By 90Min
March 21, 2018

West Ham United are ready to open a new legal case against the London Stadium's landlords as the two corporations clash over off-the-pitch costs.

The Hammers are unhappy that London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) are not footing the bill for things such as Sky TV, beer on tap and hospitality staff, according to the Times.

That has led to a further breakdown in relationship between the Premier League club and LLDC as the pair butt heads over an ongoing legal dispute concerning West Ham's desire to increase the capacity of their home ground.

This new fight is doing little to lift the gloom surrounding the English side after protests inside the stadium during the Irons' 3-0 home defeat to Burnley earlier this month, and could spell even more financial trouble for beleaguered owners David Gold and David Sullivan.

The London Stadium is facing a reported £140m loss over the next decade as costs spiral and the LLDC has claimed to try and minimise the cost of the ground to the taxpayer.

A lengthy 'expert determination' process has seen West Ham ask for draught beer to be provided at all bars inside the stadium but the LLDC wants the club to stump up the funds to install taps and pumps instead.

(You may also be interested in Karren Brady Apologises for West Ham Pitch Invasion and Pledges No More Board Interference)

West Ham also want all TVs inside the ground to display Sky Sports - the club currently foot the £150,000 business license fee to show it - and have expressed desire to see the LLDC pay for hosts and hostesses into its luxury suites.

However, the LLDC again believes that the Hammers should pay for these upgrades and wages as well as the club's wish to the replace the running track's green cover with a claret one to represent their home colours.

West Ham released a lengthy statement as they explained that the club is 'only seeking what it is entitled to under our contract' and, along with the Major of London Sadiq Khan's intervention they 'hope that this will be the start of a more sensible approach' for both parties.

However, the LLDC hit back as they stated that West Ham were 'claiming rights under the Concession Agreement that are not there' and feel that they have a 'duty to defend our rights' as the legal case runs the risk of turning nasty.

You May Like

HOLE YARDS PAR R1 R2 R3 R4
OUT
HOLE YARDS PAR R1 R2 R3 R4
IN
Eagle (-2)
Birdie (-1)
Bogey (+1)
Double Bogey (+2)