West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Erm, those who post on here already have personal accounts.

I am obviously missing something but why do you want people who have already posted their names to post their names? You know who the ten are. No one is hiding.

 

If you would like to private message your real name, email address and/or phone number then one of us would be very happy to have a discussion with you. Or indeed as Barrie has said, you could join the WSSRT (perhaps you are already a member) and take part in the democratic decision making process at the AGM, when a date is announced for it.

 

Folks

Don’t feed the troll.

Robin

 

To you, perhaps, but not to everyone, unless that comment prompted him to alter his settings.
He'd probably like the mobile numbers of the WSSRT 10 as well, so that he could have a little friendly chat with them.

 

It’s ok Robin I get the feeling those words ‘account suspended’ will appear soon.

 

Ha, that got changed quickly!

 

Julian, I am not going to post more on this because I am not a legal expert and I don't have the expertise. However, two points. The SDRT document that I signed on behalf of the plc was an extension of the previous one. It did not replace it, but extended its term. Secondly, my other point was that I believe there is a difference between a very formal, legally executed lease, and a signed agreement which, to my non-expert mind, seems to require a lower level of legal sign-off. As i have said before, there has never been any suggestion that the agreement the WSSRT has is in any way deficient.
Ian

 

Watch for the rustling in the bushes.

 

Yes Robin but you were Chairman of the WSRA at the time and you were very persuasive that it was right to sell 6412 and buy 7821, but I am a little surprised you bought the engine (on behalf of the WSRA) without checking the paperwork remembering what you do for a living! One of the reasons why I voted in support of your campaign was the belief that we could get 6 months service out of 7821 which would go some way towards the cost of it overhaul.

I am sure others will correct me if I am wrong but my memory is that the purchase of 7828 by the plc preceded the WSRA purchase of 7821

I still very much regret supporting the sale of 6412 whatever the other arguments

 

I think it may have been withdrawn - I can see no likes!

 

I have nothing to do with the WSSRT but these candidates have announced themselves publicly along with their proposed policies : you, on the other hand, insult them without reason whilst refusing to give your real name on your profile page.
Just yet another recently joined anonymous poster trying to cause trouble. Probably the same person as the last four or five. If you've nothing sensible to contribute you are not going to achieve anything here.

 

There's been discussion on whether 4500/4575 are large enough for heavier trains. Not that I know a great deal about it but straying for a moment into operations, at 2P/2F wouldn't 6412 have been of more limited use?

Patrick

 

As I have said many times JJP saved the railway, although many disagree, he was the only show in town, but saving it is one thing moving to a position of continual viability is another!

I hope at the plc AGM we will have sight of carefully constructed and viable plans open to discussion as to how we move forward to a peaceful and progressive future.

 

7821's purchase was a very long time ago, and I really think that we ought let matters rest over all this. I reviewed all the stuff on 7821 today. It is quite wrong in my opinion to single out Robin over this.

Other matters are of far more significance with pressing deadlines over Washford.

 

But they say they do not volunteer

The Mystery Deepens!

 

The reason why I now believe 6412 should have been retained is that it could have been used in a limited way on the WSR if not could have earnt its keep out on hire elsewhere.

It was after all an engine that reopened the Railway in March 1976

 

Ian, a lease has to be validy executed under the requirements of the Law of Property Act. A signed agreement for a lease is not a valid lease if not properly executed.

Ergo, you haven't a leg to stand over with regards to the Blue Anchor Museum and the Museum at Bishops Lydeard.

The SDRT is in a much better position because it has operated a business from Washford since 1976, and had the 1991 lease, from at the very least interpretation gives it security of tenure under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

I happen to think that the SDRT is ok at Washford and the WSR plc board is on a hiding to nothing over all this.

However, the WSSRT is not in the same category and is open to the same bully boy tactics of the current WSR plc board, with arguably more effect - but for that significant shareholding!

 

I am not singling out Robin in Particular but she was the instigator of the sale of 6412 and 7821 and ran a very successful campaign to enable it to come to pass. Also as the then Chairman of the WSRA is it not right that the two things are linked together?

We all makes mistakes and I believe that this is one made by the WSRA under Robin's Chairmanship or should we be laying that at the door of the Membership Secretary?!

Yes today there are far more important matters but this does have some relevance now.

 

The Steam Trust needs to be very careful then if the plc take a disliking for any new 'management'!

 

The WSSRT current board have to be very careful regardless of what else might happen