democrat
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 11
|
Post by democrat on Jul 13, 2006 14:18:36 GMT
Full Members’ Financial Responsibility
Do full members understand their financial responsibilities? ….. I think NOT. It used to be easy to become a full member, you just paid your subs and that was it. I joined because it seemed like a good idea at the time.
The financial responsibilities of full membership were never explained to me, I never received a copy of the clubs’ constitution or the terms under which the club was established.
The club is owned by the members, but it is not run as a Company Limited by Guarantee as most member owned organisations are, why? Could it be that the asset value of the club i.e. the value of the land far exceeds any debts that the club may have?.... This argument is only of use if the ground is sold to pay off any debts the club might have.
Has the club got any insurance to cover members against potential losses? Given what I have read on this forum I would doubt it!
I understand that there is a County Court Action being taken against the club. Have you as a member been given all the details of this?
It could be that the club can afford to pay it, but given the state of the club house, the toilets and general decay of the stadium, and the fact that a debt has got as far as County Court I doubt it.
If the Club looses its court case and has to pay the full amount of money being asked, where is the money going to come from? As far as I understand the law regarding member owned clubs, YOU, as a full member, in theory, could be asked to put your hand in your pocket. As full membership has not been allowed for a number of years now, the number of full members has declined so the financial risk to the individual member has grown.
It might be that the club is in a good financial state, but how do you know, how long is it since you have seen any accounts or taken an interest?
Don’t put blind faith in a club executive. They may or may not be acting in the best interests of all the members. They are there to guide not to rule.
Ask the questions that need asking, especially before casting your vote at the E.G.M. to decide the future of the club. The Football Association has issued guide lines on how football clubs should be run. How close to the guide lines is Ossett Town Football & Social Club being run?
Here are some of those guidelines.
“Every club shoud be headed by an effective board or committee (the club’s “executive body”) that:
“Is collectively responsible for the success of the club”
“Is not dominated by an individual or small group of individuals”
“Undertakes an annual evaluation of its performance against stated objectives”
“Presenting a balanced and understandable assessment of the club’s position and prospects”
“Ensuring that a satisfactory dialogue with stakeholders takes place”
For those of you who do no understand the word stakeholder, in my opinion this does not only mean full members, but junior sections, and everyone who has put time and effort into the club and who have a genuine interest in the survival of the club, as well as supporters.
Judging by what has been said by contributors to this forum the club has a long way to go to come anywhere close to these guide lines.
If I were the Football Association looking into awarding a grant for stadium improvements I would certainly be looking closely at how far a club had adopted the guide lines before any grant was awarded.
I know the club has had a grant awarded in the past, but these guide lines were only issued in 2005 so things might have changed.
If you know a full member who does not have access to the internet and who does not read this forum, then print this and the information about the deal that is on offer and give it to them it might make them take their responsibilities as a full member seriously and encourage them to come to the EGM to ask questions that need answers before a vote can be taken.
How can YOU the membership vote on something as important as the future of the club if you don’t have all the facts, and don’t ask for them.
How you vote doesn’t matter to me, but what does matter is that you use that right, after hearing both sides of the case, and having looked at all the arguments. There are plenty of ‘social members’ who care deeply but do not have the right to vote. So use yours.
Go to the EGM on the 19th of July and cast your vote on what you believe to be right for the whole club.
I am glad I am not a full member anymore, as I am not exposed to any financial risk from being one.
|
|
matsui
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 17
|
Post by matsui on Jul 13, 2006 16:42:30 GMT
Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that Ossett Town are been taken to County Court ? Also, I believe most members are aware of the financial responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by harrylime on Jul 13, 2006 20:51:48 GMT
I was told about the County Court Judgement last week by a fellow full member, it seems we are being taken to court by the firm who were going to build the new stand at the Gordon Avenue end of the ground, the figure i heard was 10 grand. I was not aware i am liable for the debts of the club, i don't how many full members there are these days, i'm guessing about 40, i dont have £250 to hand, i know full well some of the other members don't have that sort of money either. If i get a summons from the court telling me to pay £250 or whatever, i'm going to seriously fall out with someone. Its like a secret society is that committee, every little thing has to be top secret. Morons.
|
|
matsui
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 17
|
Post by matsui on Jul 13, 2006 21:25:17 GMT
I wouldn't worry " harrylime" , methinks the post by " democrat" is Thommo signing in from Spain, trying to scare the members.... No court can summons you to pay 250 quid in these circumstances, without a lengthy and complicated procedure , and thus would be unlikely to pursue. Someone is just scaremongering !
|
|
democrat
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 11
|
Post by democrat on Jul 14, 2006 13:39:24 GMT
I am pleased to hear that ‘matsui’ is aware of his financial responsibilities, there may be others who are, but how many are not? Certainly Thommo is, especially if you read his posting on June 28th 2006
In case you missed it, “ You were present when our new vice-chairman Martin Voakes accused me of being responsible for the fiasco regarding the unbuilt new stand and the ccj. I think I pretty much answered that one but I think Martin thought he was on to something, I think he really thought that the mess the club are in over that is down solely to me. He said so! If he is capable of coming out with such claptrap as that how much more dross has he been fed how much more drivel have the members been fed. I know I keep repeating this but I still have letters requiring clarification, unanswered for over 10 weeks . Now I know there's a select bunch of members who don't care what I say no matter how true it is but unfortunately there are members and associates of the club who deserve better. Each member is responsible for the debts of the club and I fall into that category, as a paying member I want answers or before very long I will arrive at the conclusion that I'm not going to get any and I will follow the necessary course to blow the whole carry on wide open”.
I am certainly not scare-mongering either, just stating facts, and to put Harry Limes’ mind at rest. If the County Court action was taken against the Club, then it is the Club that is responsible, and the Club that would have to pay the full amount agreed by the court. The money to pay any debt has to come from somewhere, and if there is not enough in the ‘kitty’ to pay it then the club could ask full members to stump up the cash.
Before any full member thinks of resigning to avoid the possibility of having to contribute, I would check with your solicitor, or the C.A.B. to see if it would absolve you of any financial responsibility. There should be something in your copy of the constitution that tells you what your liabilities could be. If you haven’t got a copy, you should have, so ask for one.
On the 19th you as a full member will be asked to vote on:
" The Executive committee feel that the speculation with regard to the sale of Ingfield has gone on long enough. Members were informed of the offer in the recent information bulletin. Therefore in pursuance of Rule 8(D) of the Constitution of Ossett Town AF & Social Club, the Executive Committee hereby gives notice that an Extraordinary General Meeting of the Club shall be held on 19 July 2006 at 8.00pm to discuss and vote upon the following resolution: That the membership should vote for Ossett Town AF and Social Club to remain at the present Ingfield Stadium for a period of at least the next five years and every effort be made to develop and improve the site to the benfit of all parties connected with the club rather than consider any offers to purchase Ingfield during that period.
The Executive of the committee have known that there could be a possible offer on the table from Tesco for quite some time.
A responsible ‘Executive’ should have been looking at all options open to the club, and when they asked Thommo to explore avenues from various parties they should have, at the same time, asked someone else to prepare a viable alternative plan for the development of the Stadium with details costs, a schedule of works, and how those works would be paid for.
This plan should have been drawn up, with all interested parties being consulted in line with guide lines issued by the F.A. as per my previous post. Has this been done? I would doubt it, and the reason I would doubt it is clearly in the words of the resolution you are being asked to vote upon.
Do not be fooled, this resolution is not asking you to vote on the Tesco/Dewsbury Rams offer.
It is however, asking you to shut the door on that offer, and any offer that may come over the next five years before it has been put the full membership.
To my mind this is against the interests of the club and a truly responsible executive would not be asking you to do this.
Think and vote carefully.
|
|
matsui
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 17
|
Post by matsui on Jul 14, 2006 21:23:19 GMT
Hi " Democrat" alias Richard Kelly Thanks for the information, which we are already aware of, but as you say, others might not be. Obviously you have a great interest in Osset Town and I don't doubt that. As advised at the end of your last " Democrat" post , and also at the end of your first post in the "What Tesco Has To Offer" thread, as Richard Kelly. Yes, we will vote carefully Matsui
|
|
democrat
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 11
|
Post by democrat on Jul 15, 2006 10:22:31 GMT
I am so glad matsui is thinking carefully before casting a vote.
I am Democrat, not anyone else, and I chose the name because I strongly believe in democracy. I also believe in protecting what little assets I have.
It may be the case that the executive have worded the resolution as they have, in order to ‘settle’ the club down, and get people working together for the betterment of the club, and this is a good reason.
But passing this resolution as it stands will not do that because the members will have be denying themselves the right to vote on any offer open to the club, not only the current one that is on the table, but any offer that may come up in the next 5 years.
I am seriously concerned that members such as Harry Lime do not realise that they ARE responsible for debts incurred. Is there is a clause in the club constitution that absolves ‘ordinary’ members and lays the full financial responsibility at the doors of the executive? I don’t know because when I was a full member I was never given a copy, and I must admit I never asked for one, I didn’t think it was important and I trusted the dedicated volunteers who ran the club.
It wasn’t until I became a member of another club (which is a company limited by guarantee) still owned by the members, and run by the members, that I realised how much financial risk I was exposing myself to whilst I was a member of Ossett Town.
Ossett Town are ‘asset’ rich because the members own the ground, but if the club is ‘cash’ poor and can’t pay a debt then the money to pay that debt must come from somewhere. Either full members be asked to contribute equally, or be taken out of any income the club has (which would then limit what could be spent on improvements to the club) or as a last resort, the ‘assets’ of the club could be sold.
It is the duty of every member to make sure that the club operates in a responsible manner. Exposing members to financial risk is not responsible.
I would strongly suggest that all full members urge the executive of the club as a matter of urgency to protect them against financial risk as far as possible.
Harry Lime, if you don’t believe what I am posting here, or are unsure and worried, then ask advice from someone you trust, who is ‘neutral’, if you don’t know any one who can advise you, go to the Citizens Advice Bureau and talk to them, they are used to giving advice in a way that can be understood.
|
|
matsui
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 17
|
Post by matsui on Jul 15, 2006 18:31:47 GMT
Good Evening Richard, sorry " Democrat" I'd be interested in your views regarding Cmpulsory Purchase, do you think there really is a possibility that the ground could be purchased under an Order by Wakefield Council. I previously though Compulsory Purchase was meant for expansion of Highways, but following a little research on the Internet, it appears I am wrong. Someone said recently, and this may not be true, that Tesco had put money into the redevelopment of the new Bus Station under the presumption that they would be buying Osset Town, and could put pressure on the Council to C.P. You seem knowledgable guy, so what do you think the realities are of this ever happening? Matsui
|
|
|
Post by harrylime on Jul 15, 2006 21:35:29 GMT
thanks to "democrat" and "matsui" for their reassurances, you can spend years as a member of a club, you can be on the commitee (in my case a very brief spell) and you can spend hours in the company of current committee members, but you never realise that you actually know very little about what goes on at the club until something like this happens. I'm more angry with myself than anyone at the club, i just sit there and take at face value everything that is said to me, i never questionned anything because i had no reason to question anything. I suppose i will be there on wednesday night for the vote, but quite frankly, i would not bother me in the slightest if i never saw the place ever again.
Maybe i'll feel better once the football starts again (if i see anymore f***ing show jumping on tv again i think i will commit an act of violence of the tv set)
|
|
|
Post by thomo on Jul 17, 2006 11:08:49 GMT
Nice to see Matsui or is it Tatsui having a rethink regarding who posts as Democrat, however as i've said many times before unlike young tats I post as Thomo and Thomo only. The idea of me breaking away in Spain to log onto this site and post seems a little far fetched at best. HOWEVER we had a great time recording a fab 7-0 victory and only a couple of minor injuries, training alongside Birmingham City - Pennant, Forcell, Clemence et al was a great experience for the lads and I'm sure improved their football education a touch more. As for the Democrat & Matsui post - holding members responsible for £250 each I would think there's facts on both sides but in truth unlikely to happen the exce could borrow money and pay any debts off and trade out of any problems. Our Chairman spoke about 5 years ago about going limited "its another reason why the books are closed" don't make me laugh. As for Compulsory Purchases my understanding is you get market value not a penny more or less. The trouble with that would be we would be searching for a site which aint easy. Tats post about the value of our land and is relationship with his bank being such that he can borrow sufficient funds to purchase and sell making £2million makes entertaining reading. I'm no expert on land values but I did ask quite a few people in the surveying game and the general consensus seemed to be a £1million per acre. Tesco offered £4.5 million for 4.2 acres some of this up front to allow us to develop a new site so it would be ready before we vacated the Ingfield pitch. I'll be there on Wednesday night but have very little confidence in things being done correctly, the other room ought to packed with associates and junior members of club as a show of interest in such an important issue.
|
|
democrat
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 11
|
Post by democrat on Jul 17, 2006 12:41:19 GMT
Sorry ‘matsui’ CP’s are not my area of expertise I’m afraid, however, I would very much doubt if Wakefield MDC could compulsory purchase the Football Club for the sole purpose of giving it to a supermarket chain to develop. I am aware that the ‘ in’ thing these days is for publicly funded organisations such as councils, police, fire and health to work in partnership particularly with the private sector. It is for ever mentioned in the press and on television. You asked for my opinion though, which may be quite different from Richard Kelly’s as I am not him. There have been one or two things in the press that recently that have got my mind thinking. One was the article about the new ‘multi-user’ sports stadium ‘THE Wildcats' long-awaited new stadium could be in sight if the public give it the thumbs up. Crunch talks were held on Monday between Wakefield Trinity Wildcats and Wakefield Council – which has included plans for a new stadium in its sports strategy for the district.’ Click on this link and read about it. www.wakefieldtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=704&ArticleID=1583601I think there was also mention in another article of various sites that could be made available, one of which was in Ossett on council owned land near to junction 40. The other item was the article that appeared a few editions ago, about a ‘Super Health Centre’ for Ossett and the search being on for a possible town centre site. Take these articles in isolation and they don’t mean much, look at them together, and it could lead to the belief that there is something going on in the background. There are many developments that have taken place in ‘private/ public partnership agreements where by the Private sector, i.e. a supermarket have been allowed to develop a site provided they make a provision within that development for a public amenity such as a library, or a health centre.If for the sake of argument Ossett town was to be compulsory purchased, where could they go? There is no land available that could be made use of for a ‘single’ user stadium. I believe that to be true. The club could then be forced down the route of moving into a new ‘super stadium’ sharing facilities with heavens knows how many other clubs, they would then be a very small fish in a very big pond, with not much say in the running of the facility. I believe that some time in the past Ossett Town Football Club did discuss the possibility of going into a multi-user stadium with the ‘wild cats’ but felt that the terms were not right and they would not have much say in the running of the stadium as there would be too many other clubs involved. All of the above points are why it is so important that Ossett Town Football Club do not paint itself into a position from which there is no way out and passing the resolution put before the members on the 19th would do just this. Wouldn’t it be better to be a 50% stakeholder in a two user stadium and be able to keep your club house and the function room in the centre of Ossett? I don’t know. These are all things that need discussing and thinking about carefully before making any decision, and it should be up to the whole membership to decide in a democratic fashion.If you do pass the resolution on the 19th you will be denying yourselves the right to do this.I would suggest the best course of action from a democratic point of view is to: 1) vote against the resolution which would at least keep your options open. 2) Hold your AGM as a matter of urgency, so at least the members will know the true financial position of the club, where you ask the treasurer for information about the clubs’ finances, including the facts about the county court action which will let members know the financial risk to which they are exposed. 3) Then hold an open meeting to discuss the current offer that is on the table with no vote being taken at that meeting but each member be given an information pack to take away with them with both sides of the argument clearly laid out. Give the members a few weeks to think about the content of that meeting and weigh up in their own minds what they feel is the best course of action. 4) Then hold an EGM to vote in a secret ballot on whether to reject or accept the offer that is on the table this way the members will feel free to vote in the way they themselves feel is right for the future of the club and can’t be intimidated by fear of reprisals. At least that way, there can be no arguments in the future that members were not given the chance to vote on the offer before the club. Yes, there will be a few more weeks of uncertainty, and lobbying from those for and those against, but once the vote has been taken in a truly democratic way, neither side can moan about unfairness. I am sure the club would then be able to settle down as all the members will feel a ‘democratic’ decision has been taken by all the members. I say again, look at the broader picture, and think carefully before voting. www.thefa.com/TheFA/RulesAndRegulations/Regulations/Postings/2005/03/FinancialAdvisoryUnit_downloads.htm For information on financial responsibilities of clubs click on the link and download what might help you. Just as another thought, does the club have ‘trustees’ and if so do all voting members know who the trustees are. I am given to understand from reading information on other websites that member owned clubs that are not limited companies are not allowed to own land, the ownership of the land should be in a trust with appointed trustees. See link www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1077475675Happy reading!
|
|
|
Post by thomo on Jul 17, 2006 13:12:04 GMT
What a quality post.!! On the trustee front - I have raised concerns regarding this previously as we currently have only 2 who are members the other trustee resigned his membership and was project manager on the project to which the ccj relates. Our Chairman is another. The land & clubhouse is a benefit of the trust. A trustee cannot benefit from proceeds of a trust. The trouble with a secret ballot is who counts the votes. All the other suggestions have been made in some shape or form at exec meetings but admittedly not as eloquently and concise as this post. As a former member it would be interesting to see if Democrat would renew membership as it seems input could be invaluable.
Why have the exec called an EGM for such a ridiculous proposal it can only be in the hope that opposers to it may not be available to vote!
|
|
democrat
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 11
|
Post by democrat on Jul 17, 2006 16:02:30 GMT
|
|
democrat
Sunday Morning Hoofer
Posts: 11
|
Post by democrat on Jul 17, 2006 16:04:54 GMT
No problem with a secret ballot, or the counting of:
The chairman or secretary counts the votes in full view of the assembled meeting overseen by two members, both of whose views, are known prior to the meeting.
Thomo, it is obvious from your various postings on the forum over the past few months that you would like members to be given the chance of voting on the offer that is available, you could be a scrutiniser, and I am sure a member of the exec who is equally against giving members the chance to vote on the offer could be the other.
You could try this at your meeting on the 19th, it may well make a difference to the outcome of the vote.
The vote should then be clearly announced. How many votes were cast, how many in favour and how many against and the ballot papers be available for any full member to check and count if they so wished.
Why not go armed with enough small pieces of the same colour paper and ask for a show of hands of people who would prefer a secret ballot. Count out the required number of sheets, to give one per person. Get the Chairman or secretary to check the number of pieces is correct. Then ask each member to write on the paper, the word for, or against before putting it in a ballot box.
If all else fails I suppose you could ask the F.A. to oversee the ballot!
As for re-joining How? The membership is closed and if you are having difficulty in getting a decision on whether or not 2 social members of long standing and hard work, are to be made full members, imagine how difficult it would be to re-activate my membership! But if there were a way, I might consider it.
Keep me posted!
As for there being only two trustees who are members, does the terms of the trust allow it to be run in this way? Are there any trustees that are not members?
|
|
|
Post by xed on Jul 18, 2006 10:43:22 GMT
what happened to Pete Jessop? is he still with the club?
|
|