Attempt by our Committee to change the Club rules without notifying the members

Status
Not open for further replies.
fireball said:
It seems to me that the only way you're going to get "ordinary members" in on this is to gate crash the AGM with flyers outlining your grievance and hijack it. The committee would either have to physically expell you (to the questioning minds of the members) or let you speak.
If they do physically expell you and the members do nothing to stop it then you'd have to accept that they're just not that bothered - or they agree with the committee decision.
If they do let you speak and nothing changes then you'll have to accept that the members are not bothered or they agree with the committee decision.
If they do let you speak and it causes a no-confidence vote for the committee you'll have to accept the responsibility of a mutiny and find people to fill the potentially vacant posts ...
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I meant when I mentioned a pyrrhic victory in my previous reply. Odds are massively that you will get nowhere with this, most members won't care, but if you do, the committee will go. And it's a rare sailing club that can instantly find a whole new replacement committee. It's also a rare club that can survive long without one.

Take the high road. Walk away with you head held high.
 
Last edited:
Comrade Red said:
The whole of 2015 spent on this - what a waste of a life.


Why not use your talents for something positive? Perhaps doing some charitable work with disadvantaged kids or at a hospice?
Click to expand...

Its a waste of time to some people, but to NickC its a big issue. If he wants to fight his cause, good on him. we don't have to read the posts, but we have, and taken an interest. Its too easy to tell an individual to give up, or you've wasted your time. Its pretty sad quite frankly someone has been part of a club for such a long time, and for whatever reason someone has then been expelled. The tone of the letter asking for personal items to be collected was written in a tone that had absolutely no regard to humanity and feeling. shocking really,

Good Luck

Steveeasy
 
Sorry to disappoint but... the stupid engine has been removed and replaced with a more suitable 4hp, I believe.

Boom and goose-neck went missing while in boatyard during last winter so had to be replaced.

She has been out on her mooring all year but nobody has actually seen her sailing, just motoring up and down a bit. Apparently centerboard is stuck up; seemingly it was not removed and anti-fouled inside the slot last winter.

Mooring has dragged and has needed to be relaid twice this year - perhaps they should have used the correct size chain in the first place!

Rather glad I am out of that floating disaster. Really should have know better than to buy a boat named 'Pandormonium' :nonchalance:
 
Last edited:
NickC said:
Edit:
Actually, apart from being busy that night, the primary reason for not attending that 'hearing', which was discussed with Committee members in advance, was that as no specific accusations had been made this should be dealt with by a vote of Ordinary Members as allowed in the Club rules.
Click to expand...

In any dispute which goes to a hearing, legal or just club level, considerations of the opportunities for reasonable discussion are often taken into account. Here you have passed up the opportunity to face your accusers in an official situation; principles are one thing but you could have turned up with witnesses to have it out with them on record.
There also seems to be a contradiction between "being busy that night" and the immense importance you seem to give this issue on this forum.
 
Floyd Raser said:
In any dispute which goes to a hearing, legal or just club level, considerations of the opportunities for reasonable discussion are often taken into account. Here you have passed up the opportunity to face your accusers in an official situation; principles are one thing but you could have turned up with witnesses to have it out with them on record.
There also seems to be a contradiction between "being busy that night" and the immense importance you seem to give this issue on this forum.
Click to expand...

Floyd,

> for reasonable discussion

Precisely, and for reasonable discussion to ensue the defendant must be made aware of what they are actually accused of before the hearing.

> you could have turned up with witnesses to have it out with them on record.

Yes but with which witnesses? Without being told what I am accused of how can I know which witnesses to produce?

As any junior law student will attest; at a hearing the defendant must be made aware of the accusations against them a reasonable period of time in advance, this is to allow them to produce appropriate evidence, witnesses statements etc.

RYA document 'Expulsion of Members' makes this clear and requires that the member:
  • be told well in advance the precise nature and details of the complaint against him;
  • be given well in advance any written statements made by witnesses;
  • not be subject to unreasonable time restraints in any of the above. For example, he should be given all the relevant documents at least 3 weeks before the hearing, and the committee should be prepared at the very least for a 2-hour hearing; in many cases it will take longer.
Imagine if you will a hearing whereby the prosecution creates the accusations as they go along and therefore can produce any evidence or witnesses they like. However the defendant, having not been made aware of the actual accusations in advance, cannot defend these as they have no suitable evidence prepared or appropriate witnesses present. How a fair and unbiased do you think that ‘hearing’ would be under these circumstances?

Then there is the small matter that at the time of this ‘hearing’ the majority of the members were of the opinion that the committee could not expel someone without allowing Ordinary Members a vote on the matter. It was even discussed with some committee members in advance of the hearing that post-hearing this would then go to a vote by the members. No indication was given at that time that the Committee were to attempt to steam-roller this through without allowing the Ordinary Members a vote on the matter!
 
Last edited:
NickC said:
> you could have turned up with witnesses to have it out with them on record.

Yes but with which witnesses? Without being told what I am accused of how can I know which witnesses to produce?
Click to expand...

Once again, either I am being unclear or you are missing the point. Any witnesses. If you turned up with notebooks in hand to record everything that is said, you could have asked specifically for the reasons to be explained clearly. If they were then explained you would have a case for going away and preparing a defence. If they were not explained you would have witnesses to support your claims of unfair treatment. Either way you would have communicated with the committee in an assertive manner.
 
NickC said:
Floyd,

> for reasonable discussion

Precisely, and for reasonable discussion to ensue the defendant must be made aware of what they are actually accused of before the hearing.

> you could have turned up with witnesses to have it out with them on record.

Yes but with which witnesses? Without being told what I am accused of how can I know which witnesses to produce?

As any junior law student will attest; at a hearing the defendant must be made aware of the accusations against them a reasonable period of time in advance, this is to allow them to produce appropriate evidence, witnesses statements etc.

RYA document 'Expulsion of Members' makes this clear and requires that the member:
  • be told well in advance the precise nature and details of the complaint against him;
  • be given well in advance any written statements made by witnesses;
  • not be subject to unreasonable time restraints in any of the above. For example, he should be given all the relevant documents at least 3 weeks before the hearing, and the committee should be prepared at the very least for a 2-hour hearing; in many cases it will take longer.
Imagine if you will a hearing whereby the prosecution creates the accusations as they go along and therefore can produce any evidence or witnesses they like. However the defendant, having not been made aware of the actual accusations in advance, cannot defend these as they have no suitable evidence prepared or appropriate witnesses present. How a fair and unbiased do you think that ‘hearing’ would be under these circumstances?

Then there is the small matter that at the time of this ‘hearing’ the majority of the members were of the opinion that the committee could not expel someone without allowing Ordinary Members a vote on the matter. It was even discussed with some committee members in advance of the hearing that post-hearing this would then go to a vote by the members. No indication was given at that time that the Committee were to attempt to steam-roller this through without allowing the Ordinary Members a vote on the matter!
Click to expand...

Having been in a similar situation to yourself a few years ago ( With a club which shall remain nameless ) I can only say that in most of these cases a huge amount of dishonesty is generated by Committee members, most of which is documented in email or hard copy format. As this was the case, an impromptu meeting was held with a small group of unbiased members who, having examined the evidence, and taken me at my word that it would be made public either by local press or dissemination to the membership, realised that this could finish the club. In the event, four of the dishonest members of the Comm resigned and myself and a friend were reinstated. Altogether, this took up almost a year of my time but like yourself, my principles would not let it go.
Good luck in your foray !
 
Floyd Raser said:
Once again, either I am being unclear or you are missing the point. Any witnesses. If you turned up with notebooks in hand to record everything that is said, you could have asked specifically for the reasons to be explained clearly. If they were then explained you would have a case for going away and preparing a defence. If they were not explained you would have witnesses to support your claims of unfair treatment. Either way you would have communicated with the committee in an assertive manner.
Click to expand...

> Once again, either I am being unclear or you are missing the point. Any witnesses.
…
> you would have witnesses to support your claims of unfair treatment

Ah I see we are both taking about sorts of witness. You were referring to having people witness events at the meeting. I was referring to providing witnesses and evidence to refute their allegations, which was impossible without knowing what their allegations were.

No need to have additional witnesses at the meeting, there were already a couple there and they report that there no actual specific or definitive allegations were made, just lots of bluster.


> you would have a case for going away and preparing a defence

Yep but that wouldn’t have helped would it? They would simply not have allowed a second hearing in which to defend the accusations. They would have claimed that the expelled member had a chance to defend themselves at the hearing, which obviously they did not because they were not told the accusations in advance, and that was the end of the matter.

Either way none of this excuses ignoring the Club Constitution and their refusal to allow Ordinary Members a vote on the issue!

The other point worth mentioning was that this 'hearing' was to occur in the middle of a local pub in full view of the rest of their clientele. There would be no computer present nor Internet access to allow relevant emails and other documentary evidence to be introduced. Over the past couple of years there have been literally hundreds of emails and other communications related to Sailing and Club matters, without knowing just what the accusations were there was no way of knowing which of these would have been required.
 
NickC said:
>

No need to have additional witnesses at the meeting, there were already a couple there and they report that there no actual specific or definitive allegations were made, just lots of bluster.


> you would have a case for going away and preparing a defence

Yep but that wouldn’t have helped would it? They would simply not have allowed a second hearing in which to defend the accusations. They would have claimed that the expelled member had a chance to defend themselves at the hearing, which obviously they did not because they were not told the accusations in advance, and that was the end of the matter.


.
Click to expand...
But were these witnesses there on your behalf, representing your views, or just ordinary members who related information when asked? There is a big difference.

"They would simply" "They would have.." No they wouldn't. If you had turned up with a group of supporters determined to get the job right, they would have to justify their actions or back down. I'm not sure that second guessing what someone will do counts as an excuse for a lack of action.
 
GrumpyOldGit said:
Having been in a similar situation to yourself a few years ago ( With a club which shall remain nameless ) I can only say that in most of these cases a huge amount of dishonesty is generated by Committee members, most of which is documented in email or hard copy format. As this was the case, an impromptu meeting was held with a small group of unbiased members who, having examined the evidence, and taken me at my word that it would be made public either by local press or dissemination to the membership, realised that this could finish the club. In the event, four of the dishonest members of the Comm resigned and myself and a friend were reinstated. Altogether, this took up almost a year of my time but like yourself, my principles would not let it go.
Good luck in your foray !
Click to expand...

Any chance they are the same people?
 
Last edited:
I have been following this thread for some time and frankly it is truly amazing that this is still ongoing.

I contacted an old university pal in the same town as this club who has no known connections with the club, or any of the committee although he does know them as the sailing world can be a small community at times. This saga (and let’s face it that’s what it’s become) has surely run its course.

Let’s be clear that the OP has not been as truthful as he might have been and has had several opportunities to resolve this matters in the past. He has declared himself innocent of all charges not quite in line with his legal morals of earlier post which incidentally are not quite in line with established legal practice. Using my rudimentary search skills and those of my pal if the OP ever takes this to court or is indeed taken to court he needs to have some very very deep pockets indeed frankly this would never get past the first hurdle and correctly so. No lawyer would ever advocate this route.

I now understand that some committee members are taking rather a novel way of putting their side to the general sailing community at large but in a quiet but rather polite way. They have been invited to do this to level the playing field from these posts. This can only detriment you OP.

OP why don’t you e mail your former club members direct and seek face to face meetings with them and see you can regain the friendship you once had. Let’s face it there has been sailing at the club (Very competitive as Well) this year which I understand is functioning well still even without you. Please this is not Katherine Tate “Yes” but “No but”. It is reasonable to assume that if a riot has not broken out at the club by now it is not going to. As far as is known at the club despite your objections to the contrary h cub believe they have followed the rules and others have verified thy have done so. Grow up OP and either move on or offer you hand
 
For those interested; the correspondence, pictures, evidence etc. behind these issues is now available on a website. Publishing details here would almost certainly get the thread pulled again so PM me for the URL. Some of it’s almost quite entertaining.:D

Hopefully all anonymised but if you spot anything identifiable which should have been removed please let me know by PM and I’ll fix immediately.

For those who do not want to read the full details, that’s fine but please do not post disparaging remarks without understanding the full story.
 
Rather odd. You have again just identified the whole club, members via here again. Do you ever learn or just blame everyone else for your own situation. You have identified the club and everyone in tit again I took me about 30 seconds. Seems to me you are the bully here
 
What on earth has this total train crash achieved. I have an old uni pal who lives local to this club and he tells a different story to that to what the OP tells here. Myself I have a few issues. OP when you received your letter inviting you to the meeting with the committee where is the correspondence from you raising your concerns and telling them you could not attend. A reasonable question in the circumstances bearing in mind you are telling us a friend on the committee told you what happened. I cant find that correspondence. I am in possession of some e mails regarding this mess from my pal that I cant in on your web site. As just bout everyone knows it takes about 30 seconds to find your sites without the need for a PM.
 
NickC said:
For those interested; the correspondence, pictures, evidence etc. behind these issues is now available on a website. Publishing details here would almost certainly get the thread pulled again so PM me for the URL. Some of it’s almost quite entertaining.:D

Hopefully all anonymised but if you spot anything identifiable which should have been removed please let me know by PM and I’ll fix immediately.

For those who do not want to read the full details, that’s fine but please do not post disparaging remarks without understanding the full story.
Click to expand...

So no need to post anything here then?
Now you will know for certain exactly how many of us are interested in your plight, you can therefore communicate with them all via the website or email and declare this thread officially dead?
 
Floyd Raser said:
So no need to post anything here then?
Now you will know for certain exactly how many of us are interested in your plight, you can therefore communicate with them all via the website or email and declare this thread officially dead?
Click to expand...

Well Said Floyd. Perhaps we could start one up show the other side. It cant be all that one sided asI now know
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Top