S&DRT told to quit Washford by WSR

[Jonboy]

One bit of fun in commercial leases is always service charges relating to maintaining services that are shared between tenants and/or landlord. For an example on the estate my employer have recently vacated the service charges covered road maintenance, landscaping and gardening , CCTV, security etc.
The lease is vague on it and as a tenant you are at the landlords mercy to costs involved(without a tribunal if it gets out of hand).

 

Could be the track maintenance mentioned above is deemed subject to service charge by wsr and not by the s&drt. Refuse to pay and it ends up with lawyers.

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, PenrithBeacon said:

It probably says as much as can be said at the present.

I really didn't think that the WSR could create even more reputational damage to itself but it seems to be determined to do so. All very regrettable.

 

On 22/02/2020 at 09:23, PenrithBeacon said:

The WSR was talking c2010 about taking over Washford because it needed the space and making an offer for the 2-8-0. If a new lease was signed less than two years ago why has the lessee been given notice?

 

The WSR came very close to being shut down by the ORR a short while back. Among the many things the WSR urgently needs to do is some serious track renewal - and that costs big time.

 

The ORR couldn't care less what sort of agreements the WSR may or may not have with anybody - they have been given notice they need to act FAST in getting their house in order however painful or upsetting it may be to preservationists in general.

 

Remember no WSR operations = probably no S&DRT operations either given all the obligations under ROGS legislation

 

Drastic times call for drastic measures....

 

If, as has been suggested the S&DRT have been asked to help with this (which it should be remembered is all about keeping the WSR open in the first place) and they cannot / will not help then its not that surprising the WSR want them out.

 

 

 

 

[johnofwessex]

I do not think that the Articles would allow them to help, assuming that they have the resources to do so

[Stubby47]

What will happen to the 7F?

[woodenhead]

31 minutes ago, Stubby47 said:

What will happen to the 7F?

Separate agreement so it's not going anywhere 

[woodenhead]

Update from WSR

http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm#1970

 

[caradoc]

15 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Separate agreement so it's not going anywhere 

 

Unless the S&DRT decide that they will do to the WSR what the WSR has done to them and terminate the 7F contract early ?

 

8 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Update from WSR

http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm#1970

 

 

Some strong language there - ''Cuckoo in the nest' ! The WSR seems unhappy that the S&DRT is not contributing enough financially to them, but how much spare cash does the Trust actually have ? And surely their very presence (and their loco) assists the WSR by attracting extra visitors to the line.

 

I have only visited the WSR twice, partly due to its distance from my home, and partly due to the lack of a direct rail connection, but recent events (not just this issue) do not encourage me, at all, to go again.

 

[woodenhead]

The suggestion that the S&DRT want to establish and LRO on the site suggests they want some sort of moving train on the site - clearly looking to ramp up income from the site but at the same time continue to pay a peppercorn to the WSR - I guess that does sort of may get backs up at the WSR.

 

Problem is both organisations are chasing the same charity £ for their own needs and it is proving extremely difficult for them to both do that in a complimentary manner.

 

Hints of other issues too and maybe that puts them at odds with the safety management requirements set out by the ORR.

 

I guess it will all come out eventually, or not of course but it is the WSR's railway not the S&DRT's

[pete_mcfarlane]

The press releases from one side seem a lot more professional than those from the other. 

[geoffers]

Hmmmm....this could get nasty..........    I truly hope not.

S&DRT try to remove the buildings they have erected.....WSR try to prevent them......

7F contract ended similar.....

Are charities allowed to gift money to PLCs under Charity law?

As always with disputes I guess my learned friends will be the only ones who will benefit.

Edited February 24, 2020 by geoffers

[Boris]

Preserved Railway politics strike again.  There are no winners here and likely neither are telling the full story.

[H2O]

8 minutes ago, geoffers said:

Hmmmm....this could get nasty..........    I truly hope not.

S&DRT try to remove the buildings they have erected.....WSR try to prevent them......

7F contract ended similar.....

Are charities allowed to gift money to PLCs under Charity law?

As always with disputes I guess my learned friends will be the only ones who will benefit.

 

I think the S&DRT own all the track on site too as it was a completely empty site when they took it over.  For many of the WSR recent points this was all known for many years before they agreed a new 25 year lease 2 years ago - I know the WSR is under new management now but some of those near the top would have known this.  The S&DRT are an independent trust who are legally obliged to follow their articles of association - they probably didn't have a choice in the matter and some preliminary investigation by the WSR would have told them this.  I can't see the need for the WSR to take the nuclear option.

[Steamport Southport]

 

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

The suggestion that the S&DRT want to establish and LRO on the site suggests they want some sort of moving train on the site - clearly looking to ramp up income from the site but at the same time continue to pay a peppercorn to the WSR - I guess that does sort of may get backs up at the WSR.

 

Problem is both organisations are chasing the same charity £ for their own needs and it is proving extremely difficult for them to both do that in a complimentary manner.

 

Hints of other issues too and maybe that puts them at odds with the safety management requirements set out by the ORR.

 

I guess it will all come out eventually, or not of course but it is the WSR's railway not the S&DRT's

 

It won't be for much longer if they continue like this. It won't be anyone's.

 

No working locomotives so they hire them in at great expense and then have a dispute with a resident group owning a locomotive. Doesn't make sense to me. These things never do.

 

I don't know the details of the LRO application, but was it so they could run the Peckett and give rides in the yard? If so, seems sensible to me. It's called maximising assets.

 

 

 

Jason

[chris p bacon]

12 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

It's called maximising assets.

Isn’t that what the WSR is doing. 

[Oldddudders]

8 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

It's called maximising assets.

And bringing more visitors to a slightly remote place off-season. The more attractions the better to encourage numbers to the WSR, with the S&DRT as an attractive side-show. I assume it will take a good couple of years before the WSR alternative proposals for the site can bring in revenue. When your finances are dicky, cutting off a revenue stream does seem a bit odd. 

[woodenhead]

11 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

And bringing more visitors to a slightly remote place off-season. The more attractions the better to encourage numbers to the WSR, with the S&DRT as an attractive side-show. I assume it will take a good couple of years before the WSR alternative proposals for the site can bring in revenue. When your finances are dicky, cutting off a revenue stream does seem a bit odd. 

I think it depends what the income stream is, how much the WSR benefits and whether or not the public don't know who owns what.

 

There is probably a lot more to this than is in the public domain but having one station on your line under another group who want to also run trains but not contribute to the host line at a sensible rate may be at the heart of it.

 

But on the other hand, if you're a small preservation group you want all the money you can get to keep your group going so I can appreciate perhaps that the S&DRT may not feel that it is to their benefit to pay more when they have a lease agreement to hand that has only recently been renegotiated.

 

Probably key to all this is who agreed the lease, who vetted it and who signed it off and why.

[Gwiwer]

20 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

And bringing more visitors to a slightly remote place off-season...... I assume it will take a good couple of years before the WSR alternative proposals for the site can bring in revenue.

 

Maybe.  But the Trust has 12 months notice to quit meaning the WSR has that time to formulate plans and develop their intentions for the site.  Which might be got into place a year from now with enough speed that there is at least some income in Season 2021.  At least as much as the Trust might have contributed.  So possibly no net loss and a longer-term net gain.  We shall see.  

 

As for being "slightly remote" I would suggest "Off the main tourist trail" might better describe Washford.  It is on the main A39 Taunton - Minehead road which also is the link from Bridgwater.  Which is more than can be said for the somewhat larger location of Williton just along the line.  Washford may well not be anyone's ultimate destination.  Neither, I suspect, is Bishop's Lydeard.  The WSR has worked long and hard to develop the latter as a base and railhead for its operations.  While there might be a difference being at the end of the normal running line there seems to be no reason why a suitably-promoted attraction at Washford should not attract visitors.  

[EdChap]

But WSR Plc have said that Washford will become another p-way yard. So no income to be gained there.

[JimC]

3 hours ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

The press releases from one side seem a lot more professional than those from the other. 

 

Its  a weird statement. Someone should have said to the WSR board "This is going to make us look really bad to third parties"

[TheSignalEngineer]

1 hour ago, Boris said:

Preserved Railway politics strike again.  There are no winners here and likely neither are telling the full story.

On two occasions in the 1970s I was invited to join embryonic preservation projects. I visited both and already knew a lot of the people involved.

At the time for a living I was trying to steer a course between the demands of helping to keep the big railway running despite the conflicting interests of the Department, Divisional Management, Region and Marylebone Road whilst simultaneously keeping in favour with the money men at the PTE, local authorities and Whitehall.

I declined the preservationists requests as life in the office seemed easier than dealing with their antics.

[Tim V]

1 hour ago, Oldddudders said:

And bringing more visitors to a slightly remote place off-season. The more attractions the better to encourage numbers to the WSR, with the S&DRT as an attractive side-show. I assume it will take a good couple of years before the WSR alternative proposals for the site can bring in revenue. When your finances are dicky, cutting off a revenue stream does seem a bit odd. 

But as I previously said, the site as Washford is rarely open. The station is not manned. It is hardly 'an attractive side-show' if you can't visit it.

[PenrithBeacon]

I don't know whether this still applies, but the WSR's stations used to be managed by self contained teams of volunteers who had total responsibility for their station. If that's still true then it looks like the team at Washford just walked away.

[Dava]

What will the WSR do about the D&EPG at Williton? Are they useful in restoring diesel motive power or also 'cuckoos in the nest' who could be remov?

 

Dava

[mdvle]

5 hours ago, EdChap said:

But WSR Plc have said that Washford will become another p-way yard. So no income to be gained there.

 

Maybe.

 

Income can be gained from the station itself, or other aspects of the property that aren't needed for the p-way yard.

 

And given the ORR had issues with WSR, anything that makes the maintenance more effective (more work for less money) will be a gain for the WSR.

[5944]

6 hours ago, EdChap said:

But WSR Plc have said that Washford will become another p-way yard. So no income to be gained there.

A p-way yard that, unlike the current one at Dunster, has virtually no road access, so everything will have to come by rail. Dunster is only 5 or so miles away, so I can't see what benefit there is to moving the p/way yard. 

 

For a line that is struggling financially, they do seem to have some odd ideas. Three, possibly four, locos hired in for the steam gala in April. The three that have been announced so far are all tender locos, so that's six low loader movements required. That's a hell of a lot of tickets to sell to cover the costs of transportation and hire fees.