S&D Railway Trust

I wonder whether the L&T and/or the above will be within the remit of the HRA-appointed process? Also for that matter:

Talks are still at the proposed stage, the Trust anticipates other stakeholders involved, and a moderation process?

Patrick

 

The obvious thing to do would be to go for a HRA Ajudication which was what @Robin Moira White et al did with the WSRA, I assume that is what is intended.

That might also allow the PLC statements about 53808 to be looked at as well.

 

So, What if the Chairman just ignores any decision from the talks if it does not agree with the outcome he wants, what then? Will the Majority shareholders combine their votes and call for the chairman to go? will they sit on their hands saying " its nothing to do with us gov" if it goes as far as likily to end in court, and looks likily the PLC will lose, it may be too late to come off the fence.

 

The issues are:

What's being resolved (lease/Landlord & Tenant, loco, other?) and, if multiple issues, are they linked?
Who's involved (PLC and Trust, other stakeholders?)
What process is it (e.g. is it an Arbitration under the Arbitration Act or another process, and to what extent is it binding?)

We don't know and it's no good speculating.

Patrick

 

That's never stopped NatPres before though!

 

Could be worse @martin1656 - there might be heffalumps and woozles. Or even jagulars.

Steve

 

Thank God for the WSR

If it wasnt for the management of the railway, we would have nothing to do in lockdown!

 

Well if you insist.......

 

Well, luckily for you, nobody does. Contrary to some posters' expectations, this thread does go quiet when there's nothing to discuss, as now.

 

I see from the latest 'Pines Express' - S&DRT Magazine received yesterday that there was a meeting with the HRA mediator/arbitrator scheduled for the 20th of May

 

Is it bad I spent a good 30 seconds trying to figure out if that was a date in the future on the past!? One would hope some smoke signals would have been seen by now, hopefully something soon.

 

I wonder if, based on my experience of court cases, it might be to find out what sort of action might be appropriate - mediation or arbitration and perhaps to advise the parties what sort of documents might be needed?

It is possible in a directions hearing as well for the judge to indicate his or her opinion of the likley outcome.

 

Did it say whether it is mediation or if it’s arbitration?

 

It didnt.

 

The phrase was 'an HRA-appointed intermediary ... ', simply the first stage of a longer process so it's unlikely anything will be publically announced until the full sequence is accomplished.

 

I really hope not, and I am also sure this first HRA stage will not require going anywhere near a judge.

 

Correct, courts and judges only get involved when arbitration fails. The essence of arbitration is to preclude the necessity of court proceedings and consequential expense.

 

Both parties have to compromise, this must result in some WSR occupation of Washford.

 

Why? If the outcome were to be a decision that the eviction notice was without foundation, why should the S&DRT give ground?

If the WSR were to physically occupy at least part of the Washford site, then I would suggest that the S&DRT could request a reduction in their rent as they are no longer getting as much space as before! Maybe a suitable compromise would be to let the Plc appointment their own Stationmaster there and run their own booking office, tho' I' not sure how that could be accommodated easily. I wonder how much benefit the Plc would actually get out of that, given that it would be at least one more post for them to 'staff'.