Most expensive buggy hire ever

[Oldham92]

I’m not so sure Homer

While the club appear to have been pretty inflexible in applying their comp rules, the rule itself came from somewhere, it hasn’t just been thought up last week specifically to annoy £275 buggy hire and I wonder if the club are getting a bit more stick than they deserve

No one made £275 buggy hire spend the money, he chose to spend it in order not to let his partner down & to make a point to the club, (all credit to him I doubt I would have) however:
The club didn’t give £275 buggy hire 3 days to get a certificate signed, it was £275 buggy hire who gave the club just three days’ notice that he wanted to use a buggy (which he knew wasn’t normally permitted) but he didn’t have the any certificate/report to the club, just correspondence between patient/consultant & GP) and so forced them into a snap judgment on whether the various bits of email/letters were sufficient for an exemption (which in my opinion they got wrong) but; it was the OP who created much of the circumstances requiring the decision to even need to be made, because while it was clearly important to him last Tuesday, it seemingly didn’t occur to £275 buggy hire to ask for any type of certificate/letter addressed to the golf club when he last met/corresponded with the consultant… despite the fact they discussed playing golf… and the consultant even saying he was ok to play golf!

I’d agree with the majority & say the club have made an error in judgment but sorry to say to £275 buggy hire, so did you

To be fair common sense could be used. Club could say something like, usually we need this but as it's short notice we will make an exception and use the Letter if you're aware it's a one off and agree to a smaller charitable donation instead of paying out to the doctor

 

[Slab]

To be fair common sense could be used. Club could say something like, usually we need this but as it's short notice we will make an exception and use the Letter if you're aware it's a one off and agree to a smaller charitable donation instead of paying out to the doctor

Agreed, from the info there was several things that would have prevented this, but they weren't all down to the club

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I’m not so sure Homer

While the club appear to have been pretty inflexible in applying their comp rules, the rule itself came from somewhere, it hasn’t just been thought up last week specifically to annoy £275 buggy hire and I wonder if the club are getting a bit more stick than they deserve

No one made £275 buggy hire spend the money, he chose to spend it in order not to let his partner down & to make a point to the club, (all credit to him I doubt I would have) however:
The club didn’t give £275 buggy hire 3 days to get a certificate signed, it was £275 buggy hire who gave the club just three days’ notice that he wanted to use a buggy (which he knew wasn’t normally permitted) but he didn’t have the any certificate/report to the club, just correspondence between patient/consultant & GP) and so forced them into a snap judgment on whether the various bits of email/letters were sufficient for an exemption (which in my opinion they got wrong) but; it was the OP who created much of the circumstances requiring the decision to even need to be made, because while it was clearly important to him last Tuesday, it seemingly didn’t occur to £275 buggy hire to ask for any type of certificate/letter addressed to the golf club when he last met/corresponded with the consultant… despite the fact they discussed playing golf… and the consultant even saying he was ok to play golf!

I’d agree with the majority & say the club have made an error in judgment but sorry to say to £275 buggy hire, so did you

Taken from the OP

I provided the club with letter from my Consultant Neurosurgeon to my GP which outlned my symptoms etc. He had sent it to update my GP’s records.

My opponents of course being good sports said they had no problem with me using a buggy. The small advantage I would gain by using one slightly eclipsed by my having to play with a slipped disc.

Ahh but no!! the handicap secretary and now the club secretary insisted that I had the official club medical exemption form completed by my GP. Saying it had to be received by Friday before the secretary’s office closed for the weekend otherwise I would have to play without the buggy and if I used one I would be disqualified.

With 3 days to get this form signed I contacted my local surgery to see if the GP could sign me off. Not surprisingly the earliest appointment I could get was in two weeks unless of course it was an emergency. I told them it was an emergency I needed this document otherwise I couldn’t play in the semi of the winter foursomes blah blah. The receptionist laughed and politely told me to stop wasting her time.

Left with no option I callled the handicap secretary said I couldn’t get the paperwork but surely the letter from the consultant would do. No was the very firm reply but I could scratch from the comp as ‘rules were rules’ it needed to be the official club form and nothing else.

Left with no option. I contacted my consultant who said he could see me in time to sign the form but unfortunately it would have to be a private consultation and it would cost £250. I had no choice I agreed because I couldn’t bring myself to let my mate down, if it were singles I would have just forfeited.

In my mind the fault lies solely with the club. The OP has provided clearly medical evidence in good time via a letter from the neurosurgeon. It's the club saying the official medical exemption form is needed and that if not the outcome was DQ if a buggy was used. I admire the OP for sticking by his PP and to my mind the club are in error for insisting rules are rules and the right bit of paper has to be singed and in the secretary's had by close of business on Friday. That then put all the onus on the OP to again get a signature (at huge cost) when to all intent and purpose the club already had that. I simply think the club put up barriers and were instransigent especially as the opposition had voiced no concerns as well.

 

[Slab]

Taken from the OP

I provided the club with letter from my Consultant Neurosurgeon to my GP which outlned my symptoms etc. He had sent it to update my GP’s records.

My opponents of course being good sports said they had no problem with me using a buggy. The small advantage I would gain by using one slightly eclipsed by my having to play with a slipped disc.

Ahh but no!! the handicap secretary and now the club secretary insisted that I had the official club medical exemption form completed by my GP. Saying it had to be received by Friday before the secretary’s office closed for the weekend otherwise I would have to play without the buggy and if I used one I would be disqualified.

With 3 days to get this form signed I contacted my local surgery to see if the GP could sign me off. Not surprisingly the earliest appointment I could get was in two weeks unless of course it was an emergency. I told them it was an emergency I needed this document otherwise I couldn’t play in the semi of the winter foursomes blah blah. The receptionist laughed and politely told me to stop wasting her time.

Left with no option I callled the handicap secretary said I couldn’t get the paperwork but surely the letter from the consultant would do. No was the very firm reply but I could scratch from the comp as ‘rules were rules’ it needed to be the official club form and nothing else.

Left with no option. I contacted my consultant who said he could see me in time to sign the form but unfortunately it would have to be a private consultation and it would cost £250. I had no choice I agreed because I couldn’t bring myself to let my mate down, if it were singles I would have just forfeited.

In my mind the fault lies solely with the club. The OP has provided clearly medical evidence in good time via a letter from the neurosurgeon. It's the club saying the official medical exemption form is needed and that if not the outcome was DQ if a buggy was used. I admire the OP for sticking by his PP and to my mind the club are in error for insisting rules are rules and the right bit of paper has to be singed and in the secretary's had by close of business on Friday. That then put all the onus on the OP to again get a signature (at huge cost) when to all intent and purpose the club already had that. I simply think the club put up barriers and were instransigent especially as the opposition had voiced no concerns as well.

Sorry but for me one doctors note intended to be read by a second doctor will potentially not be in any kind of format legible for the public to understand and are hardly likely to mention the OPs ability to play golf without a buggy

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Sorry but for me one doctors note intended to be read by a second doctor will potentially not be in any kind of format legible for the public to understand and are hardly likely to mention the OPs ability to play golf without a buggy

But it surely outlines the medical condition and therefore joined up thinking would suggest a buggy would be required. Its not like he's just decided to get a buggy on the spur of the moment. Not sure what the format and public ability to understand does for the argument. As long as the original document ascertained a condition needing a buggy, and that the club have now said "we'll take your word and your integrity" it all seems an unneeded storm in a teacup. Clearly you disagree and I respect that but I simply felt this could have been handled so much better by the club and nipped in the bud

 

[Slab]

But it surely outlines the medical condition and therefore joined up thinking would suggest a buggy would be required. Its not like he's just decided to get a buggy on the spur of the moment. Not sure what the format and public ability to understand does for the argument. As long as the original document ascertained a condition needing a buggy, and that the club have now said "we'll take your word and your integrity" it all seems an unneeded storm in a teacup. Clearly you disagree and I respect that but I simply felt this could have been handled so much better by the club and nipped in the bud

It's not the job of handicap secs to trot off and goggle the ailment or condition and then make a judgement call on whether that requires a buggy to play golf

It didn't say anywhere that the consultants notes reference golf in any way

Edit, it said they were consulting notes to update the OPs medical records not his golfing ability

 

[Grant85]

It's not the job of handicap secs to trot off and goggle the ailment or condition and then make a judgement call on whether that requires a buggy to play golf

It didn't say anywhere that the consultants notes reference golf in any way

Edit, it said they were consulting notes to update the OPs medical records not his golfing ability

I completely agree with this.

Rules are there to protect the integrity of competitions. It may seem trivial, but it's a route you could easily go down to soften said rules, without changing them, then that's where some people do take advantage of them.

There is very little prospect of someone determining from a letter from one doctor to another that a person can play golf comfortably but they would need a buggy to do so. Or that playing golf without a buggy would risk them making their condition worse.

The only way is to get them to complete a medical certificate where specific golfing related questions are asked. Or else change the rules to allow buggies for all competitions or at the discretion of the committee.

Also imagine golf was a sport more like football where it was accepted that it was 'part of the game' to try and get one over the referee or the opposition. These rules would of course be much more important and people would be much happier they were followed, rather than relaxed.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

I completely agree with this.

Rules are there to protect the integrity of competitions. It may seem trivial, but it's a route you could easily go down to soften said rules, without changing them, then that's where some people do take advantage of them.

There is very little prospect of someone determining from a letter from one doctor to another that a person can play golf comfortably but they would need a buggy to do so. Or that playing golf without a buggy would risk them making their condition worse.

The only way is to get them to complete a medical certificate where specific golfing related questions are asked. Or else change the rules to allow buggies for all competitions or at the discretion of the committee.

Also imagine golf was a sport more like football where it was accepted that it was 'part of the game' to try and get one over the referee or the opposition. These rules would of course be much more important and people would be much happier they were followed, rather than relaxed.

Sorry but that's the answer of a true jobsworth.

 

[Grant85]

Sorry but that's the answer of a true jobsworth.

Not at all. A jobsworth would be to enforce meaningless rules or protocol that make no difference to the play or competition.

That is clearly not the case here.

 

[Scozzy]

For me this is ridiculous overeach, rules are rules fine but when,in a local club comp,far away from John Paramour and the Euro tour is a neuro doctors letter and acceptance of your opponent not enough to play a club tie? Id be mighty annoyed and looking to go.I have a copy of the original rules and most modern additions, imo since are unnecessary..... I bet they're the sort of guys who watch you tee up 2in in front of marker and wait for you to hit rather than a cough,smirk and a raised eyebrow to give them (and you!) the chance to redress the situ and enjoy your round and each others company rather than 4 hrs of spite...

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Not at all. A jobsworth would be to enforce meaningless rules or protocol that make no difference to the play or competition.

That is clearly not the case here.

What difference does the use of a buggy make?

They may be antisocial but to the average club golfer they offer no real advantage.

 

[Grant85]

What difference does the use of a buggy make?

They may be antisocial but to the average club golfer they offer no real advantage.

They leave you less fatigued than someone who was walking.

Not saying that's the case here at all, but it might be a factor, depending on fitness levels at this time of year.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

And can you provide evidence that this will somehow make a difference to a club golfers standard of play in the Winter Foursomes?

What next? Ban caddies, electric trolleys?

 

[clubchamp98]

What difference does the use of a buggy make?

They may be antisocial but to the average club golfer they offer no real advantage.

I think in winter buggies are a disadvantage ,you never get warm .
It’s bad enough in FLORIDA in the morning when it’s cool.

Think the Club need a better policy like believing the word of their members.
If the opponents had said no then go down the form filling route, but like gentlemen they agreed.
It’s a game at the end of the day and I would not want to look at my winning trophy and say to myself
“ get in , I won that by dening my op the use of a buggy” that’s not golf as I know it!

 

[Dasit]

Everything I hate about club golf in one post


Just absolutely no common sense and stuck in the past

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Everything I hate about club golf in one post


Just absolutely no common sense and stuck in the past

This for me. Even if the letter from the consultant didn't specifically mention golf surely the fact that he'd provided evidence, the opposition were in agreement and the neglible effect a buggy would really have on a handicap golfer. It smacks of an overly officious club stuck in the past. Just by point of view

 

[Deleted member 15344]

To try add a bit of balance to this

I have been in the opposing position when someone has asked to use a buggy because of injury - and because it states clearly in our rules and conditions of competition you must be on the authorised buggy list for permanent use or have a doctors note to use only temp in comps - to ensure all rules were adhered to and fair to all as well consist then they all got the same response, and yes someone was DQ for using a buggy in a Comp when they weren’t on the list and didn’t have a note , that’s the rule of our comps and it’s up to us all to ensure they are consistent to all

 

[clubchamp98]

To try add a bit of balance to this

I have been in the opposing position when someone has asked to use a buggy because of injury - and because it states clearly in our rules and conditions of competition you must be on the authorised buggy list for permanent use or have a doctors note to use only temp in comps - to ensure all rules were adhered to and fair to all as well consist then they all got the same response, and yes someone was DQ for using a buggy in a Comp when they weren’t on the list and didn’t have a note , that’s the rule of our comps and it’s up to us all to ensure they are consistent to all

Yes I see that in a medal comp !
But this was matchplay and opponents had agreed to use.
Just let him play and get the forms done at the earliest appointment in the doctors instead of £250 for consultant .
Just seems unnecessary but rules are rules.
It’s not good if he leaves the club for somewhere else.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Yes I see that in a medal comp !
But this was matchplay and opponents had agreed to use.
Just let him play and get the forms done at the earliest appointment in the doctors instead of £250 for consultant .
Just seems unnecessary but rules are rules.
It’s not good if he leaves the club for somewhere else.

It’s the same rules for all comps and the oppos can agree to ignore the conditions of the competition- if you ignore for one you open yourself up for others , and also what other comps rules should be just ignored or a way around found

Now if the procedure to allow someone to use a buggy is long winded or restricted etc that’s the area to look and change - doesn’t take much for a request to be put in and even through the AGM

 

[Dibby]

This for me. Even if the letter from the consultant didn't specifically mention golf surely the fact that he'd provided evidence, the opposition were in agreement and the neglible effect a buggy would really have on a handicap golfer. It smacks of an overly officious club stuck in the past. Just by point of view

I'm not sure it's that cut and dry. If the consultants letter says he has a herniated disc, what does that mean? Should he play gold at all? If he can play, does it mean he needs a buggy? What if I get a letter from my consulatant saying I have angina, does that qualify me for a buggy or not? What if it is uveitis, or perhaps plantar facitis?

The point being, the secretary isn't a medical professional to decide these matters, it's much better to make it clear cut and say a doctor needs to provide the decision as to whether a buggy is necessary for golf.

This thread reminds me of the parent and child parking one. We only hear one side of the story. If the club were to present their side, it might well sound reasonable too, and then we may discover the truth is somewhere in between and both sides have some reasonable and some unreasonable points.