The Yorkshire Post can exclusively reveal that solicitors acting on behalf of the League made the offer on the day their deadline to respond to a High Court writ elapsed.

If Leeds agree to the proposal, a date will be set for a three-man panel to meet and hear arguments from both parties.

The panel would consist of a neutral Court of Appeal judge plus one representative apiece nominated by United and the League.

With the League One season having just over two months remaining, the earliest date possible would suit all concerned.

The League are making no comment on the legal action, but chairman Lord Mawhinney promised last week, in a letter circulated to all member clubs, to fight the writ "robustly".

Speaking to the Yorkshire Post from Monaco last night, United chairman Ken Bates said: "The letter arrived from the League's solicitors in the morning suggesting that this should go to arbitration with a Court of Appeal judge.

"To quote their words, 'impartiality and independence will be guaranteed and the competence of the tribunal will be par excellence'. Impartiality and independence is what we have been arguing for all along."

Asked whether the club will accept the offer of arbitration, Bates replied: "We only got the letter a couple of hours ago so we will have to discuss what our next move is.

"But, clearly, this matter has to be resolved sooner rather than later or they will have to print two league tables – one with minus 15 and one without.

"What makes me laugh is that it has taken six months to get to this position, six months in which the League have refused to discuss the matter with us.

"Only now, with the writ having been issued, do they instruct their lawyers to come back to us.

"Not only that, it is actually three weeks since we served the writ. Under the law, the League had a week to say they had got it and then another two weeks to respond. And they choose the 21st day to respond.

"The delay has helped no one. It will be interesting to see Lord Mawhinney being cross examined.

"It is a long overdue development and the pleasing thing from our point of view is that a Court of Appeal judge will hear it. After a Law Lord, they are the highest in the land.

"The decision to deduct us 15 points was purely one born of self-interest on behalf of the other clubs."

Leeds, who were relegated after being deducted 10 points in May for going into administration, were hit with the further
15-point penalty in August for what the League board considered to be a failure to follow insolvency policy.

At a subsequent meeting of the other 71 member clubs, the decision was upheld with only five clubs backing United's call not to be punished at all and 64 voting against. It is understood Leicester chairman Milan Mandaric missed the vote due to being late, while Bury did not send a representative to the meeting in London.

The Elland Road club have argued all along that this was unfair with self-interest clouding the voting, especially among all their League One rivals.

Some chairmen such as Bradford City's Julian Rhodes have publicly backed United's fight and Bates believes this, together with 20,000 names having been added to an on-line Downing Street petition since Friday, is a sign that public opinion is starting to change.

The Leeds chairman said: "There will always be those who say 'b****r Leeds, it is their problem'.

"But I believe there are many more who believe this is not a football issue, but one about justice and fairness.

"Bradford are serious rivals to ourselves and next door neighbours, but they have still shown their support.

"The support is very encouraging. People are beginning to realise that this isn't about Leeds United and that 'it could be us next'. Luton and Bournemouth are already in administration and Rotherham are suggesting they could go into administration."