary walls and to build block up and continue such wall in
place of them to the height of the existing wall and to the
satisfaction in all things of the Vendor or his surveyor for the
time being.

3. No noisy noisome or offensive trade or business or the sale of
wine beer or spirits to be carried on upon the hereditaments
hereby conveyed or any part thereof"

NOTE 1: The boundary referred to is the southern boundary of the
land tinted yellow on the filed plan
NOTE 2: The blue land referred to is the vicarage shown on the
filed plan.

5 The following are details of the covenants contained in the
Conveyance dated 31 July 1953 referred to in the Charges Register:

"THE Purchasers hereby jointly and severally covenant with the
Corporation as follows:-

(a) That when laying out and from time to time developing the
premises hereby conveyed as a football ground the Purchasers will
take such precautions and execute such works as may be reasonably
required by the Borough Engineer for the time being of the said
County Borough of Southend-on-Sea for the protection of the Nine
inch diameter soil sewer shown by a green line on the plan
hereinafter referred to.


(b) To develop the premises hereby conveyed for use as a football
ground for the Southend United Football Club Limited and for no
other purpose
and that in the event of such development not being

Page 6 of 7 Schedule of restrictive covenants continued

substantially proceeded with within a period of Ten years from the
date hereof in the event of the Purchasers at some earlier date
deciding not to proceed with such development the property and the
fee simple thereof shall be offered forthwith to the Corporation
for re-purchase by them at the price of Ten thousand nine hundred
pounds before it is offered for sale or on lease or otherwise
disposed of to any other person Such offer to the Corporation to
be open for acceptance by the Corporation for a period of Eight
weeks from the date of its receipt by the Corporation In the
event of the Corporation not accepting the said offer or declining
the same before the expiration of the said period of Eight weeks
then and in any such event this covenant shall cease to be valid
or of any effect Provided that the avoidance of the said covenant
shall not be deemed to abrogate modify or in any way affect the
powers and duties of the Vendors as local planning authority for
the County Borough aforesaid in relation to any development in
upon under or over the property hereby conveyed which from time to
time may be proposed to be carried out or carried on as the case
may be.

(c) That the Purchasers will within a reasonable time from the
date of commencement of work for the laying out of a football
pitch on any part of the said land (due regard being given to
difficulties in obtaining any necessary licence and materials)
enclose the property on all boundaries with fences and gates of a
height of not less than six feet.

(d) For the benefit of the adjoining land of the Vendor coloured
grey and grey cross-hatched black on the said plan and any and
every part thereof to observe and perform the restrictive or other
covenants or stipulations mentioned in the Second Schedule hereto
and to indemnify the Vendors in respect of all actions claims and
demands in respect of any future breach of the same."

NOTE: The green line referred to is shown by a broken brown line
on the filed plan. The land coloured grey and grey cross hatched
black is edged yellow and hatched blue on the filed plan
respectively


If I am reading the highlighted part correctly that would seem to say that RH is for SUFC only and if it were to change then surely a suitable other FF would have to be in place before it could be anything else...I am no expert here though.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but what is the aim of it? The plan? I get protests if a plan is in place, investers eg, who are willing to take over the club. We have none of that apart from a group of angry people who don't have an answer to what they're protesting against. It's crazy.
Can you not read or are you just so scared of Losing your uncle Ron that you’re just here to be a pest to those who have had a gut full of him?.

Read the posts, if you don’t agree fine just move on and don’t attend but stop repeating yourself like a parrot and here and ruffling feathers (excuse the pun...)
 
Would you accept a fan from another football club to attend?

I know I am happy for Southend to be relegated but I DO NOT wish any club to go to the wall which I fear may happen if RM stays at your club.

Football needs rivalry.

Yours sincerely
Your North Essex friends
Form a orderly queue behind the gun sight ?
 
Protests are different from campaigns.

Protests can simply be against something, in this case "the way the club is run". At the very least a protest implies "the club can be run more successfully". You don't need to articulate much more than that at this point. Protests are great for demonstrating a strength of feeling on an issue.

Campaigns are much different and require aims, goals, strategies, alliances, committees and so forth.

Over time protests can align with campaigns but it's not a prerequisite for a protest to be aligned to anything at all. Longer term that would be the aim here of course. But for now a protest indicating strength of feeling against mismanagement of the club is a very good idea.
 
You won't be representing me, I'm in a state of realism to know if Ron walked away tomorrow we'd fold. We have no plan, no one who'd be willing to take over, it's just a stir up from Stan that the fans are jumping on.
Not a stir up from Stan at all, this was spoke about well before Stan showed up.
The irony is your name is hadenoughblue but looks like you are pretty content to me! I have private messaged you my number if you wish to give me a call and give me your opinion as it’s always important to listen.
 
Last edited:
Let us just set out a few lines for absolute clarity.

1. The protest / demonstration / rally, call it what you like, is being organised by Save Our Southend, and is being supported by other supporter organisations. As soon we as know who has signed up (and they have a process to go through), we will share those details. The Custard Splat, Blues on Tour, All At Sea and Shrimperzone have, others are discussing it. We'd like a unified approach, hopefully we'll get it.

2. We've been attempting dialogue with the Chairman for a few weeks, but are either being fobbed off or, as you've seen recently, been presented with statements that don't address anything. I think most of us agree the Zoom meetings haven't taken us anywhere - and we have tried. Really, we have.

3. The involvement from Stan is helpful. If nothing else, it is has given what is going on here some serious publicity both within our supporter base and beyond. However, we do not know what the outcome of any talks will be. We were planning before Stan was involved, he has helped our cause but it is wrong to suggest we've jumped on that particular horse, we were riding our own horse already and we still are. But, we must be mindful that his involvement could positively change the situation or provide access to resources we didn't previously have.

4. Let us be clear, this is not a Martin Out event. Whilst I am sure many hold the desire that he should go, and I am sure some people will make that point - we don't as yet have an alternative backer - or at least one that I know of. The objectives will be about creating change in the way the club is run. I am fairly sure pretty much everyone involved in this club recognises that it has not been run properly for some time - hence our current predicament.

So, the objectives you seek are not finalised yet because we do not know how the land lies at this moment in time. We will do as the week comes to a close and we will share them, obviously. Transparency is the key here, we are very mindful that we do not want a group turning up for a shout with no strategy to take things forward into the summer and beyond, if needs be.

So, why are we publicising this now? I'd rather we were out there campaigning, organising and sharing ideas now rather than cobbling together a rushed plan with six days notice. "Planning" a word we don't hear often in these parts. So yes, there are gaps, but there are reasons why there are gaps, and these will be filled.

The really important thing. We'd like as many supporters to come along. We believe we are speaking for a majority (certainly our social media outlets suggest that). Some people will not agree with us, will not want to protest (and frankly, I never thought I'd be here again) or will simply want to stay away. It is important that as supporters we respect each other's positions and do not end up in a toxic environment that pits supporter against supporter - after all we all want the best for this club. Hopefully everyone will agree with that.

Hopefully that honest assessment gives you all some clarity of what is going here, and if you don't want to be part of it - fair enough. No hard feelings.

We'll provide updates as soon as can.

Thank you Kerry, for such a detailed explanation, something which I feel had been missing.

It is item 4 here that I have the most concern about on the day. I have already seen plans on social media for a meet up at the Borough Hotel on the seafront, and a few bevvies, before a walk through town and up Victoria Avenue. I think a large group of beered up blokes is likely to try to take the more peaceable people into a "Ron Out" protest rather than the demonstration you have originally planned.
 
Thank you Kerry, for such a detailed explanation, something which I feel had been missing.

It is item 4 here that I have the most concern about on the day. I have already seen plans on social media for a meet up at the Borough Hotel on the seafront, and a few bevvies, before a walk through town and up Victoria Avenue. I think a large group of beered up blokes is likely to try to take the more peaceable people into a "Ron Out" protest rather than the demonstration you have originally planned.
I fear the same, there will always be people making it a RM out event, and if that happens for the majority i think it would be harmful to what the stated aims are of SOS, the trust etc.

Hope I am wrong
 
I fear the same, there will always be people making it a RM out event, and if that happens for the majority i think it would be harmful to what the stated aims are of SOS, the trust etc.

Hope I am wrong
But shying away because some might have a different view is no reason to stop, they want RM out they are welcome to voice it, whether you want change or him out all together makes no difference it’s still encapsulating dissatisfaction either way.
 
Last edited:
Thank you Kerry, for such a detailed explanation, something which I feel had been missing.

It is item 4 here that I have the most concern about on the day. I have already seen plans on social media for a meet up at the Borough Hotel on the seafront, and a few bevvies, before a walk through town and up Victoria Avenue. I think a large group of beered up blokes is likely to try to take the more peaceable people into a "Ron Out" protest rather than the demonstration you have originally planned.
You saw 1 post of somebody mentioning it, which got shut down by ‘the pub landlady’ as you call her. Thought I better mention it got shut down for context..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you Kerry, for such a detailed explanation, something which I feel had been missing.

It is item 4 here that I have the most concern about on the day. I have already seen plans on social media for a meet up at the Borough Hotel on the seafront, and a few bevvies, before a walk through town and up Victoria Avenue. I think a large group of beered up blokes is likely to try to take the more peaceable people into a "Ron Out" protest rather than the demonstration you have originally planned.

I know what you're referring to, and I think it's a bit of a stretch to call them 'plans'. One bloke has mentioned going the pub beforehand and got quickly shut down. No reason to rubbish the demonstration plans. The vast majority want to do this in the right way. Unity.
 
But shying away because some might have a different view is no reason to stop they want RM out they are welcome to voice it, whether you want change or him out all together makes no difference it’s still encapsulating dissatisfaction either way.
I dont disagree, I was replying to point for stating this isn't a RM our protest. also hi lighting it may make RM even more resistant to talking to those groups organising the protest, if the aim is to remove him then thats fine, if the aim is to Open dialogue it may back fire that was what I was saying.

We live in a free country and everyone has the right to voice the opinion on every subject and that is something I encourage, all I was doing was pointing out it may not have the effect that maybe some would hope for if dialogue and openness is what is wanted
 
Post 5 on this thread.....

4. Let us be clear, this is not a Martin Out event. Whilst I am sure many hold the desire that he should go, and I am sure some people will make that point - we don't as yet have an alternative backer - or at least one that I know of. The objectives will be about creating change in the way the club is run. I am fairly sure pretty much everyone involved in this club recognises that it has not been run properly for some time - hence our current predicament.

Isn't wanting the club run properly and "Ron Out", the same thing ? Whilst Ron is at the helm nothing will change. Although "Ron Sell" is probably more apt ?
 
Back
Top