Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

I wouldn’t expect the HR firm to be specialist on GDPR.

It would be quite in order for those making the judgement to take specialist advice. After all this is how our courts work.

In fact though no specialist knowledge is needed to hear the appeal. I set out the grounds for appeal and that there is no case to answer on one of the points. Any independent panel of reasonably discerning people could be drawn upon. The Chaplains seem a reasonable suggestion as they can be trusted to be impartial.

in reality what is required is mediation, though I doubt this would be agreed to.

 

It may be. But that would be to confuse the roles of enforcement action with those of disciplinary hearings within an organisation.

This is the latter, where the breach of data protection is one of the grounds for that disciplinary action and not a matter actuality being adjudicated upon. As the release of details is one of the matters being complained of, I regard the clean hands of those bringing allegations as important - yet another data breach does not appear to be resulting in disciplinary action.

More generally, and applicable in both cases, I suggest that the principle of nulls poene sin lege needs to be applied. And there, having recently reread the Trust’s articles, I can see no basis for the actions being taken.

Assessing these as neutrals with no interest to declare seems the minimum requirement. And one which the Trust Board cannot meet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Company law is neither here nor there - it’s the purposes of the trust that count.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I like it, Some of those skills I've yet to learn - dry stone walling isn't that common on a council estate, but I do know what materials to use for signs that are resistant to vandalism, up to and including small calibre firearms...

Also how to extract pairs of tights from an upright hoover.

Steve B

 

Why on earth should someone's land be effectively forcefully taken to allow a narrow gauge railway to be built? The line closed close to 100 years ago, I doubt there is anyone alive who remembers the line prior to closure, so in effect this is a new build railway not a reinstatement. If i was one of the effected people id have a field day just reading this thread, but ironically have no fear of my land being taken, as the chances of the line ever pushing out of the current limits are more or less zero, especially with a management team who appear to be incapable of holding elections, let alone raising millions of pounds worth of funding.

 

You are wrong, I personally know of at least 2, both still alive and kicking.

 

It isn’t very complicated. The board simply needs to follow its own rules and a degree of fairness. This issue is entirely created by the board and it is therefore entirely within their grasp to undo it as well. I sincerely hope they take every opportunity to do that. Hiding behind HR firms and unsustainable accusations is not going to achieve the aim they claim to have.

 

Neither can I, hence my earlier post about the grounds of appeal and my view that any impartial look at this situation would uphold the appeal. It really is one of the worst cases I can recall of an entirely trumped up charge.

Now before someone trots along to tell us that we haven’t seen everything and there are deeper concerns etc etc, I will say this…. IF there are other matters to be considered, let them be laid before Anne and considered (fairly this time). Until then though, it is high time this nonsense stopped.

 

No understanding of the law is needed by the adjudicators. As @35B comments we aren’t asking them to decide if the law has been broken, only whether the disciplinary rules of the Land B have been fairly and properly applied.

 

How old are they ?

 

Both in their 90s.

 

So they'd of been wee children when the line closed...

 

What does that matter? And not so wee, old enough to remember quite vividly the railway when it was open, and the closing of it.

 

Sadly I doubt they'll see another inch of the L&B beyond the current limits, thanks to the how many decades of infighting and mismanagement. How long ago was the current limit of operations reached?

 

You can be negative if you want. I'll keep positive and that we will progress as and when we can.

 

There is a concept of “eminent domain” that allows projects considered to be of public benefit to compulsorily acquire land that would otherwise prevent the project proceeding.

For such powers to exist the project must be assessed against whatever criteria are in place for that.

We know that the L&B has planning policy support, and we know what decisions were made in the case of the RVR. For any specifics, we would need to consider a case, if brought, on the evidence.

As for the opponents of the railway, I sadly agree - there is too much effort on dealing with “enemies”, and not enough rebuilding. As @21B says, this needs mediation for the relationships, and common sense and decency on the “charges”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

What is there to be positive about? If you where unconnected to the project with some money to donate, you read a dozen or so pages of this thread would you donate? honestly now.....

The public damage this thread, and its contents is doing cant be measured but I fear its huge.

 

Yes, I agree with your first paragraph. However the departments who sign off the powers need confidence the project is backed, or will be back finically and have the required project management to deliver. The L&B doesn't.

 

Welsh Pony is to visit the L&B Autumn Gala, standing in for Russell.