Supporters' Trust and Northampton Town have their say as GRS Group respond to trust's 'serious concerns' over payments

GRS, a construction supply chain and engineering group with close links to Northamptonshire, headed up the project to finish the East Stand almost two years ago. It was completed last February and fully opened for the first time in April 2025.

However, last week, Northampton Town Supporters’ Trust raised ‘serious concerns’ relating to payments from the football club to GRS.

“We made enquiries and it is now clear that full payment for the East Stand completion had not been made to the contractors GRS Roadstone Group (GRS Group) by 30 June 2025,” read a statement from the Trust. “This is a serious concern as this scenario has unwelcome undertones of the situation in 2014, when the then contractors Buckingham were not paid for work undertaken on the Sixfields stadium development.”

The trust also issued a response to allegations made by the club in response to their original statement. This update is published below.

After being contacted by the the Chronicle & Echo, GRS Group chief executive Jon Fisher said: "Our relationship with NTFC is exceptionally strong, and we continue to work with the club in many different ways beyond the East Stand build, with ongoing activities such as corporate hospitality, community sponsorships and local events.

"Regarding our work on the East Stand, there has been a contract in place from the start, which is normal for any construction project of this scale. Payments are in line with this contract and are fully up to date, and we have no concerns whatsoever about the arrangements. Overall, we are very proud of our involvement with the club and we look forward to seeing our relationship develop further in the future.”

The football club added: “This is typical of the Trust board and their scaremongering. They have no detail or proof of anything untoward, yet they have seen a vulnerable time at the club in terms of results on the pitch and have decided to once again try and destabilise with further false accusations of wrong doing.

“This has been happening for years where they have accused the club of doing or not doing certain things but they have been proved wrong so many times. This very strange behaviour is why we cut off communication with them years ago. We feel our fanbase see through them and we aren’t even sure they represent their members anymore as they never seem to engage with them.

“There are no financial issues whatsoever at the club and it even shows their business naivety to be using accounts from year end June 30th 2025 to try and create problems today.

“They resigned from the FSA (Football Supporters Association) earlier this year as they were under a disciplinary process for their behaviour and were told to make changes to their conduct or face consequences, so they decided to resign instead.

“The disciplinary report at the time stated the following – which says everything you really need to know about them. 'The behaviour displayed by (board member name redacted), and by extension NTFCST, falls below what the FSA would expect to see from any individual representing a credible supporters organisation and does not appear to be conducive to developing and maintaining a relationship with the club.' (Football Supporters’ Association - Disciplinary Panel Report dated 29/5/2025).

“Our fans don’t expect us or even want us to engage with these people. This type of behaviour has serious consequences and really has the ability to damage the club.”

In response, an NTFCST spokesperson said the accusation of “scaremongering” was “inaccurate, misleading and conveys the symptoms of obsessive paranoia”.

“Nearly all of the directors of the Trust are lifelong supporters. All of the directors of the Trust are committed to promoting the long-term interests of professional football in our town, reflecting the mission statement of the Trust. They care passionately about the club and want it to succeed. In fulfilling this responsibility, they have a duty to raise concerns if there is a material risk that the future of the club might be compromised,” the spokesperson said.

The spokesperson said it did not agree with the club statement there were no financial issues at the club. The spokesperson added that the sale of the land would be sufficient to pay down the club debt.

"It appears that the future of the club may eventually depend on a speculative land investment that may go well but could very easily go badly wrong,” the spokesperson said.

“It is the duty of our directors to conduct reverse stress testing. This includes giving due consideration to many alternative scenarios, including extreme ones. One such scenario would arise if a decision was taken not to pay down the capital debt on completion of the land sale, or should some other unforeseen event occur that prevents it, such as the incapacity or death of a principal actor,” the spokesperson added.

The spokesperson said the allegation of “business naivety” was absurd.

“The Trust board is composed of directors with significant business, financial and legal experience. Further, we have access to external professional advisers for help and guidance whenever needed. We have always taken advice when considered necessary."

The trust spokesperson also refuted the allegation that the trust had resigned from the FSA as a result of a disciplinary procedure.

"The matter concerned one director of the trust about whom a ruling was made without giving the individual director or the Trust on his behalf the right to respond. The FSA conducted a process which was incomplete and not carried out in accordance with due process. We objected to the process and it was not pursued further by the FSA. Six months later we resigned from the FSA but our resignation was not related to the matter mentioned and the decision was fully communicated to Trust members who we regularly engage with,” the spokesperson added.

“Finally, as a minority shareholder in the club, we remind its directors of their own statutory duties under the Companies Act 2006, in which section 172 requires directors to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members (shareholders) and other stakeholders, paying due regard to the long-term consequences of their actions,” the spokesperson said.

Editor’s note: This article was amended on Monday, April 20, to include the response from the trust.