| Vote of no confidence thread. 18:21 - Dec 15 with 25609 views | E20Jack |
Not a member but will happily join again if this was to get off the ground.
Any members have any ideas how to do this?
Looks like the only way of stopping this deal now. I have asked several times what are the benefits of this deal, it cannot be continuing to have a voice as conceding drag rights will probably mean the Trust survives as an organisation for a shorter period than if it was to go legal. They are not long term owners.
...those who recommended the deal still have not answered.
Swans Trust,
12 Dynevor Avenue,
Neath,
SA10 7AG
I, the undersigned member, believe the current committee no longer represents the wishes of this organisation's members. I would like to register a vote of no confidence and ask you to call and extraordinary meeting of all Trust members so that we can be heard. We would like to table a motion that the following committee members should stand down and call an election at the earliest opportunity.
Alan Lewis
Stuart McDonald
Viv Brooks
Ron Knuszka
Cath Dyer
Viv Williams
Sian Davies
Yours,
................................
** any Trust members for the deal I have missed out feel free to add or any I have included that are against it then again feel free to omit. [Post edited 15 Dec 2017 20:43]
|  |
| |  |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:32 - Dec 16 with 1870 views | Phil_S |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:30 - Dec 16 by londonlisa2001 |
I know, that's why I said so two or three pages ago before Shaky said it was wrong...
The reelection of 4 of the 8 has to be in the agenda irrespective of letters or anything else.
It's an easier way forward which was my entire point, |
The AGM one is an interesting one given what I have read here
Let me give you my take on what has happened in the past. Elections are held in July and traditionally were announced at an August AGM
The last few years the AGM has slipped to November but the same process has been followed. This is what I assumed would be the case now
However based on the comments of Lisa and wobbly it doesn't seem to be that although all elected members (including those recently elected) seem to be until July 2018
I was one of those elected last summer for two years to July 2019 |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:32 - Dec 16 with 1870 views | wobbly |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:30 - Dec 16 by londonlisa2001 |
I know, that's why I said so two or three pages ago before Shaky said it was wrong...
The reelection of 4 of the 8 has to be in the agenda irrespective of letters or anything else.
It's an easier way forward which was my entire point, |
Eh? You wrote that they probably don't have to take a motion from the floor unless they want to? Not true at AGMs. There are all sorts of amendments and motions and other devices that have to be allowed if proposed. |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:39 - Dec 16 with 1837 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:32 - Dec 16 by wobbly |
Eh? You wrote that they probably don't have to take a motion from the floor unless they want to? Not true at AGMs. There are all sorts of amendments and motions and other devices that have to be allowed if proposed. |
Nope, I said that the AGM will see 4 of the 8 being up for reelection. I only mentioned it as a route that was already available.
The only question was that alternatives may need to be notified beforehand and I suggested people check.
The motions from the floor bit was in relation to those (th remaining 4) that are not up for reelection and whether a motion could be proposed to replace those on the night. I suggested someone checked whether advance notice was required.
The Trust is subject to the rules of community societies which are not the same as ordinary limited companies. |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:44 - Dec 16 with 1810 views | wobbly |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 15:40 - Dec 16 by londonlisa2001 |
They probably don't have to accept a motion from the floor unless they want to, choosing to accept one one year doesn't mean they have to do the same another year.
As I said, someone would need to check. |
I hate to be a bore, but this was your post that I was quoting and responding to. | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:49 - Dec 16 with 1788 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:44 - Dec 16 by wobbly |
I hate to be a bore, but this was your post that I was quoting and responding to. |
Yes, I was talking about the ones that are not up for reelection. I mentioned the 4 that were on page 5 or something. | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:53 - Dec 16 with 1771 views | wobbly |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:49 - Dec 16 by londonlisa2001 |
Yes, I was talking about the ones that are not up for reelection. I mentioned the 4 that were on page 5 or something. |
Ok, if you're going to be obtuse, let's leave it there. | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:54 - Dec 16 with 1770 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:53 - Dec 16 by wobbly |
Ok, if you're going to be obtuse, let's leave it there. |
I'm not - my original post is still there if you have a look. | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:57 - Dec 16 with 1749 views | dobjack2 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:32 - Dec 16 by Phil_S |
The AGM one is an interesting one given what I have read here
Let me give you my take on what has happened in the past. Elections are held in July and traditionally were announced at an August AGM
The last few years the AGM has slipped to November but the same process has been followed. This is what I assumed would be the case now
However based on the comments of Lisa and wobbly it doesn't seem to be that although all elected members (including those recently elected) seem to be until July 2018
I was one of those elected last summer for two years to July 2019 |
In that case it would appear that none of the recent elections of officials have been in accordance with the model rules. I can find no reference in them to a period of 2 years.
This may be because the secretary is acting in accordance with changes to the rules which have not been filed however that failure surely makes those changes ineffective and means that elections have been held that are not in accordance with the rules of the trust. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 21:03 - Dec 16 with 1719 views | Shaky |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:57 - Dec 16 by dobjack2 |
In that case it would appear that none of the recent elections of officials have been in accordance with the model rules. I can find no reference in them to a period of 2 years.
This may be because the secretary is acting in accordance with changes to the rules which have not been filed however that failure surely makes those changes ineffective and means that elections have been held that are not in accordance with the rules of the trust. |
It's all irrelevant.
Members voting at a general meeting have the power to remove any director regardless of any term of the original appointment.
The directors are supposed to represent the members. If the members don't like the job they are doing they can get rid of them. No problem. [Post edited 16 Dec 2017 21:05]
|  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 21:04 - Dec 16 with 1717 views | wobbly |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:57 - Dec 16 by dobjack2 |
In that case it would appear that none of the recent elections of officials have been in accordance with the model rules. I can find no reference in them to a period of 2 years.
This may be because the secretary is acting in accordance with changes to the rules which have not been filed however that failure surely makes those changes ineffective and means that elections have been held that are not in accordance with the rules of the trust. |
Apart from rule 56. [Post edited 16 Dec 2017 21:06]
| | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:15 - Dec 16 with 1634 views | dobjack2 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 21:04 - Dec 16 by wobbly |
Apart from rule 56. [Post edited 16 Dec 2017 21:06]
|
Yes but that period of 2 years is described as “normally” and in accordance with the board membership policy.
If there are no deaths/resignations there should normally be a period of about 2 years between appointment at one AGM and the date of the AGM you have to resign at.
The key point being that the half of the board members elected by the membership who are the longest serving have to resign at each AGM. That is the board membership policy - Rule 61.
Appointing someone for a fixed period of 2 years is clearly outside of the rules of the Trust as they have to resign at an AGM the date of which has not been set. The secretary is not following trust rules. | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:06 - Dec 16 with 1596 views | MoscowJack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 19:57 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
You can vote by proxy, if somebody votes it on your behalf.
That could be somebody you find yourself, or somebody seeking to coordinate overall proceedings at the AGM . . . |
Just tried to join but unfortunately, it seems that I can only join the Trust paying via PayPal, which has issues here in Russia. Looks like I'll only be able to join when I'm back in UK.
Does everyone have to use PayPal to join? Seems a bit strange to me. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:11 - Dec 16 with 1583 views | ItchySphincter |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:06 - Dec 16 by MoscowJack |
Just tried to join but unfortunately, it seems that I can only join the Trust paying via PayPal, which has issues here in Russia. Looks like I'll only be able to join when I'm back in UK.
Does everyone have to use PayPal to join? Seems a bit strange to me. |
I'll join you up if you want? |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:21 - Dec 16 with 1575 views | exiledclaseboy |
Tell ya what folks. If you’re a trust member and want to stop the sale you HAVE to tell the Trust that and do it now. I can’t stress that enough. Do it. Now. Politely. |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:31 - Dec 16 with 1552 views | NeathJack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:21 - Dec 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Tell ya what folks. If you’re a trust member and want to stop the sale you HAVE to tell the Trust that and do it now. I can’t stress that enough. Do it. Now. Politely. |
What is the best way of getting that message to them?
Other than to berate them at the pod next Saturday obviously. Emails seem to be getting ignored, the twitter account is barely used (took a prompt from myself for them to even tweet there was a forum on Thursday ffs). |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:42 - Dec 16 with 1534 views | monmouth |
Politely tell them they will be held accountable for the rest of their lives for the actions that they are taking unilaterally now, without a mandate by wilfully ignoring that circumstances have changed, and when it all plays out they may personally never be forgiven by a lot of very angry people. Because that's the ledge they are standing on. |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:45 - Dec 16 with 1526 views | donkonky |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:21 - Dec 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Tell ya what folks. If you’re a trust member and want to stop the sale you HAVE to tell the Trust that and do it now. I can’t stress that enough. Do it. Now. Politely. |
Already E mailed them directly on the Trust site. Be interesting to read their reply.
I agree with your call to act now and make your presence felt. |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 00:21 - Dec 17 with 1489 views | Van_Arnhem |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:21 - Dec 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Tell ya what folks. If you’re a trust member and want to stop the sale you HAVE to tell the Trust that and do it now. I can’t stress that enough. Do it. Now. Politely. |
I've asked them to stop the sale. Earlier. Very Politely.  | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:14 - Dec 17 with 1358 views | Shaky |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:15 - Dec 16 by dobjack2 |
Yes but that period of 2 years is described as “normally” and in accordance with the board membership policy.
If there are no deaths/resignations there should normally be a period of about 2 years between appointment at one AGM and the date of the AGM you have to resign at.
The key point being that the half of the board members elected by the membership who are the longest serving have to resign at each AGM. That is the board membership policy - Rule 61.
Appointing someone for a fixed period of 2 years is clearly outside of the rules of the Trust as they have to resign at an AGM the date of which has not been set. The secretary is not following trust rules. |
No.
The key point is all directors serve subject to Rule 63, and as such can be removed at any time at any members' meeting. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:24 - Dec 17 with 1352 views | Shaky |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 20:19 - Dec 16 by wobbly |
Its an AGM. The notice of the meeting at the very least will include election or re-election of directors. Even if it isn't, rule 24, subsection b, sub section c (which is actually a typo, it should really be sub section iii, ) of the model rules means the election of directors is on the agenda for the AGM.
The legal precedent of Betts vs Mcnaughton means that if it's on the agenda, someone other than the named directors can be proposed from the floor at the AGM and, if they garner enough votes, could get onto the board instead. That's just one possible way to change the dynamic of the meeting if people were so interested. A late push for box office representation? ;)
AGMs are great if you want to be mischievous. Shaky is right. |
Wobbly, just to reiterate it is IMO great news that you have declared more than a passing interest in this subject.
FWIW, my own professional advisory experience of UK hostile takeovers that actually got off the ground can be counted on one finger. And that dates well back into the last century, was governed by Yellow Book Listing Rules, revolved around an EGM, and my client had just under 20% so could pull all the levers without bringing others on board.
Are you open to a discussion about potential meeting tactics? [Post edited 17 Dec 2017 10:29]
| |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:32 - Dec 17 with 1338 views | MoscowJack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:21 - Dec 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Tell ya what folks. If you’re a trust member and want to stop the sale you HAVE to tell the Trust that and do it now. I can’t stress that enough. Do it. Now. Politely. |
Does it have to be done publicly? For example, Twitter? Or would a thread on here suffice?
Emails can be ignored or deleted, which means denied.
What would you say would be the best way to express this urgent disapproval please? | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:43 - Dec 17 with 1321 views | Vetchfielder |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:21 - Dec 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Tell ya what folks. If you’re a trust member and want to stop the sale you HAVE to tell the Trust that and do it now. I can’t stress that enough. Do it. Now. Politely. |
I've done mine  |  |
| Proud to have been one of the 231 |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:47 - Dec 17 with 1309 views | chad |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:43 - Dec 17 by Vetchfielder |
I've done mine |
excellent - how did you send it
registered post / solicitors letter / injunction ;) |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:56 - Dec 17 with 1278 views | Vetchfielder |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:47 - Dec 17 by chad |
excellent - how did you send it
registered post / solicitors letter / injunction ;) |
No, only by email  | |
| Proud to have been one of the 231 |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 11:02 - Dec 17 with 1272 views | donkonky |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:47 - Dec 17 by chad |
excellent - how did you send it
registered post / solicitors letter / injunction ;) |
Well I sent mine as an E mail on the Trust website yesterday. They have a disclaimer saying they will respond within 48 hrs. I’m guessing the response will be nothing other than an acknowledgement of receipt however isn’t this paper trail what is needed? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
