SEEBECK 87 Ltd have released a statement in which they claim they are the owners of Swindon Town Football Club.
In reaction to the briefing issued by Swindon Town this morning, Seebeck's statement says that they feel the current directors of the club have "obstructed the intention of the court" following a hearing on April 16.
That court appearance resulted in Swinton Reds 20 Ltd - the company of chairman Lee Power - failing in its attempt to acquire an injunction preventing Seebeck from appointing David Smith, Adam Fynn and Debbie Priestnall to the Town board.
Swinton Reds have stated that those three individuals, all of whom also sit on the board of Seebeck 87, are now 'observer directors' with no "power to pass any resolutions" until the adjourned case is heard on April 29.
However, Seebeck say they "do not recognise" the term 'observer director', instead suggesting that the three new directors have "given an undertaking not to pass any resolutions until after April 29".
Swinton Reds 20 and Seebeck 87 now both claim to own Swindon Town Football Club.
The statement reads: "On the 1st April 2014, Seebeck 87 Ltd, the owners of Swindon Town Football Club Ltd, gave notice to the Board of Directors of Swindon Town Football Ltd, through Seebeck 87’s solicitors, that that they wished to appoint three new Directors on to the Board of the Football club, and invited the two serving directors, namely Mr Lee Power and Sangita Shah to a board meeting to be held at the ground of the Football club at 2.00pm on Thursday 17th April 2014 to ratify those appointments.
"The two serving Directors served notice on 14th April 2014 to notify Seebeck 87 Ltd that they intended to seek an injunction preventing the proposed Directors appointments.
"The High Court refused injunctive relief on 16th April to enable the owners Seebeck 87 limited to appoint three directors who will now undertake a thorough investigation of the club and its business affairs before the hearing fixed for 29th April.
"The serving board members have so far obstructed the intention of the court.
"The three new directors were refused entry yesterday (17th April 2014) to the football club, until 4.30pm.
"At 5.00pm three persons who suggested they were “security”, arrived and asked the three new directors to leave the premises.
"We note that in the press statement released from the football club this morning they acknowledge the decision of the court and suggest the three directors have been appointed as “observer” directors, a term that we do not recognise, however the three have given an undertaking not to pass any resolutions until after the 29th April.
"The serving board members have so far obstructed the intention of the court and have not made available any financial information despite being formally requested to do so. If the new directors are not provided with access to the financial records immediately they will make an urgent application to the court."