Llangollen Railway

There are pluses and minuses as in all set ups.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

 

Can you be assure your money isn’t just going to prelong the long slow death ?

I’d suggest you need your money to support your life, if railway managers can’t run the business, then why should you bail them out when it goes wrong ?

 

Among all this, I'm assuming the bad news isn't confined to the railway.

I imagine many groups which had work done by the engineering arm and were expecting some recompense towards having to redo work will find any claims are towards the end of the list of creditors. That £250k isn't simply a figure on the balance sheet; it represents money other groups might have difficulties raising a second time.

Let's hope there isn't a similar knock on effect for some of those groups.

 

No, but it is the Plc that is in receivership, primarily (we are told) due to the engineering business collapsing. There's no particular reason to believe that the railwag can't be a going concern again if the support is there.

 

..... and a realistic plan agreed to take the LR forwards.

 

There are a number of issues that might concern me.

Firstly there will be a knock on effect amongst other groups with claims against the PLC for engineering work
Secondly I am not aware of what organisations have failed on the past but I suspect that the bigger lines may have benefited from a perception that the supporters will bail them out before it all goes horribly wrong, clearly if creditors lose money then it may affect the wider creditworthiness of the movement.
Finally of course it is happening at a difficult time when the money to buy assets from the receiver such as coaches is in short supply so may result in items going to scrap

 

I guess they could only sell stuff that belongs to the Llangollen Railway PLC? How much of the rolling stock is actually owned by them?

Carriages will always be bought, if they are sold off to pay debts they will go below market value and there will be buyers.

 

There is a ready market for Mk1s and they make good money. They wouldn’t go for scrap.

 

A quick look at the accounts seems to show the plc owns quite a lot of the track and stock and the trust owns the extention. Perhaps someone closer to the railway can confirm or correct my understanding.

 

In the 2019 accounts , Tangible Fixed Assets , note 10 , there is a value of £207,900 under "track and rolling stock". Is this not a true statement of affairs if the plc doesn't own any track? This started as a headline figure of £1,277,294 but significant depreciation has been applied to arrive at the lower figure.

 

Unfortunately, with receivership, there isn't 'breathing space'.
The receivers job is to raise enough funds to pay the debts that are the cause of the receivers being bought in, not arrange a repayment plan or refinancing.

 

Rather defeatist. Surely it’s better to understand the reason for the difficulties first before making a sweeping comment?

Most heritage railways operate on wafer thin margins and a lot of goodwill. Most don’t have piles of cash in the bank and it doesn’t take much of a financial shock to cause a problem.

My understanding is that it’s the engineering business that has dragged the Plc down, that isn’t to excuse the management team for previous business decisions but there’s no reason to suppose a new team can’t make a positive difference e.g. to maximise the shop and catering opportunities that seem to have been somewhat under-exploited.

 

Strikes me that the big losers here are the loco owners who have identified faulty engineering work, and have valid claims for rectification work. The Patriot project has been hit hard.

 

It seems the engineering business and claims for rectification from loco owners have been the main problem.

It leads me to wonder what impact there would be on a certain other railway, if a certain loco owner put in a claim for a loco overhaul which had been contractually agreed but not paid for.

 

It’s actually to look after the best interests of the creditors and that maybe ti back a rescue plan

 

I hope this reminders other railways not to over stretch themselves with large numbers of paid and all the extra costs that brings now. I did see that the shareholders of the plc are keeping there travel benefits it does strike me as strange.

 

I guess the travel benefits on a heritage railway cost almost nothing to deliver, but removing them might alienate those who might provide future support. So I can understand the rationale.

Tom

 

If the plc is liquidated/wound-up, there are no shareholders, & so no travel benefits.

 

That's administration

The statement from Llangollen Railway plc specifically states 'receiver'.

The charges the bank has are also pre 2003;
https://unlockthelaw.co.uk/receivership-and-liquidation.html

 

If many of these debts are rooted in quality issues in the contracting side of the operation, would not the contactor's liability insurance have some considerable part to play in making reparations?