Peak Rail General Discussion

Has he taken it over then? Kind of?
Did they buy Bakewell Station?
That would be a better aim- perhaps with a change more people might bring a more suitable loco along?
The irony of it being ran by GWR Coal tanks is not lost on the writer!

 

The Plc Board doesn’t use social media and normally writes to shareholders for the AGM only. The details of the arrangements with Pete Waterman’s Trust haven’t been made known. But then again even the basic details of the arrangements with the occupiers of PR’s site are never explained! Given PR’s reliance on the Trust I would think the Trust is using the loco shed on favourable terms plus it could ‘persuade’ PR to hire its restored loco(s) when they are available...

Bakewell station was a private sale in June I think. As a shareholder & member I don’t see that PR has the ability to invest in facilities, in contrast to the Ecclesbourne Valley, Bala Lake etc which have sound business strategies and fundraising machines. Matlock platform was supposed to be hard surfaced and have a stone building (the Board sold off the materials from the demolished shed soon after the extension opened). Rowsley South was supposed to be a proper building (plans were produced). Volunteers have worked hard at Darley Dale and it’s a pretty station, the district council has been trying to offload the magnificent disused Down building but PR isn’t able to take it on.

 

For those not privy to the annual accounts the net profit figures for the last 4 years are :

2016 £8572
2017 -£111466
2018 £51203 inc legacy £110k so real figure. -£58797
2019 -£87493
2020 ???? Potential cost of litigation -£142k not allowed for.

Doesn’t look sustainable to me.

Other ‘highlights’ inc admin expenses of £297,238 up from £275,183 in 2018 and no breakdown provided.
Also J Bunch was appointed director on 1st Oct 2019 only to leave on 31st Dec 2019. No explanation given.

 

Sheff, unfortunately most of the regime’s supporters don’t seem to understand the gravity of the accounts.

Legal & professional fees were £49,672 in 2018 and £17,984 in 2019 primarily because of the many disputes the Board has entered in to. That’s £68k wasted, not counting previous years where PR has a long history of resorting to legal action at the drop of a hat. Jeremy Bennett is a lawyer and he was co-opted to the Board. Make your own mind up if he has a natural love of railways or if it’s a way for PR to reduce legal costs and continue with its combative approach...

PR’s Mechanical Engineers have not lasted very long. I won’t debate in this thread what (or who) the underlying problem is. I will say that the core PR Directors have been in post for more years than I care to remember and they are responsible for PR’s loco and maintenance strategy; PR doesn’t have a fleet to call on, it has driven away several steam loco owners / groups, it sold Zebedee to raise some cash, it doesn’t have the funds to overhaul Royal Pioneer (ironically the same amount as legal fees), it has to hire in a steam loco and it’s facing at least one substantial claim from a loco owner.

 

Yes we’ve raked over this for many years, but nothing changes.

 

Is anyone keen to donate to the save Peak Rail Fund?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

Bye the way I think they need 250k so I'm guessing that's every shareholder giving £100

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

Save Peak Rail from what?

I'm guessing that if the current board all resigned, then £250,000 could be raised. As it stands, probably not.

If the company has lost £250,000 over the last 4 years with a potential to add another £142k loss to that, how is the company still trading? Does this not come under the definition of 'trading while insolvent'? (I know nothing about accountancy!)

Keith

 

They captitalise the wages, ie the put the cost of wages on assets sheet thus falsely making assets appear much more than actually are

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

That suggests quite a serious allegation. I have no view on the specifics merits (or otherwise) of the PR management, save to observe that I’ve never seen any point in making the effort to visit PR despite it being an easy day out, but false accounting to avoid trading while insolvent?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

It’s OK to capitalise labour but it has to be legitimately linked to genuine capital investment activities (e.g. constructing a new building) but not routine maintenance (repainting an existing building). How much is capitalised and under what circumstances is one for the accountants. Possibly the details of what items have been capitalised is shown in the full financial accounts available on request from PR.

PR has only avoided recording a financial loss in some of the previous financial years by a combination of capitalising labour, cutting expenditure (i.e. delaying maintenance spend from one year to the next) and receiving donations, one such being the £110k ‘legacy’ by an anonymous donor (followed shortly after by the surprise appointment of Pete Waterman as PR President).

The previous long standing accountants are not the current accountants, the official explanation being that PR couldn’t afford their increase in fees.

I’m trying to keep the messages factual to stay within the boundaries of this thread.

 

It would be good to move the board criticism to the other thread https://www.national-preservation.c...annual-report-and-action-group.983259/page-39

I think we have seen other cases where supplies of news dry up when threads consist of criticism.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

A busy week with Ben , bens dad, Andrew, John and myself, and heavy lifting thanks to Martin and Richard on the machine. Away from signalling a little this week -The lamp posts being the weeks major projects both at Darley dale and Rowsley , darleys lamps have had the frogs replaced so they’re all the same now and the lights wires atop and the replica fittings added to hold the lamps, John and Andrew have been continuing with the post to junction box wiring all week

Up at Rowsley the post holes have been dug and the posts erected, some levelling up and tidying the holes up will be finished off and rapidly afterwards the lamp tops and wiring will be done.
Some
Pics of the team at work, the lamps and posts and the restoration of the tops themselves

Some more display items have been refitted up at Rowsley box and I’m still on with the little locking demonstration model when I find some 2 inch bar to complete the extra tappets.

loco wise work continues on the prairie, it’s cladding and lagging back on now and the 040 Deisel shunter has all its panels off to be cleaned up and repainted , it’s engine has been removed to be replaced with another already serviced.

it’s nice to have some sunshine back in the dales too

 

Have we still got a September start Date?

Have loads of free passes to Use!

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

Keep an eye on website , all these changes in the R number and such could make things change over time, soon as we know Youl know



more work today on lampage


Day two of lamps and things. Rowsley posts levelled up and filled back in and darley up platform lamps finally connected up, only the feed supply and the hanging lamp units on the building to do now
With Ben,Andrew, dave, dave,Richard,Jacob and myself

At least one spiders nest in every lamp , must be the matrix copying itself and soo many Steve carrel one liners to be had


also managed to bump into the reenactors on their wanderingS around the valley

 

Years ahead if it ever happens at all but Network Rail's impressive report on Traction Decarbonisation :

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...-Strategy-Interim-Programme-Business-Case.pdf

proposes that the Matlock Branch be operated by battery technology, and both routes to Buxton including the quarry lines should be electrified, pages 217-218 and map on page 79.

I don't think I'll be around to see it...

Dave

 

I'm 54 and I think I will be long gone before this happens, some trains to Matlock come from Nottingham? Peak Park & Electrication? Bi-modal maybe

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

Maybe so but it will still be quicker than waiting for PR to break out of Rowsley yard!

 

PR Plc shareholders, don’t forget that it’s the closed AGM on 25 Sept. It’s disappointing that zoom or teams hasn’t reached the Derbys Dales, most other heritage railways seem able to manage the technology. It’s almost as if the Directors don’t want to talk to us!

Please submit your questions to the Board in writing by 11am Weds 23 Sept. Don’t waste the chance! It’s your opportunity to pat the Board on the back for its superb leadership over the years, the tremendous progress PR has made compared to just about every other heritage railway in the country (West Somerset aside) and the sound commercial footing they’ve put the railway on. You can also re-elect two long serving Directors, which is great news if you crave more of the same from PR!

 

Final call! Peak Rail Plc shareholders please please please send your AGM votes and questions to the Board. Note that forms must be sent to the Co. Secretary at a home address and not to the usual Matlock station registered office. If forms arrive late or at the wrong address it’s quite possible they will be rejected. As per usual, the Board hasn’t made any attempt to go digital or make life easy for shareholders (I wonder why that might be?).