Fresh Man City 115 charges points deduction claim made as 'rumour' circulates over final verdict

A new claim about Manchester City's 115 charges case has been made as the wait for an official verdict rolls on.

The Premier League accused City of 115 financial rule breaches back in 2023 and a private hearing began in September, with both sides assembling an expensive team of lawyers.

The case was concluded in December, with a three-person Independent Commission panel hearing closing arguments before assessing evidence and making a decision on a verdict.

If City were to be found guilty, possible punishments include hefty fines and points deductions - with retrospective action not appearing to be on the cards.

Pep Guardiola hinted that a decision would be announced before the end of the 2024/25 season but that has not happened and there has been a significant delay.

Throughout the process, City have strenuously denied the charges and have communicated that they are "totally confident" that they will be "exonerated" - claiming to have "irrefutable evidence" which proves their innocence.

Manchester City are still waiting for the outcome of their 115 charges case. Image: Getty

The club have continued to operate as normal, splashing out £172 million on four new signings in January and spending more than £100 million to further add to their squad in the summer.

Former Liverpool star has theory for Man City spending

And former Liverpool striker John Aldridge has a theory that there is a reason why City have been bringing in so many new players - believing it points towards a points deduction or transfer embargo being unlikely.

"There can only be two possible conclusions to draw from Manchester City’s huge transfer spending since the turn of the year," Aldridge wrote in a Sunday World column.

"I can’t believe it has taken this long to come up with a verdict and City’s huge spending in the transfer market since the start of 2025 leads me to suspect they know what is likely to happen.

"Either they are making pre-emptive moves to sign players in case they are hit with a transfer embargo or they know they are going to be found not guilty and are planning a new era of domination.

"Nottingham Forest and Everton were docked points for breaking the Premier League’s financial rules, but City’s charges were far more serious, and that fuelled the rumours that their punishment could be huge.

"I’d imagine Pep Guardiola would not have signed his new contract with the club last November if he thought they were going to get hammered with a points deduction or a transfer embargo.

"Clearly, he was also promised that City would find a way to spend huge sums in the transfer market to rebuild his ageing team."

What are the 115 charges?

• Failure to provide accurate and up-to-date financial information from 2009/10 to and including 2017/18 - 54 alleged breaches
• Failure to cooperate with Premier League investigations from December 2018 to February 2023 - 35 alleged breaches
• Failure to provide accurate financial reports for player and manager compensation from 2009/10 to and including 2017/18 - 14 alleged breaches
• Breaches of Premier League profitability and sustainability regulations from 2015/16 to and including 2017/18 - Seven alleged breaches
• Failure to comply with UEFA's regulations, including UEFA's Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play regulations - Five alleged breaches

Another article in the Daily Mail, titled, 'The bombshell result of Manchester City's 115 charges case is now clear and here's why', saw Ian Herbert write that "close analysis of the evidence, and the circumstances of the trial itself" lead him to believe that City will prevail.

Stefan Borson, a former financial advisor to City, has hinted that a verdict may be "quite close" as he believes all parties "would want to get that decision out during the close season" so that it doesn't drag on into the new campaign.

Speaking on talkSPORT, he said: "I think City must be quite close... I think there's been a lot of misinformation about that situation.

"If you have a 12-week trial, it takes a long time for the decision to come out. In the outside world, it could easily take 12 or 18 months in a High Court equivalent.

"This week felt possible. I thought that if it didn't happen in the international window that we had in April, that the parties would find a way to hold it over until the end of the season so that it didn't distract."