West Somerset Railway General Discussion

... in the care of the Plc, confidential, probably protected by GDPR(?), unlikely to be accessible by anyone else - unless an Extraordinary General Meeting is called.

 

Except it was posted up here for all to see not too long ago! Possibly an old version though.

 

I understood that but asked you to explain how, in practical terms relating to this company, the two differ.

 

("Sparky" in Isle of Wight 'slang' is someone of unpredictable temperament, who 'squares up' to someone using abusive language and threatening behaviour and who invades the other person's 'personal space', not always all at the same time).

I have been through the Companies House register of shareholders for the WSR PLC previously (made my eyes bad despite enlarging it) and it is pretty useless without contact addresses.

The WSR PLC board relies upon proxy votes of the multitudinous small shareholders, and the support of the WSSRT shareholding. In effect, the WSRA has no influence on the WSR PLC board whatsoever, especially as shortly after the current Chairman took charge, the WSRA Trust decided to remove Frank and Rodney as their WSR PLC reps on the WSR PLC board, never to be replaced so far!

In the absence of HR policies, deleted when Andy Norman raised his grievance, the issue of ID cards to volunteers is at the whim of the WSR PLC board. No wonder then why Mike and Robin have been so reticent, especially after what Paul Whitehouse was subjected to last month, in the most humiliating of circumstances, and the sort of language one would never expect of a WSR PLC Chairman to the Chairman of the WSRA; a bus man to a retired Chief Constable.

Cheers,

Julian

 

It was a forced retirement, go or else.

 

Always entertaining to wake up and read the latest, especially when, as here, I have my own motivation explained to me.

Incorrectly.

Robin

 

My apologies, I misunderstood your question; my focus was on the role and position of shareholders in the current structure.

In practice, I suspect the practical differences would be minimal, although I understand there to be more restrictions on the purposes of a CIC.

 

All that glitters is not gold !

 

When I wake up, I find it more helpful for someone to remind me what day it is

 

Thursday

Keith

 

Like Robin I am always struck by people ascribing motives to my apparent (in)actions.
Non members will likely have no idea of WSRA thinking on any matter. Members who have been in touch with WSRA may understand a lot more.
Plenty of members do write to me every day and I am happy to provide them information. I think I've answered 3 such messages just today and the day is not over yet.

 

Although only a small shareholder I wonder if the SCC might sit up and take notice if it was feared that one of their major tourist attractions was about to self implode?

 

Way back in 1970 something, the plc was on the verge of buying the entire railway for £200k from BR. SCC had their eye on the wider station site at minehead and it was agreed that once the plc had completed the purchase, they would sell minehead station to the council for £150k who woiild then lease back to the plc enough of the station to run the railway. BR didn't like this as it appeared they were selling the asset too cheaply and a private company would be benefiting. Bear in mind that at this stage the intention was only to run a commercial commuter service. BR pulled out of the deal and eventually it was agreed to sell the entire railway freehold to SCC for £245k and for SCC to lease back the opeerational bit to the plc on a lease for up to 20 years with (if i remeber right) around £18k annual rent. Scc ploughed £50k into the new business in return for 500k shares which they still hold. The WSR then applied for the various orders and licenses to run a railway. When the 20 year lease expired, the plc bought a new 99 year lease which freed them from the tyranny of the £18k annual rent. I seem to remember they paid around £180k for this.
It was this freehold that the WSRA tried to acquire behind the company's back in 2013 and which led to the long wrangle with the ex-6. Later, an agreement was reached with the SCC that if the lease were ever to be sold in future, it must be offered to the railway family first before any other options are considered.
I don't believe there is any legal obligation on the council to ensure a train service is run, that is something the plc have chosen to do. However, there is a very real desire by SCC to maintain a heritage and tourist asset and when I was chairman, they took an active interest in our activities, with occasional ,meetings at county hall and through PDG.
Ian Coleby

 

Thank you for the clarification.

 

I'm just grateful to wake up...

Robin

 

I wake up every morning at nine and grab for the morning paper. Then I look at the obituary page. If my name is not on it, I get up.

Benjamin Franklin

 

I never could get the hang of Thursdays.

 

PDG was the glue holding our 'Railway family' together and was a brilliant and long overdue innovation. It is such a shame the Group no longer meets.

 

What happened to the PDG?

 

Towards the end of last year, the previous WSRA chairman told me he was actively organising the next PDG meeting but was being thwarted by several things including local elections and appointment of new local authority reps to the PDG. I guess the WSRA still has the role of PDG chair so perhaps the present WSRA chair is working on it (any comment here Mike?) I am not aware of anyone not wishing the PDG to continue as and when possible.

Like many, I think the PDG is a worthwhile forum which helps in its own small way to brings folks together.

Steve