Adventure Bike Rider Forum

Sometimes it's good to have a little reminder

Regurgitated old PR from 2016
How much of the membership fees are directly spent on keeping the ROW open?
Contributions to the "fighting fund" come from local group fund raising.

So to answer your question they have saved me £50 by not renewing.

So 32 saved in 2016 and 0 unjust TROs.

Would be interesting to hear the real facts. What’s determined as an unjust TRO? How many TROs have been imposed in total. How many have they fought and lost? Or do they only fight the ones they think they’d win?

bill_qaz wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:39 am Regurgitated old PR from 2016
How much of the membership fees are directly spent on keeping the ROW open?
Contributions to the "fighting fund" come from local group fund raising.

So to answer your question they have saved me £50 by not renewing.

As a members association, it's accounts should be available to all members

"Sometimes it's good to have a littler reminder"

Times have changed since 2016.

The authorities have learned from their mistakes and are more careful in complying with the requirements, so the TRF threats of legal action fell on deaf ears as of September 2018 [Kirby Bank TRO] I know, I was there, even though I am a disillusioned EX TRF member I still speak up against TRO's. On the day of the decision there was a TRF director a TRF [legal] contractor and myself speaking against the TRO, all with different approaches of objection, we were out numbered about 4 to 1 by the supporters of the TRO and on the day........we lost

All these promotional videos come at a cost........and then there are probably some that are made and never get viewed because they are not approved by land owners or authorities involved in the making of them, members do not seem aware or really care about this and other expenditure and the ones who do ask questions, are branded trouble makers..........just too much apathy.

2 Yams

The thread title includes "this year". The video is from previous years.

Coincidentally 2017s Tech Report has just been reposted around TRF FB pages, with a promise to report upon 2018 "in time for the AGM".

Smoke & Mirrors...........

HedgeHopper wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 1:14 pm

bill_qaz wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:39 am Regurgitated old PR from 2016
How much of the membership fees are directly spent on keeping the ROW open?
Contributions to the "fighting fund" come from local group fund raising.

So to answer your question they have saved me £50 by not renewing.

As a members association, it's accounts should be available to all members

The accounts are available for anyone to look at on companies house https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/comp ... ng-history
regardless if a member or not, as the TRF was made a limited company. These accounts satisfy the regulation but are not detailed.

Its an individual decision whether you join, leave or remain a TRF member you have to do what feels right for you. As a former group chair and long term member I decided I did not like the direction the TRF was being taken by the board so voted with my feet but I still contact my counties ROW department and put in my objections on TRO's or to seek clarification, as many members and non members do. The local groups have lots of members doing some great work but without the EGO's
Happy trail riding

It's worth noting that most of the TRF's arguments for reopening the Stonehenge byways were pretty much dismissed by the court. Instead the byways were reopened because the Road Haulage Association and Freight Transport Association had not been consulted about the closure.

No doubt Wiltshire Council will take note, and do it 'properly' next time.

Long before the current directors were in power, the TRF had a history of winning battles and losing wars.

Greetings,

I like the "should" from the previous post because the full package is never going to be seen outside of the inner sanctum, probably only the trinity of the Technical Director, Financial Director and Chair & Marketing Director.

Accounts are published at Companies House but if you have any serious questions then they are about as clear and useful as an old 'London Peasouper'

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05848933

The phrase, "lies, damned lies and statistics" comes to mind. I have not and I am currently not suggesting any improprieties, just highlighting the distinct lack of clarity for the Membership to review. What the Membership really needs to know is not what monies have been spent but why, how the monies are spent, by whom, who and how they are authorised, the regularity of costs, contractors' fees, cost - benefit scenarios, etc....... I doubt that even the Group Chairmen do not get to see the whole picture.

I was never an accountant but as a manager of some very large budgets I annually had to explain my reasonings to senior management for my departmental spending, for senior management you could now insert the word 'Membership'.

During my membership I simply failed to understand how the Directors could retain the figures from the wider Membership.

I repeat from the past that the question belies not so much what the TRF does but how it goes about things. Until there is full clarity then to my mind folk should keep asking.

TTFN

Hugh.

I presume all "contractors" become so via some kind of open tendering process. If, by some chance, a Director is also contracted (paid) to perform a role I see no problem so long as the process is open and fully accountable. It would be foolish for it to be otherwise. If it is not a legal requirement it is certainly a moral one.
That said, when I was a member I have no recollection of ever having seen any requests to tender for a contract.