S&D Railway Trust

Just to note on an S&DJR related topic that it was 54 years ago today that the line closed to all passenger services, although a few 'twigs' survived for goods for a few years longer.

 

The above post was written on 21st February, since when there have been many pages of comment on this topic. But the only indication of a WSR future use for the Washford site was from the PLC Board statement of 24th February, which just gave a list of possible future uses rather than any clear aim. Like some other posters, I find it completely baffling that the WSR is kicking-out the S&DRT from Washford without a clear plan for early replacement by something else. What do they gain by such a precipitate eviction? Surely this cannot be simply the result of a Trump-like tantrum, or just another of those personal feuds that seem to develop on the WSR? Perhaps they do have a more defined plan, but are not yet ready to announce it? I notice that the Board statement states an aspiration to "raise greater income", but none of their suggested future uses for Washford is an obvious income generator. If any Washford redevelopment involves significant expenditure, then the WSR must surely look to some kind of external funding source, whether charitable, community or commercial?

Anyway, that is for the long term. In the short term, opinion seems to be overwhelmingly critical of the WSR PLC action, with much sympathy for the S&DRT "cuckoo in the nest". Obviously, comment on this forum is of minimal consequence in the wider scheme of things, but exposure in "Steam Railway", and possibly other media, will bring the issue to the attention of the wider enthusiast community, whose views I suspect will largely reflect those on this thread. I am also sure that many of the WSR's own volunteers will have been shocked and dismayed by the turn of events.

Having seen the WSR appear to treat the small S&DRT in a bullying and unethical manner, with the seeming arbitrary abrogation of a long-term lease, many will now be very cautious about having dealings with the WSR, whether through donations, volunteering or business relationships. The PLC Board may have made the assumption that the S&DRT will not have the cash to mount any effective legal challenge. If the dispute results in legal action, then a result will be a net outflow of funds from railway preservation into the coffers of the legal profession. And if the S&DRT does indeed have to remove all its assets from Washford to other sites, then there will be a further outflow of funds from railway preservation, this time into the coffers of removal and haulage companies. And some of that money may come from the WSR, either as compensation payments or diversion of donations.

One can only hope and pray that Mr Coleby and other respected persons are able to exert influence behind the scenes at the WSR, in favour of restraint, calm reflection and compromise.

 

I have just sent the following e-mail to my local councillor as I live in Somerset

Dear Councillor Oliver,

You may be aware that Somerset County Council is both the freeholder of, and a shareholder in The West Somerset Railway.

The Railway has had a number of 'issues' in recent years, and Jonathan Jones-Pratt was appointed Chairman of the Company.The existing board members subsequently resigned and were replaced by his appointees.

The management of the company has caused a number of controversies, however the action that most concerns me is the decision by the Company to evict The Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust from its site at Washford.

I will declare an interest in that I am a member of The Somerset and Dorset Railway Trust. I am also an Annual Pass Holder on The West Somerset Railway.

The language used by the Company in its statement announcing the decision,the full version of which is available here

https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/news/detail/west-somerset-railway-board-statement-regarding-washford

is not what I would expect from a properly run organisation, in particular the description of the Trust as 'A Cuckoo in the nest'

In order to evict the Trust, the West Somerset Railway will have to take the Trust to court, something which the Trustees will be legally required to defend. As the Trust was recently granted a 50 year lease in order to meet the requirements of potential grant funders such as The National Lottery the likelihood of such action succeeding must be debatable.. The actions of the West Somerset Railway are not only drawing the railway into disrepute but the cost of bringing the case, in particular were it to lose, could be sufficient to bankrupt the railway, leading to closure which would be a serious blow to the economy of West Somerset.

I understand that a letter dated the 9th of March has been sent by Mrs J Norman, Executive Head Teacher of The Stogumber and Crowcombe CofE VA Primary Schools to Mr Jones-Pratt with copies to Somerset County Council & Mr I Liddell-Grainger MP outlining some of the effects that the mis-management of The Railway is having in the area served by her Schools.

Given the interest The County Council has in The Railway, as Freeholder, Shareholder, and responsible for the economic well being of the area it serves, can I ask that The County takes action to ensure the good governance of The Railway and its continued operation.

Yours Sincerely

 

Just to clarify one point, the SDRT does have sufficient funds and resources to defend and challenge any legal proceedings the WSR PLC would have to start to enforce it's foolhardy and ill judged s.25 Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 'Notice to Quit' served on the SDRT last month.

Unlike the WSR PLC board, the SDRT is a very well run organisation and directly accountable to it's members.

The current problem is longstanding in that the small WSR PLC board is unaccountable, by the very flawed set up of the WSR from it's inception and the nature of the WSR PLC shareholdings.

Cheers,

Julian

 

Be fascinating to know of any response, do keep us updated.

 

Has there been anything in the local press about it? Are they even aware? Maybe someone ought to alert them as to what is going on.

 

You speak very authoritatively about this matter. So that your readers can be clear, please could you clarify the basis for this clarity and especially whether you are speaking (as has previously seemed the case) as an external interested party who has read information in the public domain, or on behalf of the S&DRT. Given your legal experience, you will appreciate how important it is to be clear who you represent and how.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

As happened with the WSRA, Nat Pres wasnt the solution, but it did play a role in resolving it, both by bringing the matter to public attention and allowing those who wished to take action to join together.

 

... in between 99% of posts from keyboard warriors and self-appointed experts.

What they need to consider is their effect on the reputation of the railway. They may want "discussion" but sometimes, people don't know when to stop.

Anyone looking for a railway to support or volunteer at is going to think twice when they see thousands of posts of hostile and unbalanced criticism and "clever" nicknames, much of it from people with little vested interest in the railway itself.

Richard

 

Hopefully many like me will "put their money where their mouth is", join the S&DRT and donate to a good cause.
Keith

 

Including yourself no?

I think the WSR management does a good enough job of destroying the reputation of the railway without any help from NP.

I do find it hilarious that on the one hand, critical posters on NP are dismissed as small irrelevant group whose views count for nothing, and the dire warnings that those self same irrelevant few are single-handedly destroying the WSR. Less, Schroedinger's cat and more Schroedinger's posters, irrelevant and vital at the same time.

 

Of course by deciding to serve notice on the S&DRT, and doing so with such an inflammatory press release is bound to give rise to adverse comment.

Whats the saying, Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt

 

It would be worth adding of course that in the past there were two perfectly avoidable libel cases, one involving a railway, the other a loco owning group. I dont know what effect the one involving a railway had on its finances but the loco owning group had to sell its loco. While this isnt a libel case, clearly attempting to evict the S&DRT could embroil the WSR in a very expensive court case at a time when the line is - it seems in a rather parlous financial state.

 

I totally agree about the WSR plc statement's language. Didn't seem professional in the slightest.

Even the gala programmes over the past 5 years or so have had some questionable phrasing. Nobody can be proof reading these public releases surely?

 

Pardon?? Your two statements seem contradictory IMHO. Are there some vital words missing somewhere?

 

Totally agree "about".

 

No but there is a very comfortable relationship between both organisations.

I am an armchair member at MN.

 

Just had an e-mail from my County Councillor saying that she needs to find the person best placed to help with this

 

Ok, Richard, so, there are things going on at the WSR which don't seem quite right. Senior people are being dismissed. Other senior people are resigning with immediate effect "to spend more time with their families", locomotive owning groups are being asked to leave the railway and take their engines with them, other groups are being served with notices to quit, but, in your ideal world, none of this can be mentioned on Nat Pres, because it might put off potential volunteers. I don't know how long you think it would take potential volunteers to find out what the atmosphere is on the railway once they turned up, but in my case, it took a couple of hours and I didn't like what I found. (This was years ago, and it wasn't so bad that I didn't remain for the week I'd volunteered for, but it was a shock.) Today I think I'd be on the next bus back to Taunton. The idea that the true situation should be concealed from potential donors in case they decide not to make their donation is tantamount to fraud.

Considering the tone of the press release about the termination of the SDRT's lease, there has been remarkably little "hostile and unbalanced criticism" and those who have been worst affected have been very restrained, in fact, most of the "hostile and unbalanced criticism" seems to have emanated from, rather than been directed against, the board of the Plc.

Your comment is very reminiscent of the 2016 US presidential election, where it seemed that there was no problem with the Democrats playing dirty, the only problem was that someone exposed their dirty play to the voters.