What is a fair suspension ?

[bobmac]

Why not get revenge by letting the presidents tyres down in the car park, it will save you a fortune.
Seriously though...
If this goes to court and you lose, will you have to pay their fees too?
At the end, what do you want to happen?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

You are taking the club to court and are also hoping that your suspension will be lifted? Have you informed the club that this is the route you are taking? If so, then are you really expecting to be back there any time soon?

If he’s paying subscriptions and the 3 month ban is complete, why shouldn’t he expect to be able to play?

 

[Slab]

Why are so many people on here blowing smoke up the backside of the "president". They're just a person at a golf club not someone to be in awe of in any shape or form.

Can't wait to come in from work tonight to pick up on the latest twists and drama's of GM SuspensionGate!!!!

I think the opposite, some posters have hung El Presidente out to dry based only on one side of the events. it needs a little perspective for balance. The President could be at fault but it could equally be the OP

There are posts saying 'if the OP version is true then blah blah power hungry blah blah too severe etc... but not many offer up the flip side of what if its the OP at fault

 

[Siolag]

If he’s paying subscriptions and the 3 month ban is complete, why shouldn’t he expect to be able to play?

Because the club might very well decide he’s not worth the trouble and give him a further ban.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Because the club might very well decide he’s not worth the trouble and give him a further ban.

On what grounds? Isn’t he already taking them to court for not following correct procedures?

And ask him to keep paying

 

[Neil Grice]

Because the club might very well decide he’s not worth the trouble and give him a further ban.

May i ask on what grounds? The case i have has what is termed legal merit i.e i have a case, I am not prepared to ignore injustice or unfair tactics just to get back to playing golf. That cannot be right

 

[Jacko_G]

I think the opposite, some posters have hung El Presidente out to dry based only on one side of the events. it needs a little perspective for balance. The President could be at fault but it could equally be the OP

There are posts saying 'if the OP version is true then blah blah power hungry blah blah too severe etc... but not many offer up the flip side of what if its the OP at fault

Again perhaps you are correct but they're only a figurehead at a GC not a God.

 

[Siolag]

May i ask on what grounds? The case i have has what is termed legal merit i.e i have a case, I am not prepared to ignore injustice or unfair tactics just to get back to playing golf. That cannot be right

Aren’t there other members of your club on here? Has your club got a social media policy? Are you totally in line with that?

Have you paid all of your fees?

If, as you say, it’s got vindictive, they might well turn round and say that they just simply don’t want you as a member any more, and I’m not really sure what you could do about that save for adding it to the court case.

 

[GB72]

I am interested in what can be gained from the legal action. If the club is incorporated then it is a separate legal entity from the members and so any legal advice obtained is privileged and you have no entitlement to see the same. If the club is unincorporated, it is not a legal entity and so you can only only take action against the individual members. If you have commenced legal action against the club as you state then the club has to be a legal entity separate from the members and you have no entitlement to see privileged advice obtained by that entity.

With regards the payments lockdown, a simple small claims matter.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Aren’t there other members of your club on here? Has your club got a social media policy? Are you totally in line with that?

Have you paid all of your fees?

If, as you say, it’s got vindictive, they might well turn round and say that they just simply don’t want you as a member any more, and I’m not really sure what you could do about that save for adding it to the court case.

So you are basically suggesting he’s a troublemaker and best for them if they just find a way to get rid of him and make this all go away!

I have no idea if he is telling the truth or not or if he’ll win his case or not, but it’s his money he’s risking and he (or anyone) shouldn’t be expected to be badly treated (in their eyes) and simply go away and allow themselves to be trodden on.

 

[Canary_Yellow]

I must say, although I understand the OP has a valid point of principle here in relation to how the club has been run (based on his version), I don't really see why it's worth spending £000s on.

Having soaked all the information in, there are a few things that don't really make sense:

1. If a few hundred quid during lockdown are so important to the OP, why then are the £000s litigation will cost worth it?
2. Does a lack of transparency over the way the committee have made a decision really matter? They have been elected by the members to make decisions on behalf of the membership. A club would not work if every member got a say on every decision. Is the OPs suggestion that they are not acting in the interests of the club (i.e. the members)?
3. If the club isn't being run at a profit, how does the OP expect the club to recoup the losses from members not paying during the lockdown? Would the OP prefer a reduction in quality of the golf offering, more visitors clogging up the course, or higher fees in the future?

Pride can manifest itself in ugly ways - does the OPs lawyer really believe there is a valid case here? I suspect the OP probably does have a reasonable point of principle in relation to the way the committee has made decisions, but I think he can no longer see the wood from the trees on what really matters here. The committee should be held to account, but a member taking the club to court over something that seems to me relatively trivial in the grand scheme of what has happened to the world in 2020 is nuts; is this just a personal vendetta that's got out of hand?

 

[Bunkermagnet]

If it’s a private members club, I can easily see the OP not being asked to renew his membership at the next renewal time.
As for the whys and wherefores , I reserve judgement suffice to say that as a member of a private members club I wouldn’t be too pleased with another member posting about my club on a public forum and taking legal action over something some may perceive as trivial in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Swango1980]

I am interested in what can be gained from the legal action. If the club is incorporated then it is a separate legal entity from the members and so any legal advice obtained is privileged and you have no entitlement to see the same. If the club is unincorporated, it is not a legal entity and so you can only only take action against the individual members. If you have commenced legal action against the club as you state then the club has to be a legal entity separate from the members and you have no entitlement to see privileged advice obtained by that entity.

With regards the payments lockdown, a simple small claims matter.

Interesting points. I have no legal experience, but I did wonder what would happen if individual members kept demanding to see certain types of paperwork the Committee were in possession of. Surely members simply elect a Committee to take responsibility for that, and if they don't trust them, then ultimately they can hopefully vote for a different Committee.

I pay a Sky subscription. Very expensive (double by golf membership over the year). But, I doubt I can call Sky and demand to see every legal document they are in possession off to ensure my payments are fair.

It is in the interest of the Committee to provide clarity to members. That doesn't necessarily mean every individual member will be happy with that, and sadly sometimes their reactions can be fairly extreme.

I'm assuming that when it comes to membership renewal, then I'd be shocked if the OP would join again with all this going on. But, if he does, I'm sure the Club has the right to not accept someone as a member, albeit not sure where that leaves them on the grounds of discrimination? If they do not have to accept the OP's new membership, then I can't see they will.

It seems like a complete mess, caused by a huge case of stubbornness.

 

[Neil Grice]

I am interested in what can be gained from the legal action. If the club is incorporated then it is a separate legal entity from the members and so any legal advice obtained is privileged and you have no entitlement to see the same. If the club is unincorporated, it is not a legal entity and so you can only only take action against the individual members. If you have commenced legal action against the club as you state then the club has to be a legal entity separate from the members and you have no entitlement to see privileged advice obtained by that entity.

With regards the payments lockdown, a simple small claims matter.

Good question. Another issue we have is club is both. A limited company and an unincorporated club. This isn't really feasible and certainly not advisable. We asked 4 weeks ago what entity we should focus on. We don't as yet have an answer. Club ( via captain) already admitted they have known for some time the constitution is not fit for purpose but they never got around to changing it. Not sure at the moment if i am having to sue the members (all 1200 of them) or the directors of the company which is 7 and in my view the main personalities behind this dispute. I most certainly don't want to drag the members in unless forced to by circumstances beyond our control.

 

[Siolag]

So you are basically suggesting he’s a troublemaker and best for them if they just find a way to get rid of him and make this all go away!

I have no idea if he is telling the truth or not or if he’ll win his case or not, but it’s his money he’s risking and he (or anyone) shouldn’t be expected to be badly treated (in their eyes) and simply go away and allow themselves to be trodden on.

I’m not saying what I would do if I was on this club committee, what the right thing to do is, or what would happen at most clubs. I’m saying that if the relationship has gotten that bad, that the club could easily not offer renewal to him, and other than adding that to the court case there’s probably not much he can do about that.

There’s a good chance he will win if this gets to court, as a skilled lawyer will probably find something that the club has done wrong due to the fact it’s likely to be volunteers trying to work within a constitution.

Given that this is unlikely to be only known to a few members, the membership might be split between people who agree with him (and may or may not say) or didn’t mind paying fees through the lockdown. If he could find enough of the former to force an EGM then that would be a potential route that would be within the rules of the club, but not as severe as taking the club to court. We also don’t know the financial situation of the club, if it really needed the cash during lockdown, then this court case could wind up very serious indeed if they lose.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Interesting points. I have no legal experience, but I did wonder what would happen if individual members kept demanding to see certain types of paperwork the Committee were in possession of. Surely members simply elect a Committee to take responsibility for that, and if they don't trust them, then ultimately they can hopefully vote for a different Committee.

I pay a Sky subscription. Very expensive (double by golf membership over the year). But, I doubt I can call Sky and demand to see every legal document they are in possession off to ensure my payments are fair.

It is in the interest of the Committee to provide clarity to members. That doesn't necessarily mean every individual member will be happy with that, and sadly sometimes their reactions can be fairly extreme.

I'm assuming that when it comes to membership renewal, then I'd be shocked if the OP would join again with all this going on. But, if he does, I'm sure the Club has the right to not accept someone as a member, albeit not sure where that leaves them on the grounds of discrimination? If they do not have to accept the OP's new membership, then I can't see they will.

It seems like a complete mess, caused by a huge case of stubbornness.

Depends on the “Club” all our members are shareholders and is written in the constitution that we can request in writing any paperwork relating to Club business, obviously you have to give reasons etc.

If Sky decided to block your Sky box for 3 months would you keep paying?

Not sure equating Sky to a Golf Club is a good analogy.

 

[Slab]

Again perhaps you are correct but they're only a figurehead at a GC not a God.

Correct but whether they were office bearers or not I wouldn't insult my PP's with colourful language (I guess we can just say swearing now) call them liars and expect them to do nothing about it, there's gonna be repercussions

I've said already that the email thread between them will show 'who started it' and how much blame to apportion to each side, and whether the correct process was followed etc so its a simple matter

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I’m not saying what I would do if I was on this club committee, what the right thing to do is, or what would happen at most clubs. I’m saying that if the relationship has gotten that bad, that the club could easily not offer renewal to him, and other than adding that to the court case there’s probably not much he can do about that.

There’s a good chance he will win if this gets to court, as a skilled lawyer will probably find something that the club has done wrong due to the fact it’s likely to be volunteers trying to work within a constitution.

Given that this is unlikely to be only known to a few members, the membership might be split between people who agree with him (and may or may not say) or didn’t mind paying fees through the lockdown. If he could find enough of the former to force an EGM then that would be a potential route that would be within the rules of the club, but not as severe as taking the club to court. We also don’t know the financial situation of the club, if it really needed the cash during lockdown, then this court case could wind up very serious indeed if they lose.

That’s not what you said mate, you said a “further ban” not stop him renewing. Post #214.

 

[Siolag]

That’s not what you said mate, you said a “further ban” not stop him renewing. Post #214.

Yep, my error, that’s what I meant really. Typing when doing something else not the best.

The post about the constitution “not being fit for purpose” could be the key here. I feel he has a good chance of winning, but it may be something of a Pyrrhic victory.

 

[Swango1980]

Depends on the “Club” all our members are shareholders and is written in the constitution that we can request in writing any paperwork relating to Club business, obviously you have to give reasons etc.

If Sky decided to block your Sky box for 3 months would you keep paying?

Not sure equating Sky to a Golf Club is a good analogy.

May not be a perfect analogy, but a big part of the reason he is taking club to court is he wasn't able to see their legal documents. The ban of 3 months and paying subscription is just a further element. Not sure where club stand on that. But, presumable Clubs can ban players under extreme circumstances. If that member had already paid their annual fee, I doubt they have a right to get some sort of refund from the club.

Of course, whether the club were right or wrong in that judgement is difficult to know, as we do not really have a detailed description of what exactly has gone on. I'd have thought that if the Club were completely out of order, then the Committee between them would have tried to calm the situation down by now to avoid going to court. It doesn't seem that this is happening, so it may be the Committee are fairly confident (or maybe stubborn as well) with their case.