S&D Railway Trust

No it would need a lease from SCC and finance and a TWO involves a lot of work.

In any event, the liquidators may have sold all the remaining assets.

 

a non-train operating purchase of the land would involve an abandonment order as the LRO would still remain (it is a statutory instrument). This would ensure the statutory powers that allow the operation of a railway would be extinguished. If there was a receiver they might be able to fund an abandonment order if sufficient assets existed or they might ask the purchaser to do so.

If a Train Operating Company wanted to acquire the land for railway use then a transfer order of the powers might be more appropriate. However if the new Company wanted to do things differently (eg up speed limit to allow commuter trains) then a new TAWO would be required.

Very much based on the WHR scenario that played out in the High Court in the 1990’s.

regards

Matt

 

Well, for a start it is a very expensive legal process - probably hundreds of thousands of pounds. So your putative new company has to somehow fund that. And bear in mind whatever the source, that is hundreds of thousands of pounds thereby not going in to what you and I might think of as "real" railway preservation, i.e. overhauling locos, carriages, stations and so on.

As for the infrastructure: everything points to that not being in good condition, and that won't change just by a change in operating company: the requirement to spend millions renewing the track still remains (but a few hundred thousand down because of the legal process ...)

The bottom line is that, like it or not, the best chance for survival of the WSR as a recognisable heritage railway is for the current WSR plc to remain solvent as the operating entity.

Tom

 

Never said I wanted them to go bust. Please show me where I said that.

I was just exploring the legalities of if the PLC was wound up.

 

Are the physical assests property of SCC?

 

Whether you want them to or not isn't the question, but you were speculating about what might happen if they did:

My answer was to the effect that were that to happen, it makes everything more complex, not simpler.

Tom

 

WSR have a 999 year lease. SCC own the freehold. The lease would have a value although it may depend on the terms of the lease eg there might be provision about what happens in the event of insolvency. I don’t know for sure as I haven’t seen the lease.

to reiterate what @Jamessquared said though- If we want to continue seeing heritage trains on the WSR then the existing Company remaining solvent is by far the best outcome.

 

The only way it could work would be if enough shareholders stand for election to the board at AGM, what the chairman said about a probationary period, has no basis in law, so if enough like minded people stood, they could then vote the group of 3, or 4, off the board, and rescind the eviction, they would also then have the power to invite all the parties to a series of meetings, to decide a way forward, merging, under a new name the various groupings, then a proper fund raising operation, to ensure the railways survival possibly allocating the unsold shareholding to the new charity in return for funding the plc.

 

Not necessarily. If the original organisation has gone into liquidation, any assets it owns will be disposed of by the liquidator for the best value he can obtain, for the benefit of the creditors. This could include the track, which, even at scrap value, is worth a lot of money. So the successor organisation would need the resources available to match or better this figure. Also, you use the word "just". It's not a short or cheap procedure to obtain a new TWO, particularly today, and no doubt some of the derogations from current requirements which may be allowed for the original operator would not be allowed for a new one.

Replacement of WSR PLC by another operator is not a realistic option, I am afraid.

Sent from my SM-T590 using Tapatalk

 

Given the potential economic impact of coronavirus the ability of a hypothetical WSR successor to raise the funds to rescue the line from the receiver must be questionable.

 

The best chance initially for survival of the WSR is for the WSR PLC to withdraw the 'Notice to Quit' over the SDRT and Washford, undertake it will not repeat s.30(g) grounds in a new 'Notice to Quit', see sense and restrain egos, and retract the statement in it's 'position statement' of 1st May that it will not honour the agreement in respect of loco '88', and act decently over all this.

The fall out with regards the WSRA and WSSRT will come later perhaps, and certain personalities will have to account to their own memberships over all this.

Cheers,

Julian

 

In case anyone's interested, I was looking at the accounts and noticed for the first time on page 25 of the PLC's last report and accounts that the provision made for 53808's overhaul had been overstated in prior years and the PLC had reduced the provision in the accounts by £287,302.

Accounts (if the long link works!)

Patrick

 

Sadly the link doesn't work. So in the last few years the WSR has spent £287,302 previously set aside for 53808?
I do still wonder if this whole saga has been a ploy to wriggle out of paying for 53808's overhaul. Cause the S&D Trust so much grief that it's them that end up terminating the loco hire agreement rather than the WSR, so the WSR doesn't have to pay for the overhaul. At the end of it the WSR has had the use of a free loco for 10 years, and some new land to play with.

 

... all of which has been blindingly obvious since page 1, 100 pages & 3 months ago...

 

Interesting spot. Here is the link to <A HREF="https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01010188/filing-history">Companies House </A> and look at Page 39 of the Accounts to 31 March 2019. Provision for Loco overhaul - total £118537. As at 31 December 2017 (prior to being restated as at 31 March 2019) total was £441,000 and 1 January 2017 £374,000.

 

Does this represent cash in an account somewhere, though, or merely an anticipated expense? I do wonder if the WSR actually has money set aside.

 

One word - EGO !

 

A response

https://www.sdrt.org/

 

Chairman's response to WSR plc, WSRA and WSSRT joint statement
The S&DRT notes the helpful joint statement by the WSR plc, WSRA and WSSRT issued on 1 May. Whereas we might take some issue with the suggestion that, hitherto, we were not minded to enter into any discussions, we are grateful nevertheless to the WSRA and WSSRT for bringing about that discussion now.

We also note the position statement provided at the same time by the WSR plc. There are a number of matters in that statement with which we might take even greater issue or of which we might question the relevance but we do not think it helpful to do so publicly at this time.

We welcome the involvement of the Heritage Railway Association and look forward to engaging in discussions via that body.

Ian Young, 3 May 2020

 

Clearly it could go either way but the outcome of the HRA adjudication clearly has one outcome that would be to say the least interesting.

I hope that it is published