West Somerset Railway General Discussion

?

 

Chickens usually come home to roost.
But I am also on the infamous list I believe, so he probably won't read this.

 

As someone who has used the "Ignore" function on this and other forums, purely in order to keep my blood pressure in check and normally a short term measure only, I am concerned by the allegation that such usage is "not legal!!"

 

For avoidance of doubt I was simply stating that holding more that 20% of the shareholding would not be legal. I am not sure how this should be contentious.

 

I'm afraid what you actually said was that placing members on an ignore list would not be legal.

The only thing I can think of is that you placing so many people on ignore messes up the quoting system and you ended up quoting the wrong post or not knowing what you were quoting, another reason not to place people on an ignore list, it only ever causes confusion on all sides.

 

Legal or beneficial ownership?

 

That was not my understanding Peter!

 

'Would not be legal' suggests against the Law. From what has been said here, it would be o=contrary to the 'Constitution' of 4110 Limited. The two things are rather different.

The Trustees of WSRA will have to have considered how holding a shareholding insufficient to block a Special Resolution fits with use of Charitable Funds under their objectives. I am sure that this they will have done and concluded that there is no difficulty.

Steven

 

Re the proposed sale of 4110.

I have a couple of questions which members may be able to answer. Apologies in advance if there's something I've missed. Please feel free to put me on your 'ignore' list if that is the case!

1) According to an e-mail which I received from GWR 4110 Ltd, dated 4th January 2019, the target of £100,000 plus 20% VAT, has been pledged. If, as is proposed, the sale to 4110 Ltd goes ahead, with WSRA chipping in 20%, then I reckon 4110 Ltd will be left with approximately £20,000 of pledged funds. I wonder how that may be used.

2) The WSRA have been reluctant to reveal how much has been pledged to them as a result of their appeal, but it's fair to assume that it's at least £20,000, as that's the sum they have proposed to contribute to the bid by 4110 Ltd. Whilst I realise that they offered to return any monies not used for the locomotive purchase should their bid be unsuccessful, what will happen to any funds which are, for whatever reason, not claimed back by contributors? I refuse to speculate!

Finally, let me say that I am fully supportive of the original bid by GWR 4110 Ltd to purchase the locomotive outright (without assistance).

Stef. (My real name).

 

Given that funding into 6 figures will be required to restore the loco to working order 1) presents no problem surely the answer is obvious if unstated?
It is an unfounded assumption that the WSRA have received a full £20,000 in pledged funds but that doesn't prevent them contributing that amount and seeking further contributions until they reach it and beyond..

Purchase is of course only the start of the story and with further sums required to return this loco to service the WSRA 20% could well end up totalling around £100k as the work proceeds.

 

Hi Stef,
Let me please make a few statements to help or in fact confuse probably. There are only a very few people who know what the actual financial position is and I am one. However whilst negotiations continue there will be no issued statements. What I will do is comment on your statements, 1) the pledges of 4110 do not amount to £100K plus VAT. VAT is just a confusion as 4110 is registered for VAT. The WSRA has not said it will contribute 20%. The 4110 notice said all share holdings would be limited to a maximum of 20%. Therefore your question around a surplus of 20% is erroneous. 2 Your assumption is inaccurate and wide of the mark and the WSRA has not proposed to contribute 20%. They proposed to contribute the amount of pledges they received and any gift aid associated with them.
Sadly you ended your note stating you refuse to speculate but that is exactly what you have done.
I have withdrawn from the team helping to secure 4110's future as my job is complete, it will take a few more days before any agreement is formulated, please be patient, if it is at all possible that 4110 can be saved for the WSR it will be done. In the meantime why not contribute some more money because as a well known supermarket says every little helps.
Faol or Ken what ever you like

 

Ken,

Many thanks for your post; things are clearer to me now.

However, I am still slightly confused regarding the '20% shareholding'. I have taken the liberty to paraphrase the latter part of your first paragraph. To me there's a contradiction.

Stef.

 

Suggests to me that the WSRA contribution may be more than 20%, less than 20% or indeed bang on 20%. Either way, their shareholding will be limited to 20% regardless of their contribution because that's the rule that has been set.
Doesn't seem a contradiction and I'm sure all will be revealed by and to the relevant folks in due course.

Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk

 

For the benefit of those not on Facebook, the WSR Infrastucture group have posted a very interesting selection of the extensive trackworks going on during the closure period:



Various photos from all the sites and working parties, during our three month closure.

 

Thank you. Posts like this are always welcome.

 

Thanks, I have also just noticed a very comprehensive and well-written update just posted on the excellent "unofficial" site : http://www.wsr.org.uk/ie-winter-2019.pdf

 

The meeting at Oake on Saturday is full with a waiting list so 250 people should be there.

Also this is what is been done on the line during the closed period http://www.wsr.org.uk/ie-winter-2019.pdf so plenty to help loose the Christmas pud look.

 

Please excuse my ignorance but what is the 56XX class , would the final version end up similar or even exactly the same as 9351 . I have heard 9351 described as that " bloody Mongrel" . I would never describe it as such . IMHO that loco has been modified to suit the WSR and I do think it has proved it's suitability . Powerful for most service trains other than the incoming charters but we have the Hall and 88 to deal with those . There is a fireman who is a member of WSRA who would recommend double heading Pannier Tanks , if that's not enough just stick another one on at the back . Lol

 

Could someone please update progress on D1661. Thxs

 

Oo

The purists will moan about anything Paul. The bottom line is that 9351 is a fine loco and ideal for the WSR. 99% of the visitors willl never notice and just delight in a good looking loco running. Adding a pannier tank may have been the way 70 years ago but not appropriate today. It is not realistic today to keep one in steam just in case.