https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/spo...nderland-owners-start-fight-fairness-14917527 Sunderland owners start fight for fairness, with business rates and policing costs in their sights Sunderland's new owners believe that the club is paying over the odds for policing and business rates, and it could hamper their promotion bid next season COMMENTS By James Hunter 12:40, 17th JUL, 2018 SPORT please log in to view this image Sunderland Association Football Club say that they will hold talks with Northumbria Police about the size of their policing bill. Figures revealed this week show that Sunderland paid more than twice as much as Newcastle United last season despite the average crowd at the Stadium of Light being almost half that at St James’ Park. The Black Cats have also launched an appeal against their £2m business rates bill claiming that it must reflect the club’s drastically reduced income caused by back-to-back relegations. The club’s business rate bills, covering the Stadium of Light and Academy of Light, are the largest outside the Premier League, and the figure is far in excess of those of their League One rivals who on average pay less than £80,000 per year. Sunderland’s bill is way out of kilter with other clubs in their division and much higher than the vast majority of clubs in the Championship, with only Aston Villa paying anywhere near the same amount. The rateable value of business properties are set by the Valuation Office Agency, part of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, they were reassessed in 2015 for the first time since 2010, and will not be looked at again until 2021. The latest valuations - which take into account turnover - came into force in April last year when the club was still in the Premier League and enjoyed a turnover of more than £123m. Since then the Wearsiders have dropped two divisions to League One, and the club’s turnover next season is likely to be somewhere in the region of £17m. please log in to view this image New Sunderland manager Jack Ross (Image: Sunderland AFC) That means that the club’s business rates as a proportion of turnover have increased more than seven-fold, rocketing from just 1.6 percent in 2017 to around 12 percent next season. The imbalance between Sunderland’s rates and those of other clubs in the third tier will put the Black Cats at a significant financial disadvantage as new owner Stewart Donald attempts to plot a way back to the Championship at the first attempt. In addition to the club’s high business rates, Sunderland’s policing bill from Northumbria Police last season was £347,618 - more than double the figure that Newcastle paid. The Black Cats played one home game more than Newcastle last season in all competitions, but the average league gate at the Stadium of Light was 27,635 compared to 51,992 at St James’ Park. Sunderland executive director Charlie Methven said: “When we came to the club it became clear to us pretty quickly that other clubs have come to view Sunderland as a portable gravy train over a long period of time. “It may be that the day-to-day absence of the owner led to a rather complacent ‘take-take’ attitude. “It is time for the club to start fighting for what is fair and a lot of time over the last two months has been taken up with talks with various stakeholders in the club and other interested parties with a view to starting that process. "It has also become apparent that the public sector regards the club as easy pickings, with very high business rates and policing costs. “We are very happy to pay our way and pay our share, but the amounts that we pay must be fair. “By way of comparison, next season we would be paying around ten times the business rates of many clubs in the Championship and 25 times the business rates of some clubs in League One. “To that end, we have started an appeal against our business rates bill and we will also seek discussions with Northumbria Police regarding the cost of policing games at the Stadium of Light.” Money collected from business rates is split equally between central government and local councils, who use it to fund services. Businesses are entitled to ask the VOA to review their business rates if their circumstances change, and if they are unsuccessful they can make a formal challenge, and ultimately ask a tribunal to make a decision. Sunderland are not the first club to challenge the rateable value assigned to their ground. Wigan Athletic have been relegated three times in six years and are heading to court to argue that the taxman should take into account the loss of revenue caused by relegation when setting business rates. I simply can't work out the justification for those policing costs - how can we be charged twice as much as the mags for so much less policing. 6 extra games - but still over 300,000 people less watched SAFC than NUFC last season. It looks to me like people taking advantage of the club and the situation we were in. The business rates looks like an archaic measure - only assessed every 6 years - whilst our turnover has reduced by over £100m in that time (over 85% decrease!)
It's a ****house of a police force from top to bottom. Wouldn't surprise me if it was the most corrupt to boot.
We've been crying out for transparent. This is so transparent it's untrue. Hearing about trying to get lower ****ing business rates. Brilliant insight into the running of a club.
Its a depressing read but at the same time optimism for the future running of our club. Who the **** has been in charge over the past 6 years plus?? Its basic **** if even I can sit there and see the unjustly difference in policing costs for us and the mags.
It sounds like we are being bent over with the policing costs. Business rates will reflect the size of the stadium and AOL. Not actually sure we've got much of a case with that. We'll have far bigger than most in the country, I would imagine.
Business rates are calculated on annual turnover along with assets etc. When they were decided our turnover was far more than we get now. Our business rates are also the highest in the two divisions below the pl. technically the land on which any London based club has its ground is far more valuable than the sol and aol put together really. I don’t now all of the ins and outs but definitely has something also to do with turnover
It probably is mate. I'm still in my first year of running a legitimate company so they've never had any of our turnover to work from yet. Good point about the land in London, though. I hadn't considered that.
Amazing insights, these new boys are a breath of fresh air, so open and above board, never known anything like it. Long may it continue.
The point that N/C's gate was about 40%+ higher than ours LAST SEASON and in percentage terms is likely to be even higher this time round must surely be taken into account. Then there is the relevant behaviour of the fans of the two clubs, or to put it another way, who needs policing most. I suspect that our track record holds up well. We don't go in for trashing the surrounding area when we lose and The SSoL is an area where police horses can operate in safety.
I like that we have a club that now asks why to things...means they care and they not going to spend money on something they don't get a return on...hmmm oh Rodwell has gone...
yeah Sunderland fans are saints... Aside from the casual comedy, business rates are an actual joke in general. The councils who ****ing demand business rates are the ones who will be the first to moan that there's only tumbleweed on the highstreet.
Anyone know how police fees are actually calculated or have realistic ideas? Not having a go there, I genuinely don't know how they would work them out. As regards NUFC vs SAFC and the respective bills it does seem odd that Sunderlands are higher but if I was trying to think of reasons why it may be higher than expected it could be that the police have to predict what they think the crowds will be like (better to provide too many police than not enough) and is it possible that when they start/finish in Newcastle they can go back to their usual work faster as it is in the city center whereas with Sunderland they need to travel more? It sounds a fudge, just thinking of ideas that could be argued to legitimise it.
Chester-Le-Street, front street, is a prime example. It's been on the decline for years and landlords are still charging a bomb to rent a store. There's a huge turnover of shops opening and closing. I looked there and found them in the same price bracket as Durham City centre, it's ludicrous.
Absolutely, and at a time when retailers need all the help they can get. I know some local councils are desperate, but there must be better ways of raising funds?
Yeah, drop the rates. Let the businesses breathe a little and give them an opportunity to flourish. Cheaper business rates could see a drop in prices passed on to the consumer, which would bring back the folk who now shop elsewhere. That place needs big investment to get it rocking again, though. It's been left like that for a few years now, even the market is a ghost place and that used to be popular with people far and wide. There's not enough money to go around because people are struggling now more than ever. VAT is too high for businesses too, 20% is a piss take for them, that should be slashed to 15%. Again this could and should be passed on to the consumer which will drag them in and get the economy on an upturn around these places.
http://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/finance/2015/NPCC Guidelines on Charging for Police Services.pdf In answer to your question I started off reading this. Then I realised that it was written by a 'Sir Humphrey Appleby' without the humour and went off to watch some paint dry. A part that did strike me though was concerned liaising with the local Licensing and Safety authorities then this bit -- . It is essential that this approach is adopted consistently across the country to ensure that legitimate recovery of police costs is not undermined. Any departure from this principle should only be made on exceptional grounds and with the specific approval of the PCC On the face of it would appear that consistency is not being applied. However, bearing in mind the fact that we are dealing here with a mental outlook trained by Local Politics I would guess that any complaint by SAFC is unlikely to bring a reduction. It may though generate an increase in the fee charged to our friends to the north !!!!!!
Scary thing is that the previous "businessmen" didn't seem to care - I never questioned Martin Bain - mainly as I thought he was just doing as he was told. But if a chief exec (or whatever he was) isn't asking these questions then he's got to be **** at his job! I am self employed as a singer (as most know) and I question HMRC with £5 on my income tax bill if I think they're over-charging me - I'm just a self employed person that's all - I'm not earning hundreds of thousands (or even millions) a year to deal with the money.
Bain was a laughing stock up in Scotland, and their was general amazement that we had given him a job of any description. The man turned out to be useless at every aspect of the job he was paid to do, in fact a typical behind the scenes appointment during the "Short era" which went on far too long. No wonder the club was in such a state, De Fanti ?, Byrne and Bain totally wrecked our club, these new guys have their work cut out, and so far look to be doing it in style.
