West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I did indeed, Ian. Lapsos memoriae. I will amend my post, thanks for the reminder.

 

Whether the incumbent is doing a good job, or not, will remain to be seen next March if the line, hopefully, is up to scratch and ready to run trains again. That I guess will be the acid test. The danger that you suggest they see has apparently been there for a long while, gaining strength and only being brought to light when JJP entered the scene. If the line was on the verge, or even in insolvency, then someone out of their depth, in my view, would not have halted the lines demise. How the turn around was achieved is obviously debatable, as are other events since, but they have been the subject of a large numbers of prior posts already on NP.
The SCC should have sorted out the level crossing renewal and the recent large donation to the WSSRT which will go towards track work and the Halt at Doniford, just two things that I know about. I expect we will see how the work progresses on here, someone will be keen to show it I am sure.
As to others stepping up well, as far as I can see, it would have to be someone not deeply involved in recent times with the WSR and its groups. If needed, it should be a totally new broom to sweep away the debris from the past. I did presume that was why JJP was elected. He was local to the area and would have heard all the gossip.

 

Yes that's right. All the current trustees have received that threat from the ten.
Ian Coleby

 

The parthian shots from outgoing trustees are troubling. The claims of legal proceedings and police action further sully the reputations of all involved. It would be well for these allegations to be challenged, or justified, by the 14/10/12/WTFK with clarity and honesty.

Chris Austen departed claiming threatened legal action- a dreadful situation for the whole of the WSR, but I then note Robin White's e-mail trail,
I would then have to consider whether a report to the Information Commissioner, other regulators, or an action in the county court would be the appropriate next step to lead the Trust back into compliance.
Which to me at least, states that there are grounds for legal action, but is not a threat.

So to the existing (remaining?) trustees, I have to say, if you are being threatened, please tell us, how, by whom? What exactly has been said?

 

What are they threatening? How are the police involved? I know there are allegations following on from the data protectiion fiasco, but that's not a police matter. What else (if anything) is being alleged?

 

Good idea. That would certainly help current members make their decision on who to vote for.
Must admit I’m undecided at the moment as a result of all this animosity and mud slinging.

 

Then I would assume that it refers to actions by the Board as a whole rather than of an individual.

 

Deary me. My mother was on holiday in Somerset recently, she mentioned how nice the stations along the WSR and the surrounding scenery looked. I hadn't the heart to tell her about the mess behind the scenes...

 

My sympathies are finite given the scorched earth defence by the current trustees*, but it would be heartless not to acknowledge the impact of this level of conflict on individuals who have signed up to work with a small railway charity and found themselves caught up in such bitter politicking.

It would however be useful to understand the nature of these threats of police action, if only to help judge whether the trustees are facing abuse, or being legitimately called to account.

* - I received my agm papers today. I’m sure, notwithstanding questions over nominations, that they are above board and legal, but find the differentiation between those items that are and are not recommended by the board unusually and unpalatably strong, and of dubious ethics. It meant that, for me, voting against the candidacy of the acting chairman became a moral necessity, as a lightning rod for my disapproval of these tactics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

@WSSRTcandidates - or anyone else for that matter, please can we see the threat of Police action to clear up the situation

 

People don't tend to threaten police action, unless they feel they have been wronged, and believe me, the police take a very dim view of people who waste their time,
The prospective trustees have claimed to have been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty personal abuse, in the light of that, then threatening an abuser with police action is I would say a right full course of action, I also read Robins reply, and I see no outward threat, other than to point out the legal ramifications of the breach,
Of course, if you have been found out, and the boots on the other foot , I can see how talking out crying I've been abused etc to save face, or to create enough of a momentum of feeling,, that you hope might damage those you are against. might be an option.

 

And unless you (the trustees) provide specific details we will assume you refer to the possibility of county court action detailed in the above quoted post.

 

Apologies in advance if I am unwittingly transgressing some forum rule by raising this, but @WSSRTcandidates' post https://www.national-preservation.c...eral-discussion.508987/page-1695#post-2612782 partially reproduces a prior post by @Maunsell907 which, when I use its hotlink in an attempt to access the full original post reports the error that I don't have permission to view the page or perform the action. I don't recall the full original post containing material that would warrant its concealment, so is there some reason for it having become inaccessible?

 

I think the post itself has been deleted, whether by mod or the writer, I don't know. I get the error too. Normally if the mods delete a post they also delete any quotes from the post.

 

Many thanks for that explanation.

 

Bit busy providing some training elsewhere today, Mike.

Robin