SHEIKH JASSIM'S lawyers have written to Manchester United complaining about "a pattern of demonstrably false and defamatory comments" from Sir Jim Ratcliffe.
Qatari Sheikh Jassim wanted to assume 100 per cent control at Old Trafford, but ended up missing out as the Glazers opted to go with Ratcliffe's 27 per cent minority takeover.
After the deal had been completed, Ratcliffe was quizzed about Sheikh Jassim.
The British billionaire said: "Still nobody’s ever seen him, actually.
"The Glazers never met him… he never… I’m not sure he exists!"
Ratcliffe also appeared to suggest the rival bid did not produce proof of funds.
READ MORE ON MAN UTD
This had first been hinted at by Man Utd when they filed to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in January.
According to , Sheikh Jassim and Nine Two Foundation, the organisation set up for the Man Utd takeover, have sent legal letters to the Red Devils in both New York and London to complain about Ratcliffe's comments.
They have called for "immediate corrective action" to Man Utd's SEC filings and accused Ratcliffe of breaching a confidentiality agreement around the sales process with his recent remarks.
The Qatari bid's initial move to complain came in January after Man Utd submitted their schedule filing to the SEC.
Most read in Football
BEST FREE BET SIGN UP OFFERS FOR UK BOOKMAKER
Inside Ratcliffe's Man Utd plans
Everything you need to know as Sir Jim Ratcliffe takes charge at Manchester United...
- Ratcliffe opens door for controversial Mason Greenwood return
- We’re not a brutal organisation, but…' - Ratcliffe on Ten Hag's future
- Inside Ratcliffe's five-window transfer plan... including Rashford
- Ratcliffe channels Fergie with iconic warning to Man City and Liverpool
- Inside plans to turn Old Trafford into 'Wembley of the North'
This documented the events leading up to Ratcliffe's takeover - a requirement due to the club being on the New York Stock Exchange.
In the filing Man Utd claimed Sheikh Jassim's bid had repeatedly failed to provide "customary financing commitment letters", which was then reported in the media as an inability to provide proof of funds.
A legal letter was sent to Man Utd from the Qataris claiming this had provided a "misleading" impression, while they also insisted this be corrected.
This demand has not been completed by the club.
The Qataris claim they provided a "definitive" proof of funds.
The Athletic are reporting they have seen evidence that "a senior executive from QNB wrote to United to confirm the ability of the Nine Two Foundation to fund the purchase of the club and clear the club’s debts".
Meanwhile, Ratcliffe's comments around the existence of Sheikh Jassim were addressed by Joe Ravitch, the co-founder of Raine Group who brokered the bidding process, in an interview with The Times of London last month.
He said: "We met Jassim. He was in New York. He’s a lovely guy; a very smart guy. The Qataris were very real. They were very smart guys, very thoughtful.
"I don’t know why they didn’t appreciate the value [of the club] but we were not their adviser.
READ MORE SUN STORIES
"We tried as the seller to explain the value to them, and they put what they thought was a series of very serious bids on the table."
Man Utd have been approached for comment.
Man Utd vs Chelsea - so what? They’re sinking towards irrelevance, says Dave Kidd
By Dave Kidd
MANCHESTER UNITED and Chelsea were the two dominant forces in English football when Sir Alex Ferguson and Roman Abramovich were in their pomp.
But when they meet at Stamford Bridge on Thursday night it will be a ‘so what?’ match between dysfunctional clubs lurching in and out of crisis.
On Saturday, Erik ten Hag’s United failed to build on an FA Cup win over Liverpool and were poor in the 1-1 draw at Brentford.
And Mauricio Pochettino put out a Blues side that failed to beat ten-man Burnley at home.
Will either be in a job next season? And will it make much difference?
United have only won a League Cup in seven years and Chelsea’s last domestic honour was the 2018 FA Cup.
Both clubs are sinking towards irrelevance.