Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

There's no restriction on a charity giving money to a company provided that the grant given can be seen as furthering the charitable aims of the charity.

Tom

 

buying a pub?

 

That's a very narrow viewpoint, its not just a pub is it, it's the original station, the facilities, the potential for tea rooms, museum, the land etc etc etc.

 

According to the Trust 2022 accounts the Trust made a contribution of £34,858 to LBBC (the Blackmoor Company) The notes are not helpful, only showing movements on funds and the capital and reserves of subsidiaries and the profits or losses made in 2022. The movements on the Blackmoor fund shows expenditure of £44,174, and with the help of the Bideford Accountants, I was able to establish that the difference between the two - £9,316 - is legal expenses AIUI in connection with the Trust setting up the subsidiary. This £9,316 must surely be included in the figure for legal expenses of £84,000 and odd in the Trust's I & E Account (along with the £34,858 contribution).

Irritatingly, the amount spent on investment in subsidiaries is only shown as a total, with no break-down, but with the help of the Accountants I have ascertained that the Trust owns £203,000 in B shares (including £3,000 donated) and £50,000 in A shares, a total investment of £253,000. So, up to the end of 2022 the Trust has been involved with £297,174 in connection with the acquisition of OSHI. Of course, there may have been more since, maybe co-inciding with the purchase in April. There are no obvious loans to be seen in the accounts connected with the Blackmoor Company. Hopefully there will be more detail given at the meeting.

 

I am not sure that there will be much more they can say since the AGM is after all only reporting on business up until 31/12/22 what has happen since will only be revelled in next years accounts.

As for a narrow view yes it is still a pub and yes sure we now own some more land and the potential for rebuilding the original station and a new tea rooms, museum etc, but we brought it with that in mind not so much as an up and running business, as far as a business is concerned it now has to make some money so it won't be a new station building just yet, as much as we would like to see it.

 

But it's not GIVING money - it holds shares in the Company.

 

But I am sure I read that there was a loan as well

 

I am struggling with the Chelfham Mill School thingy. Perhaps others could provide a business plan for this or just off the wall comments?

 

The info available at present - such as it is - is at https://yvt.org.uk/support-us/chelfham-mill-appeal/

What are your struggles?

 

Not quite so simple as that. The Charity Commission has a Code of Fundraising Practice which needs to be followed. There are many elements to this but essentially funds raised must be used for the purposes that they were raised, that the charity manages the resources responsibly, acts in the best interests of the charity and acts with reasonable skill and care. If this does not happen or there is a complaint then the Charity Commission can investigate. For this reason the charity commission does actually disapprove of investments to non charitable companies.

For information this was one of the reasons that Peter Ramptom parted company with Tony Hills with the Brecon Mountain and Vale of Rheidol going their separate ways. Both railways at the time were commercial companies but Peter Rampton had used funds from his trust (which held the infamous ‘collection X’) to help purchase the VoR. The VoR subsequently became a stand alone charity.

 

Since it was me who kicked it all off in the first place, my plan was to buy the place and use it for storage and volunteer accommodation manly, however it turns out there is also old watermill which is is a grade 2 listed building.

One of my co -conspirators suggested that it might be possible to turn the mill in to some form of electrical generator, it wouldn't be much but it could provide an income.

Sadly part of one of the building has been damaged by arson and it will need rebuilding (as far as I know there is no insurance cover on the site). The main school building (or the B&B house) I am told will require a major refit, you can see for yourself if you look for the urban explores you tube site, most of the buildings will require some work as vandals have broken in on a number of times and a lot of damage has been done, but it is repairable.

It currently has outline planning for 19 homes but there are a number of official bodies who will object to any further planning application, the big one is English Heritage (or who ever the body is now) has objected to any new building work with in I think it is 10 meters of Chelfham Viaduct itself, since this has come to light there are not to many options for the site available.

Currently I have a few ideas which may be use to help generate some cash flow to pay the overheads. but they can wait for now. I am not to worried over which part of the L&BR family owns it, as it would yet be another part of the jigsaw we need to acquire.

 

Thank you for your work on this. The fact that you had to revert to the Trust Accountants to get clarification shows how badly the accounts have been presented. There seems to be an attitude that as long as the minimum reporting requirements are met that is all that is needed. The Trustees and members are entitled to accounts that set out I & E and asset movements in a way that is readily understandable, even if this means additional notes by the accountants. Lack of clarity can, rightly or wrongly, lead to suspicions of either impropriety or incompetence.

 

So in amongst everything that happened at the AGM last night.

Talking to an individual , it appears that you beautiful people really have been causing more bad than good on here ....oh shock horror ,

We have a member on here ...who does post in this thread as well , who is actually an objector to the L&B ( and being a local has every right too his own opinion), lives In paracombe and I belive has just been elected onto the parish Council.

Should we still carry on giving away the game ans handing over all info good and bad to a public fourm still?

I'm sure some of you will happily carry on anyways , sometimes the biggest problems ona railway are the railway supporters and this 400+ page is a beautiful example.

Could it be time that , even for a couple months while things get back together and a plan forward is sought-after that this page is locked/moderated better or the subject is changed to general day to day of the railway rather than the political nonsense that its become on here.

I've managed to put a few names to faces with replys on here and who spoke up at the AGM last night and a couple of you have definitely surprised me.

 

So what happened?

 

The general impression that I get from feedback this morning is that, apart from a decision to re-run the Trustee elections by posts with Anne's name included on the list, the Chairman effectively just carried on as before, ignored/rejected all the evidence on procedural irregularities, and blamed it all on things being stirred up on social media etc. No doubt some more first-hand comments will appear here in due course.

I understand the point being made by Small Prairie, but....until such time as the Trust gets it act together and sets up some sort of member-only forum, how else is the wider membership going to be able to discuss such matters?

 

Rather cryptic, what?

 

So it all sounds as if Mr. Chairman can see, hear, feel and do no wrong? Same old, same old? Is that it then? 'Moi, culpable? Certainement non!' Oh, dear!

 

You are quite right. I have stated this several times. This is an open forum and is visible to anyone.

Some of the posts on her have surprised me. Copies of emails have been posted on here which have been sent to members asking for information - they really ought NOT have appeared. All this has done is inform the opposition.

A member has a right to ask for information - I have done several times and have always received an answer to my question. However, I regard the replies as personal to me and not for others so I keep this information confidential - It's probably my Civil Service background where the 'need to know' principle applied. How can the trust respond to a member honestly when the response might appear on Social media to be read by all and sundry?

I've grown tired of the 'I know someting you don't know' and half-truths, the self-appointed planning and legal experts and the 'hair-brained' schemes proposed by some.

We all want the L and B to suceed - so lets try to make this happen instead of bickering.

 

That sounds like a major victory. But who will count the votes?
How many spaces are there on the board and how many candidates?
Ian

 

Wonderful, literally the 2 posts after mine are bring up the fact you want to still discuss in an open public fourm everything that goes on.

There's going to be a letter sent out that will be recived by all paid up members explaining all .

And no its not cryptic, it was quite clear....this fourm is feeding into the objectors hands everything that need and want to know