Peak Rail Annual Report and Action Group

As a matter of interest, as the previous auditors "parted company" with PR PLC, who is doing the auditing now?

 

Of course . Defenses are always 'robust', and timetables are invariably 'intensive'.

But the track record so far shows that the defence may have been robust, but the result was not. Not forgetting the Briddon case before the Grinsty one!

 

The auditors said in their resignation letter that they were leaving for reasons that did not have to be drawn to the attention of shareholders. The 2018 accounts mention an increase in price, which supports that.

Mind you, if I wanted to disengage from a business relationship and didn't want to create a stink, I would increase my prices...

 

This is true, afterall, a certain director claimed that Santa Specials were running every day of December, also the line leading to the workshops/sheds, is in use 24/7!

 

Is the Waterman collection paying a rent towards the upkeep of the sheds that they are in?

Out of interest how does the engineering run at peak rail? Is it peak rail engineering or is it a private group that are working on the Waterman Locomotives??

 

Well here's a snapshot of how PR's intensive services are playing out today - from an FB post by a chap I had the pleasure of volunteering with back in the 80s ....

"Today was our first visit to Peak Rail for several years. Our tea and scones at Rowsley South were fantastic. The two ladies on duty in the buffet were very friendly and efficient.

I was struck by the overall absence of volunteers and the lack of welcome that used to be a feature of Peak Rail when I was a more regular visitor.

In particular, I was astonished that the train pulled out just as we were walking across the platform to board it. The guard told us as he passed that this was a late running train.

We had no other information from anyone until the train returned from Matlock. We were then told that it would be going back out over an hour later having missed out one timetabled run.

A very disappointed family who had been talking to us decided to give up and leave. We held out a little longer and were told that the train would be going out in a few minutes. The train crew seemed to have no idea what was happening and were making things up as they went along.

We hopped aboard and took our seats. The guard came round, apologised and told us that there had been an earlier problem with a water pump that had meant that the steam and diesel locos had to be swapped around the train.

It was also a little disheartening that volunteers are still talking about internal politics in front of customers (us).

It is a real pity that on a day when Butterley cancelled operations due to a lack of volunteers, with the honourable exception of the Rowsley buffet team, Peak Rail wasn't able to step up and provide a customer experience to remember".

 

Is there probably a bigger issue here that there shouldn't be 3 heritage railways in such a close proximity of eachother? Peak rail, MRC and Ecclesbourne? And it's not much further for a volunteer to travel to get to GCR (N), GCR, Foxfield, Churnet Valley, and Barrow Hill depending on where you live?

 

Yes, three railways, two forging on and developing, the third stagnating. I will not say which is which!

 

Based on experience over recent times, Ecclesbourne is winning that one comfortably, despite a lack of resident steam. Most of the key PR vols I knew in the 80s have moved there and seem to be in much better humour now.

 

I wonder what (or who?) is the cause of that?

 

There’s no theoretical reason why there shouldn’t be, there are other places with multiple railways in close proximity (e.g. Llanberis, Snowdon, Welsh Highland); and if Peak Rail was doing what it was set up to do it would be streets ahead of the competition anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Isn't this just the cost of running trains, staffing the buffet, actors for the Santa services etc?

 

Precisely! Which is why the £130,000 shouldn't be in that catagory!

 

The amount is huge, in relation to the turnover. So in my view that is exceptional, so should be stripped out of trading.

 

Ouch!!!

 

Not picking on you, @Breva, in particular, but there has been an intervening post not on this topic. I enter the debate merely to provide some technical clarifications on accounting disclosures.

Firstly, when a Company changes its auditors, they out-going auditor has to formally resign and a letter of appropriate wording be filed at Companies House. This is the case whichever party instigated the change, and the timing could just as easily suggest that the resignation was as the result of a tendering process after completion of the audit a few months earlier as any other reason - I have no knowledge of whether this was the case.

Secondly, how 'Exceptional Items' appear in accounts is governed by accounting standards, specifically in this case Financial Reporting Standard 102. This does not require Exceptional Items to be shown separately on the Profit & Loss account and indeed there has been somewhat of an assumption that they won't be to avoid poor results being 'hidden' by potentially dubious classification of expenses as 'Exceptional'. Instead, Exceptional Items are highlighted by note as has been done here.

Without wishing to appear to take sides (which I lack the balanced knowledge to do), the presentation here does not appear unusual, although FRS102 does allow a separate line for Exceptional Items on the Profit & Loss. It does not define what are Exceptional Items.

Finally, I seem to recall that the subject was raised by stating the audit opinion was qualified in respect of Going Concern. This is not the case. Given the loss and net Current Liabilities, the auditors have drawn attention to the Going Concern situation and the note detailing why the Directors (acting on the auditors' advice, one would hope) have considered the Going Concern basis to be appropriate but state that 'Our Opinion has not been modified in respect of this matter'.

Final Comment deleted as inaccurate (doesn't refer to above).

Steven

 

The only point in Steven’s excellent note I would differ on is that as a Plc I don’t think it can avail of an audit exemption.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Many thanks - you are correct - shows how long it is since I was an auditor! My thought was prompted by seeing a charity recently that wasn't audited despite being a 'mass membership' organisation - the Turnover limit for Charity audit is lower than for a Private Company (and a Charity can be both) but still is £1 million.

Steven