Llangollen Railway

So where did the UPVC windows come in, if it was always intended to use hardwood?

 

I think that this was an attempt to make sure that the funding was made available for the hardwood joinery. Basically a wind-up.

Bob.

 

So as the current Chair and only remaining director of Llangollen Railway PLC and Trust, you are confirming that the statement made by the ex chair to the membership regarding Corwen was factually incorrect?

As such does her position as General Manager remain tenable?

 

Let's just say that I am in the process of sorting out all of the problems regarding Corwen for the benefit of ALL members, and would ask for a little patience to allow the new board, some of whom are already in place, to get settled in.
It's not helpful for people to read too much into what's happened, but when you have sections of the membership who don't agree with another section this is the result.
Don't ask questions about the employment status of any of our employees as this is out of order, especially on a public forum.

Bob.

 

A member of the Corwen team has spoken to me today knowing I’m a member of this forum and asked me to make clear a few little things. The building and canopy has been designed and been given planning permission for construction. The use of UPVC windows and doors was to be used as a temporary thing until funding was available to construct wooden GWR style items to modern building regulations. The upvc windows and doors in question were donated to the corwen group. The columns for the canopy that seem to have come under such criticism from certain members of the board of directors have been in the possession of the project team for several years. Most have been up for 18 months to 2 years. Whilst not GW they cost the price of a wagon from their former home. The Llangollen Railway opened to Carrog in 1996, ever since there has been many challenges with getting to the final goal that was set out in the 1970s when the Flint and Deeside Preservation society took possession of the derelict station at Llangollen. The project team that have built everything on the Corwen station site were told by the board several years ago that the railway doesn’t currently have the money or manpower to progress the task. Everything that can now be seen has been done by a workforce whose average age is 68, all money has been raised by that team either by sourcing grants or chasing donations. Them and most on the railway just want to get there now, get the project finished. What is there can be altered in the future if the situation requires, but it needs to open. 24 years since the previous extension to Carrog, and 7 or so since the opening of Corwen east temporary platform.

 

Can you tell me when the planning was granted? or the application no? I tried searching Denbighshire council, but theres no map search function...
Credit to the Corwen team. I have to ask why on the website there isn't anything regarding fundraising and donation, apart from the tenner a ton appeal in 2018

 

I would have expected to be able to find this online by searching planning applications online at Denbighshire County Council. I cannot readily find. Whilst relevant to the current discussion it would also be of interest to those of us who are looking forward to the day trains run into a "proper" terminus at Corwen as they will give an idea of what to expect. Can you point me in the right directions as I am probably not looking in the right place.

 

I presume the “planning permission” is actually the Transport and Works Order - link below

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2010/2136/made

 

Yes.

Bob.

 

I was going to say, not fully knowing but I’d assume it’s not quite the same type of planning permission as say putting a garage on the side of your house. Given the railway leases the land from Denbighshire council it all has to be done in the correct way. Putting up a small building isn’t quite on the scale of what has been achieved so far, for example removing an entire section of railway embankment to then widen another single track section to take 2 tracks and a island platform. Building a subway into the embankment and up to the platform, building a signal box and water tank as well as an 8 coach platform. Not forgetting a bridge was removed on the site and the embankment filled in using polystyrene blocks. Rather a lot has happened on the site, and mostly with volunteers.

 

When you try to build a heritage station, the following will be raised to thwart you:

- I have some second hand windows that will fit nice
- Plastic is cheaper and lasts longer
- People are too stupid to notice
- We're not paying for something people won't notice
- No one cares about heritage, they just want a train ride
- Heritage style costs more (a number will be picked out of the blue sky, and raised by another)
- Most of the volunteers don't care
- Building regulations won't allow it
- Fire regulations won't allow it
- Planning approval won't allow it
- We're in a great hurry and need to open the station now
- We can always change it later
- It will blend in
- If we build it heritage style, we will lose a key person
- We don't have the skills
- GWR building practice was poor
- If a train hits the footbridge, it will knock the whole station down
- Modern regulations demand it

These are all actual objections raised for the Broadway station rebuild. You may recognise some of them
Don't be disheartened, they can be overcome. Most are tongue in cheek, to throw you off the track.

 

When people say 'regulations don't allow x,y,z' - ask for chapter and verse in writing.

One of my colleagues isn't known as 'Dr No' without good reason.

 

I'd ditch Dr. No and pally up to Goldfinger.

 

In which case you will end up with a station like Surbiton

 

I was wondering if directors were prohibited from dying, if that would take the number below the lower limit!

Noel

 

Look what they did to Jeremy Bentham

 

You mean removing his brain and stuffing him full of straw?

I thought that was a prerequisite for being a member of a board.

 

An old boss of mine would have treated the deceased as irresponsible and inconsiderate, for using that excuse for not turning up for work!

 

Now that is very silly - mind you I have known some directors who might as well have been.....

No - death, unsound mind, bankruptcy and being barred are all allowed as reasons for standing down (or being forced to).

The earlier comment about as many standing down as want to regardless is not correct. This is enshrined in company law. If the Articles say a minimum of four then there must be at least four. If they all try to resign together then the last four 'out the door' are not permitted to resign, are still considered directors and still bear all the legal and financial responsibilities as directors - no matter what they say.

In the case where there is a minimum number stated and the actual number drops below that for a valid reason (as in the death of an incumbent) then those that remain are severely restricted in what they can do. The only company business they are permitted to do is in the arrangement of appointing a new director/s to bring the Board back up to at least the minimum number. One person 'hanging on to sort things out' is unacceptable and any decisions they make as a director (other than the appointment of other directors) are completely invalid.

There are a lot of legal requirements placed on company directors. Many people volunteering do not realise just what they are legally letting themselves in for.

 

To keep the people who seem to inhabit Companies House site happy , if they check over the next day or so they will see that both plc and Trust once again have the required number of directors / trustees.

Bob.