Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

I agree, but accountability is not settling scores. @35B . If the forensic accountants find that unapproved or straightforwardly illegal things have been done, and the Trust has suffered losses as a result, the the Trustees at that point (even if they're no longer on the Board) are jointlly and severally liable to make the Trust whole, and in this case - which let me be clear, I hope we don't get to - those should be pursued.

 

The final rant from the Führerbunker is beneath the bother of comment, except for one interesting area. Exmoor Associates is & always has been a shareholder company, not a membership organisation. Amongst its many investors are Messrs Miles, Cowling, Summers and Nicholson.....


As to the concept of "hostile takeover", a comparison with this is instructive: https://www.exmoor-associates.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Trackbed-Trails-9.pdf



Sent from my SM-T575 using Tapatalk

 

Meanwhile - I have STILL not had the EGM paperwork come in the post., so I shall have to resort to copying the stuff that others have kindly put on the web. If it were not for the web and forums such as this, I might not have known about the EGM at all :-(

I wonder if there are any other UK-based members still waiting for their copies?

 

I am, so I think the situation is pretty wide spread.

 

That is true, but not an argument for doing nothing. It would be preferable if settled quickly, but that would require precisely the kind of collaborative approach from 6 members of the board that they are apparently unable to deliver, and which inability has been entirely responsible for the present situation.

 

Completely agree. But the starting point is identifying what has been done, and fixing it. The consequences for individuals, if any, need to follow those outcomes and not be pre determined.

Personally, my preference leans towards magnanimity but taking care to ensure that if individuals have wilfully done harm, they never can again. However, such decisions need to belong to members, not a small self perpetuating group.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Interesting reading to say the least

 

Although my documents arrived earlier this week - our postal service is not what it was - we have only had two deliveries this week - it's frustrating when you are waiting for something to arrive. Could be the perils of living in the country. At least we have decent internet with Full fibre to the house.

 

Could be the joys of rural life. I am pretty sure that the postman has been to the village just once this week!

 

Fortunately our postman does usually come every day - I can see him walk past my house without anything for me :-(

 

Penny for your thoughts, @H Cloutt ?

 

Very interesting indeed Richard. This provides evidence as to how difficult it is trying to work amicably with 'senior members' of the L&BR Trust. I suggest this is essential background reading for all who post on this thread.

 

As a life member of the L&B (that looks like a mistake curently) but with heavy involvement on other heritage railways this weeks incoming email filled me with further dismay and requires yet more careful critical reading, not to mention questioning its legitimacy as a communication.
I have limited time to examine all the issues and decide how to vote and return my proxy.
My thoughts are to return to basics:
1. All the current Trustees were elected by the membership at various times in the past
2. Having been so elected the option not to cooperate with other elected Trustees simply does'nt exist. The only option is cooperate or resign. That surely is basic.
3. It is the clear duty of a Chairman to include all the Trustees in running the organisation. OK at times that might be difficult and require a strong chair but there is no first or second class Trusteeship and again the option to marginalise is simply not there.

My conclusions are that the Chairman needs to go and go now. Trustees who have decided on a course of non cooperation need to go similarly.

Now I need to set aside time to complete and return the proxy.

 

It speaks volumes that the Exmoor associates' people did get legitimate legal advice, which basically said the trustees were at best ill advised, or downright lying, and even advised them of the correct way it should be done, Clearly, this does pose the questions, of what other actions have they taken, that are illegal.? As i see it the trust needs to take action to remove forthwith these people, or accept that in time there will be no L&B Trust, because others will take that action, either the membership via EGM, remove, then investigates what's been done, in their name, or you walk away, start another group and leave the moribund trust to wither on the vine, by removing all avenues of funding, by stopping your memberships, and instead, via another membership group, that hopefully The other members of the L&B family can work with, so move away from the toxic environment, it might make some of the other activities such as old station inn a bit difficult, as removal of funding might effect that's future, but equally it could be a millstone round the trusts head, theres no easy option, you have to be prepared if an EGM to remove the trustees in question were to fail, to walk away, and start a new body to represent the members.

 

Hi Martin it may not be that easy for some of us to do even though it may be the only way out

 

The short answer is that we don't know and we won't know for as long as 'the six' treat accountability and transparency as they do. My greatest concern is about the ties to Old Station House Inn / LBBC Plc where Ian Cowling has not only not been forthcoming, but he has misled us all as a matter of course over the Trust's exposure, and has resisted providing the Trustees with the accounts required to do their job.

A forensic audit to establish what has gone on and what was authorised - and what was not, such as the mailshot last year in response to the Minority Report, which must have cost several thousand pounds as a missive from 'the six' alone, and was full of duff information to boot - should be the first order of business.

 

The trouble is if the 6, plus 1, where have we heard that expression before? Manage to rig it so they maintain their total control, and resist all attempts to remove them, and they manage to strengthen their grip, what other option is there, their mis- management.is going to one day bring the trust down anyway, especially if the Old Station Inn, starts to suffer a downturn, and exposes the trust because of it, then you will have a situation whereby everything is under threat, because of the trustees refusal to accept they have made mistakes.

 

In the Sunday Times there is a headline referring to the Police's attitude in the Couzens case that ends: ‘and still can’t see their guilt’ . I think the same applies here. The latest faux pas is the statement on the Trust website denying that there is an ongoing Charity Commission investigation when Toby received a letter from them a fortnight ago. Is this mis-information ? (or stronger ?).

 

I suspect that in part this is an attempt to use a difference interpretation of 'investigation' than others have used. We know what it is, they probably know that as well, but clearly do not want to admit that. It reminds me of the situation at the moment regarding certain protest groups using certain chants which some people regard as unlawful whereas the police say "well, it depends on the circumstances".