Crewe Heritage Centre for Sale

So can you explain why you would want LNWRHCo. to build your boiler? I'm sure that the other boiler makers, who have to operate within normal business restrictions and practices, would be interested to know why you want to support a 'maverick' operation like LNWRHCo?

if it's just for 'old time's sake to say it was built at Crewe' then frankly that doesn't show a great deal of concern for the people who suffer under the current arrangement, such as our signal box group.

Peter Jordan

Chairman, Exeter West Group

 

Peter

Time to play dirty. You claim that Crewe Heritage Centre has been the subject of unauthorised extension of use beyond permitted limits. If that is indeed the case and CHT can prove and substantiate its legal position :-

Go to the Charity Commission and ask for help - a charity cannot be expected to have the resources of a multi millionaire, or to waste those resources fighting a trespasser who merely happens to be bigger then they are - You might not get anywhere - but it will raise the ante and create publicity.

Issue any trespassing company with a notice to quit all areas of CHT property where the company has no legal right to be in place and be prepared to back it with action.

Where any trespasser has moved artefacts, damaged any property, buildings etc, etc, issue them with a claim for reinstatement, including your potential costs of moving their property out and storing it safely.

If the Heritage Centre has been unable to perform its aims and obligations due to trespass, formulate a claim for any losses incurred

Write to Cheshire East and ask them what are the credentials to be chosen as preferred bidder and how those sit with the trespass and other misdeeds which you allege.

You will need broad shoulders and determination in anything you do, as you would appear to be up against a master of self publicity - but remember - You can't buy class, and the bigger they are, the harder they fall.

 

You could try some FoI Requests to Cheshire East

 

In answer to the last couple of posters, as far as Cheshire East Council are concerned, the councillors don't appear to be worried about the rights and wrongs of this case. All they are interested in is creating and maintaining jobs so that they will be able to present themselves in a good light when it comes to re-election time. Who they hurt in the process seems to be of no consequence to them.

Peter Jordan

 

Can the CHC engage a lawyer on a 'no win, no fee, basis? It seems extraordinary that Mr W on getting the 125 year new lease could then get CHC evicted because of having allowed him onto the premises in contravention of the present lease. It occurs to me that the council would be the ones entitled to enforce against breach of their lease to CHC, and if they tried there would be a defence that the council had known about this breach for many years and done nothing about it so that it would be inequitable to evict CHC after all that time. Only a thought, but may be worth getting at least some advice, and W may be persuaded to behave more reasonably and perhaps assist with the cost of moving the signalboxes to preserved railway sites, where they may be better appreciated and more secure. Didcot for example may be glad of such an iconic GWR box as Exeter.

Although I hate it when lawyers become involved - remember 6024 society having to pay someone half a million in damages and legal fees for libel - they are sometimes a necessary evil. I know it's shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted, but if only the trustees had seen a solicitor before letting W move in, their position would today be far stronger.

 

Legal action has not been discounted, and it might be possible for it to be done at reduced cost, as Crewe Heritage Trust has as one of its representatives a very capable lawyer who, now being retired, might be willing to undertake a lot of the 'donkeywork' at little or no charge. But part of the reluctance to go down that route is caused by the understandable feeling that the time and effort of Crewe Heritage Trust would be better expended on trying to develop the Centre, not engaging in interminable legal battles. Legal action will be the last resort.

Regarding possible new homes for Exeter West, Didcot was offered it before Crewe and turned it down. And if it were to go to a new home, I for one wouldn't be getting involved in the practicalities of shifting and rebuilding it - I think I've done that enough already.

Peter Jordan

Chairman, Exeter West Group

 

lawyers only take on "no win no fee" cases when they are a racing certainty that they will win. Be very slow to go down the legal route, exhaust all other possibilites first. JAW JaW not WAR WAR

 

Agreed that law should be a last resort - what our friend said about legal costs in the 6024 case being 300K+ says most of what needs saying, but no harm in seeing whether a 'no win, no fee' lawyer will take it on; make sure that you have insurance, though, against the other side's costs if you should lose.

 

Getting good legal advice early on (before someone else's actions force you to need it in a hurry), may be useful in considering all the possible options and may actually help avoid court action. From everything on this thread and in the press there is no sign that either the Council or Pete Waterman will change their positions or offer any help to the CHC.

 

Don't worry - I did explain earlier that Crewe Heritage Trust now have an excellent lawyer on board. That is why bailiffs now turn up when rent is significantly overdue.

Crewe Heritage Trust used to be a 'soft touch' which is why Mr. W was able to do what he did. But if he wants to pick a fight with them now he will find them a much more formidable opponent than in the past.

Peter Jordan

Chairman, Exeter West Group

 

Of course, Peter, your lawyer will have advised you that if rent for CHC has been accepted by Crewe and Nantwich B C in the clear knowledge of any continuing breach, that they have acquiesced in the breach and are stature barred from pursuing it - so that pees on Waterman's declared strategy to use appropriate terminology.

 

What you say is probably true, but the situation raises the possibilty of us seeing the bizarre spectacle of PW or his representative standing up in a court and saying, 'We make application for the lease to Crewe Heritage Trust to be forfeited because they breached its terms by allowing a sub-let.' They would probably then be asked who it was who took the sub-let and benefitted from it, to which the only truthful answer could be, 'We did.' Can you imagine what the reaction would be?

And my lawyer friend tells me that it is very unusual for a court to order the forfeit of a lease. Still, if PW wants a fight............

Peter Jordan

Chairman, Exeter West Group

 

... and could there perhaps have been a conflict of interest if PW was involved in the management of CHC (which I believe he was at some point) when it was agreed, albeit without a proper lease, for his company to rent part of the site from CHC? If so this could be more of an issue now than it might have seemed at the time.

The trouble with all this is that, it seems to me as an outsider, the income from PW's rent has been essential to the survival of CHC so far and there might be no-one to pick up this deficit if he lost the argument and decided (or was forced) to leave the site. What a mess!

 

It is certainly true that there used to be a conflict of interests when PW was Chairman of Crewe Heritage Trust and was operating his business from the site, and that was one of the points made in the article 'Crewe's Railway Age in Crisis' that was published in the December 1998 issue of 'Steam Railway.' But he no longer has any position within the Trust and that should make it easier for the Trust to take any action needed.

It is also true that CHT have come to rely on the income from PW's business, but I'm sure that could be replaced. I have been urging CHT to look for alternative bodies to come and use the Centre's facilities - for example, Clive Mojonnier of the 'Princess Elizabeth Society' is now on the CHT Board and maybe they would like to use Crewe as a base and pay for some facilities. But given the current position, any actions and their possible consequences need to be thought out carefully. 'Cutting off the nose to spite the face' would not be a good idea.

And yes, you are right - it's a mess!

Peter Jordan

Chairman, Exeter West Group

 

Rental/occupation details for anyone using part of the Crewe site would, of course, be a matter for negotiation. If the place could be tidied up and additional attractions added then, with some successful special events staged each year the income needed from rental of parts of the site could be rediced or even eliminated.

I'm intrigued by the BBC programme that you found. Is this something private or is it on the internet? I'd like to see that.

And yes, all that additional land that the Centre had in 1987 is now the Tesco car park.

Peter Jordan

Chairman, Exeter West Group

 

I've been there 3 or 4 times for auctions - but there's no way I'd bother to go there for any other reason. The place was a bit of a tip - full of derelict diesels and expensive parking at a council car park some distance away. The auction even had to import portaloos to provide reasonable facilities