S&D Railway Trust

A provision in the accounts is not necessarily money in the bank, it's just acknowledgement of a future liability.

 

Weasel words !

 

I think you infer something that's not there.

The two side jointly say the agreement is suspended. The deal looks like each side is mitigating their loss, as they would need to in the event of litigation.

Whether the Trust eventually gets anything out of the PLC is another matter.

Patrick

 

S&DRT members have been told to expect announcements in September regarding the future homes of the museum collection and carriages.

 

The “reluctance of the loss of 88” quoted by the PLC is an interesting statement. I can only assume that the reluctance is of the loss of a “free” loco to use for the benefit of the railway, after all, the reluctance doesn’t seem to be equally expressed for the rest of the trust assets or its members. Throw in the fact that the PLC has already stated that it can’t meet its contractual obligation, i’d have absolutely no faith in the PLC adding a penny to the pot should 88 have stayed. The trust have had their hand forced and I am very grateful to the MHR for throwing the trust a lifeline.

Returning to the accusations of a cuckoo in the nest made at the very beginning of the eviction saga. The PLC would’ve known long before issuing the eviction notice that they hadn’t provisioned enough for the contractually promised overhaul. So the trust, albeit unknowingly, would appear to have been one of the biggest benefactors to the WSR in recent times on the basis of forfeiting several hundred thousand pounds of overhaul fees that they will now need to find. Funny looking cuckoo that!

With a decreasing pool of loco’s available to the WSR it’ll be interesting what hire arrangements/steaming fees are agreed for PLC board member engines. I strongly doubt that they will be offered on such beneficial use and repair arrangements enjoyed with 88, despite the well publicised financial struggles of the railway. Of course I’d be very happy to be proven wrong! Such an arrangement would certainly help the WSR, especially as other associated groups are being asked to financially contribute to ensure the survival of the railway.

 

hopefully its a clean break, the S&D Trust can then get on with the task of rebuilding, hopefully at a location where they are wanted, and valued, I just hope the collection isn't dispersed far and wide, and the trust loses its purpose, As regards the WSR plc, I hope the board members, all get to live in interesting times, as the Chinese proverb goes, the S&D trust now need everyone's support, especially financially and the plc, well they deserve all that happens , Remember this, if the line remains closed, its wholly down to their mis management, not, WSCC, Not any supporters groups, Not Nat pres, But actions done by the board of the railway's PLC, some historic, some recently.

 

The bit that I have highlighted in bold is perhaps the most noteworthy. Is he now going to evict himself?

 

Interested to know what part of that statement you consider reasonable?

Letting the SDRT take it elsewhere to earn 20% of the overhaul costs, but admitting the 80% that the WSR were due to pay has already been spent so the SDRT won’t be getting it?

 

No, they are weasel words.

How is it a reasonable statement? It throws previous management under the bus 'not my fault the money was spent, guv'. The PLC chairman saying he put himself in the SDRT's shoes, coming from someone who decided to evict the SDRT, called them cuckoos in the nest, made numerous untrue allegations in the press against the organisation, rings, how shall we say, more than a little bit hollow.

 

There has to be more in this whole sad story than just the S&DJR Trust not being able to stump up what the Chairman wanted from them in funding, in the past the trust has been very supportive of the railway, so what changed?
The only answer I can think of is that there is an bias by some people with in the WSR of the S&D, because they are not GWR, and they have the ear of some of the currant board , so hence the Cuckoo slurs, and of course, unlike other organisations, they don't hold shares in the PLC, as an organisation, so have no clout to push back with, at least I bet that was the thinking, except I think it will be the S&DRT that could very well end up the winners, because at some point, this has to bite the board back.

 

I was just thinking that some of the speculation about the 'real' plans of some involved with the WSR PLC do seem possibly fanciful, but I think those ideas are fundamentally down to the actions of the PLC regarding the SDRT, the WSRA, ordinary volunteers, etc: these actions are largely so incomprehensible that one is hard put to explain them as the results of careful and rational decision-making. There is thus fertile ground for the aforementioned possibly fanciful speculations. There are indeed other possible explanations, but alas they are equally dire for the WSR.

Noel

 

One explanation is that to buy a ship and its' cargo, one has to first drive it onto the rocks. All the better if you can blame the previous captain.

 

Be grateful that hostility to anything that isn't GWR means they won't be going down the Doncaster Rovers route. Much too LNER.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/ex-owner-of-doncaster-rovers-jailed-for-arson-plot-1078635.html

Apparently, the owner of Wigan was looking to put it into liquidation before he bought the club.

 

If it is confirmed that the S&DRT is to re-locate its museum and vehicle collection to other sites, it will be a costly operation. A major appeal for funds can be expected, which will of course be in competition with appeals from the WSR itself and indeed from other heritage railway appeals. An unavoidable result of the move will be a net transfer of funds out of railway preservation and into the coffers of removal and haulage companies. If the redacted sections of the Bailey Report are ever made public, it will be interesting to see whether Mr Bailey comments on that aspect.

The big mystery remains - what did the WSR think that it would gain by evicting the S&DRT? The suggested alternative uses for Washford seemed far from definite, and certainly not needed by the end of the short 12-month eviction timescale. Hence the speculation in this forum about possible alternative motives. But I don't find any of the alternative explanations very convincing. If the WSR does indeed have a "cunning plan", they have done a very good job of keeping it secret. My guess is that the Washford eviction simply resulted from a spur of the moment decision, the consequences of which were not thought through.

In a conventionally-run organisation, one might expect a dodgy proposal to be questioned by Board members or senior managers before it becomes an irrevocable decision. But such a safety valve may not be available on the WSR, where absolute power has became concentrated in very few hands.

 

When and if any such appeal is made public by the S&D Trust I would appreciate a 'heads up' by members on NP. The least one can do is to try and help make their move as easy and as smooth as possible.

I can't start to imagine the angst this extremely unpleasant and seemingly unwarranted episode has caused Trust members and supporters. 40 years dedication and free labour for preserving railway history destroyed without a second thought. Just insults. Even more surprising, no obvious public support from other organisations on the WSR.

Shame on all those others for their deafening silence. Lets hope they don't find themselves on the end of the same rope. History in general has a pattern on repeating itself.

 

The wind has been sown, let’s see what the whirlwind shall reap.

 

Bit of a mixed metaphor here?