West Somerset Railway General Discussion

A distinction though, these are rolling stock groups with a connection to the WSR, rather than WSR bodies who one might expect to co-ordinate their appeals. Otherwise you're saying to these groups 'please base your stock here, but you can't fundraise for it'. Great if, like the 7F, there's a full repairing agreement* but many groups don't have that

For comparison the SVR has around 40 groups associated with the railway and, outside the SVR Companies and SVR Trust, I can think of half a dozen active current appeals - Warwickshire Trust for a new boiler, GW(SVR)A for their newly purchased Hawksworth Brake Third, EMF to repair 7802 which was damaged at the WSR, 82045 new build etc.

Patrick

*Yes, I know

 

But by all accounts wasn't Sir Bill a decent bloke who gave to his interest in his hobby rather than take from it?

 

Although it looks like the 7F doesn't have that anymore...

Keith

 

He was. As far as I could see his hobby in railways was a large part of his life hence his involvement in many different preservation societies and not just railways. I believe he was a big contributor to Tornado's construction as well as spending millions on Scotsman. He was also heavily involved in rescuing the RHDR in the 70's. He was also decent to work with and highly regarded certainly by the volunteers at Fawley.

 

Whilst emphatically not defending any particular individuals I have to say this is a sweeping generalisation and like many generalisations grossly unfair to the majority. Most of the people holding positions of responsibility on heritage railways are far from egotistical, and indeed couldn't function well if they were. Without people willing to be directors and Trustees, ops managers, traffic inspectors, etc etc etc, not one railway could exist. Don't tar everyone with the same brush, just because there are a few who do not match the generally high standards of most.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

 

For those who don't recall the details, it broke while at the WSR, but it was nothing to do with the WSR. (The wording could be read other ways.)

Noel

 

https://www.somersetcountygazette.c...arity-plan-bring-peace-west-somerset-railway/

 

Why does this come to mind ?

 

I know it's been said before, it does look as if John Bailey's been brought in to to bring peace to the WSR when in fact he was engaged to arbitrate in a rental dispute! No sign of the primary mission in the article at all

 

I'm a little confused now by these recent appeals.

Having established that the "Taunton Inspector's Saloon" is actually what previously seems to have been known usually as the "Hawksworth saloon" - and there was me thinking we'd acquired yet another one ! - then why an appeal for refurbishment, as I though that had been done already ? It certainly looked quite nice the last time that I was inside it at an August Rally.

 

Just proving my point Andy.

 

If we look back at the May Joint Statement & Position Statement, there are two things to highlight;
communications/info
attitude

Now initially that amount of info looks impressive. However, if you go through it, you realise there's a lot missing, enough so that you can't actually come to an informed view on the situation.

Is the rent typical for the site & area?
Why is an increase by RPI an issue, when that's the norm?
Is the site of a rateable value? Even if it is, wouldn't the S&DRT be paying them, & getting a charity discount?
It doesn't specify what the 'site' is, but from what has been said, it's an empty piece of land & something like a full repairing lease on the station building, but without exclusive use. Those lead to a low rental value.

Then there's a listing of rents paid for different things in different locations. (Notice that the big values are put first)
No mention of rates.


Lets look at the figures given, & see if anything can be compared.

Blue Anchor Museum premises look a similar size to Washford station.
Bishops Lydeard Museum is a sizable structure, being the old goods shed.
So that's probably more building space than at Washford.
Total rent of £841

So the £1250 for Washford doesn't look out of alignment.

Also note that there is an agreement to waive the rent for Blue Anchor for ~2 years.

-
"It was suggested that the Trust should review its finances, that a rent increase was needed..."
Needed.
Not 'could we negotiate as we can justify a higher rent'

 

Even if the rent for Washford were low, it had been freely negotiated for the 50 year lease, so as long as S&DRT paid it, the WSR regretting its earlier deal does not justifying booting the tenant out.

 

Who decided, and how, that the new lease is not 'legal'?

 

Good question !!!

 

>>>Blue Anchor Museum premises look a similar size to Washford station...

If you consider the totality of the Washford station building + the old signal-box, then I would suggest that BARM is only about 1/2 the size.

 

Internally the vehicle is rather tired. The seats need reupholstering, there is mould starting to grow on one of the internal walls and last time I was Guard in it one of the leather window straps split when trying to raise the window (I didn't use excessive force before anyone suggests that!). In my opinion the £5K grant, should we get it, would be well deserved for this vehicle with it's great historical connection to the part of the world we live in.
The link again for anyone who missed it before. All you need to do to help out is like the cause, donating is optional but helps even more!

https://communityfund.calor.co.uk/restoration-of-taunton-saloon-carriage

Seb

 

I doubt very much that any thought went into the decision, other than, a moment of anger, but assuming the PLC, is due to be wound up when the new structure is decided, whats stopping the trustees from saying the eviction is now invalid, and that the trust can stay, or will the loss of face be too much for some? who, most likily will very soon be playing no further part in these proceedings, as they are the reason this came about, and are so tainted that only a new group of board members of all groupings, can move the change on, whats now needed is for the entire boards of all organisations to step down and a caretaker team set up to oversee the change to a new charity owned company and structure,

 

Correct, no other reading intended

Patrick

 

You are getting ahead of yourself Martin:

> but assuming the PLC, is due to be wound up when the new structure is decided​

It isn't. There is a suggestion that has been put forward of a possible new structure. But that is not the same as there being a process in play right now to implement that structure, which is likely to require a degree of legal complexity even if all parties were in full agreement that it was the right direction of travel. For example, the ~8,000 shareholders of the plc would have to be formally consulted on a decision that would in effect liquidate their shareholding in favour of a new commercial entity and member-led owning trust. How would those shareholders be compensated? It looks sensible when viewed from 20,000 ft but there are legal protections of shareholders - the law, quite rightly, makes no distinction between a plc shareholder who has in essence made a donation, and one who is a deadly serious investor.

> whats stopping the trustees from saying the eviction is now invalid, and that the trust can stay
​

Which trustees? It is the plc that has revoked the lease, so it is only the plc that can unilaterally re-instate it - the plc has directors, not trustees. The SDRT Trustees have been "done unto", not "doing"; the WSRA and WSSRT trustees are essentially bystanders since they are not the entities who have signed, and then revoked, the lease.

I'm sure we all want the "right thing" to be done - but it isn't helped by a degree of looseness in phraseology: to get from A to B, you have to be precisely clear as to who is doing the travelling, and which route they are taking.

Tom