Forum / Boardroom Changes

[Norman Verona]

GriegM, I'm afraid I no longer have the written opinion of counsel obtained when I did the first bulk buy.

However I do clearly remember that it stated that my status made no difference to my potential liability. The scenario was that a member gets his new jack, jacks up the car and slides underneath. The car slides off the jack and kills the chap under it. His insurers claim against me, the provider of the jack as being liable due to inadequate warnings as to safety.

The point was also made that even if I won the resultant case the costs would bankrupt me.

It matters not if you are really liable, I've seen many taken to court by insurance companies where there was no liability but the "target" paid up as it was cheaper than fighting the case in court.

Anyway, I'm not a lawyer and will leave you all to carry on. If you arrange for a BB and the members contract with the supplier and pay over the money does not mean you will not be sued, rightly or wrongly, if, say, the supplier runs off with the members money.

I've said it, others have said it, why not lets see how it works and go from there.

[markcoopers]

Chaz,

I sometimes think your trying to just have an argument, it would be nice to feel some level of support, and I think the best approach is to see how this actually works then to change if necessary. However I know that the people who comment in this thread have the club at the hearts and this is why people argue the issues with such passion.

Anyone at the committee meeting you would have seen the process that these decisions go through at the final yes/no stage and the many hours of deliberation that goes into this looking at it from all angles.

However in the interests of trying to put the case across let me please answer the questions you pose:

AFAIUI any member can become a trader for a membership fee of £120 they do not have be introduced to trader status via a member organised bulk buy.

They can then offer goods and services.

Am I understanding this correctly?

Yes. I think this is quite clear in my posts ? This will allow many more people to engage on the site to the benefit of all. Larger companies will be encouraged to take the steps from trade member to full sponsor, which we envisage many may want to do for the extra exposure.

If a member wishes to organise a a bulk buy via a company not yet involved with the WSCC he introduces them as a "trader" they pay up £120 for a 12 month membership and run the bulk buy on behalf of the member and then their own bulk buys and services thereafter.

If the committee see it as fit they may allow a trader free trade membership for a limited time to run a bulk buy but only if its a "knockout idea"

Special bulk buys (if allowed by the committee) are subjected to criteria and published by the club (if so does the trader pay the trader membership fee?)

Is this correct?

Yes. Your concerns are noted and have been thrashed through by the committee. There have been issues with previous bulk buys that have been discussed by the committee. In addition there are real and present issues with allowing a free for all on bulk buys. As I have stressed our preferred mechanism isto engage with companies to obtain member discounts. However there are still ways in which bulk buys may continue with little difference. I think if we had had a load of bulk buys this year it would be a major issue. We havent. I get the distinct feeling your picking on one issue, making a big thing out of it.

Mark tells us he has taken a few hours of legal advice on this subject. This must mean that there are valid concerns, and that he was concerned. I would like to see a written copy of that advice,as in my experience legal advice is never black and white, and if it is any good it will take an educated risk to the outcome of any choice or direction. Mark - can you tell us more about this ? (of course it could be that mark was embellishing this point somewhat as that tends to be what happens on these sort of discussions and I think that is what I am being accused of ?)

We also still refuse to let individuals who are not members to adverstis their cars on the WSCC.

Please read the proposals again.

I had hoped that any solution put forward would be all inclusive, stop the issues with commercial posts and benifit the majority of members

Please read the proposals again. This was a driving factor behind trade memberships. Win Win.

Right - hopefully about to get on a damn delayed flight back into the UK now. I'll be back later tonight so we can discuss some more.

Who are you?

Legal advice, I too have lawyers in the office and have asked, but no need, spend 5 min on google it is easy to find. Their is no legal issue that needs to move BB from members concerns to that of the club. If you think there is you have been I'll informed. Not embellishment you cheeky A***, fact. So given that I too was a moderator and a committee member for many a year and never once saw any issues over any bulk buys organised during that time, what purpose is there to change other than to raise £120 or to vet and protest sponsors? I have yet to see an answer, but as deflects tactics go, talking about how has the best lasers is a good one.....get back to the point and change this silly rule.

And if we are in the silly game of saying please read the proposals again, please read my question again.... I want to have the facility as a member to post in the cars for sale or the parts for sale section items that would be Westfield related and of interest. I don't want to post a link, I want to place an advert.

As I have countless times explained the club members should all have a duty of care to ensure that this site becomes the must visit destination fr all things Westfield, and that included newbies looking for cars. The more cars we have the better we are, or is anyone going to argue that we need less westfields for sale on our site and that they should be sold via other websites and means?

Norm, why change it if it does not need changing?

[chazpowerslide]

Chaz,

I sometimes think your trying to just have an argument, it would be nice to feel some level of support, and I think the best approach is to see how this actually works then to change if necessary. However I know that the people who comment in this thread have the club at the hearts and this is why people argue the issues with such passion.

Anyone at the committee meeting you would have seen the process that these decisions go through at the final yes/no stage and the many hours of deliberation that goes into this looking at it from all angles.

However in the interests of trying to put the case across let me please answer the questions you pose:

AFAIUI any member can become a trader for a membership fee of £120 they do not have be introduced to trader status via a member organised bulk buy.

They can then offer goods and services.

Am I understanding this correctly?

Yes. I think this is quite clear in my posts ? This will allow many more people to engage on the site to the benefit of all. Larger companies will be encouraged to take the steps from trade member to full sponsor, which we envisage many may want to do for the extra exposure.

If a member wishes to organise a a bulk buy via a company not yet involved with the WSCC he introduces them as a "trader" they pay up £120 for a 12 month membership and run the bulk buy on behalf of the member and then their own bulk buys and services thereafter.

If the committee see it as fit they may allow a trader free trade membership for a limited time to run a bulk buy but only if its a "knockout idea"

Special bulk buys (if allowed by the committee) are subjected to criteria and published by the club (if so does the trader pay the trader membership fee?)

Is this correct?

Yes. Your concerns are noted and have been thrashed through by the committee. There have been issues with previous bulk buys that have been discussed by the committee. In addition there are real and present issues with allowing a free for all on bulk buys. As I have stressed our preferred mechanism isto engage with companies to obtain member discounts. However there are still ways in which bulk buys may continue with little difference. I think if we had had a load of bulk buys this year it would be a major issue. We havent. I get the distinct feeling your picking on one issue, making a big thing out of it.

Mark tells us he has taken a few hours of legal advice on this subject. This must mean that there are valid concerns, and that he was concerned. I would like to see a written copy of that advice,as in my experience legal advice is never black and white, and if it is any good it will take an educated risk to the outcome of any choice or direction. Mark - can you tell us more about this ? (of course it could be that mark was embellishing this point somewhat as that tends to be what happens on these sort of discussions and I think that is what I am being accused of ?)

We also still refuse to let individuals who are not members to adverstis their cars on the WSCC.

Please read the proposals again.

I had hoped that any solution put forward would be all inclusive, stop the issues with commercial posts and benifit the majority of members

Please read the proposals again. This was a driving factor behind trade memberships. Win Win.

Right - hopefully about to get on a damn delayed flight back into the UK now. I'll be back later tonight so we can discuss some more.

Hi Adrian, I'm not being unsupportive or posting up for the sake of argument.

I hope that from my history with the club and my posting history on the boardrooms that is clear.

I'm trying to clarify things in my own mind as I have not found what has been posted as clear as I'd like.

I have found some of what has been posted by the committee members confusing.

Bearing that in mind others will feel the same way and I have had emails asking me to clarify things.

As one of the Area Organisers I must be clear on my understanding so I can advise if required to do so.

I now understand the first point I have highlighted on the quote above in red in responce to my question.

I'm sorry, it was not clear in your first post and got subsiquently more confusing as the thread developed.

My interpritation of what the committee members had written was that a member wishing to become a trader needed to do a bulk buy started by another member to qualify, hence the concerns I voiced.

In post 77 I said that if it was the way you have conformed it is it would be win win and a good thing.

It should negate the issues we have with commercial posts from members, there was a real need for change in this area.

Thank you for answering the second question.

I'm now clear on this.

I am personally sceptical about the reasons given for the need to change and weather or not this will work in practice as are others are for the reasons previously stated.

However I can see that companies that do sign up will benifit the membership if the deals they offer are good enough.

I hope that this change is positive and does not have the opposite effect of putting off would be bulk buy organisers and the companies they wish to deal with.

I also understood that the links page will feature companies/individulas who wish to do bulk buys on their websites from the links page, I think there will be some innovitive wrangling on this one as people try to publicise what they are doing in an area with little visibility.

I'm certainly not picking on one issue and making a big thing of it Adrian, I want to be clear on the facts and they were not clear.

No it doesn't. It either costs Mickmade 120 quid for *unlimited* numbers of products and offers, or he gets a link as a supplier of bits placed on the links page which we can all point to if anyone askes "Where can I get a Mickmade part?" And of course if Mickmade has some extras or unsold parts he may wish to offer them as a "one off" bulk buy.

OK, so the 120 quid may hurt. Don't pay it. It is NOT compulsory. Do a bulk buy by asking permission.

Having to ask permission of the folks who run this place has never been required before but things change. But it costs nowt and sorts out once and for all permissions, privileges and expectations whilst giving the moderators control and a set of rules by which to make judgements and at the same time preventing what could easily turn in to a free-for-all of traders disguising bulk buys which is pretty simple to do.

Thank you Mark, between yours and Adrian's posts I am now clear.

Chaz, in answer to your first question see the thread and discussion in the AO area, any member can pay £120 and be a trade member. Thus MM or anyone else can upgrade their standard membership to offer goods and services for the benifit of other members.

It was not clear Smoky, not to me or others hence the confusion on the thread.

Do you take your own booze to the pub or do you buy from the bar? it's the members who pay for this club to exist at all. I don't mind paying for a taster. I also don't mind paying for the *very* few exceptional non members who genuinely add value to the membership. But it should not be a free for all for everything all the time. Membership MUST carry significant benefit over non membership. There must be value, perceived or real. I personaly think the new rules offer too much to non members, especially in the For Sale sections, but I don't get a vote on any of that until the AGM where us members have our say if we can be bothered to turn up. DO NOT get me started on that subject!

Mark, I fully agree with you first comment.

Yes, there should be a significant benifit between member and non member.

I think that could be acheived without booting off all forum users after 30 days by allowing then very limited accounts.

We have a wealth of people on here many who have contributed to the club both financially over the years as members and also on the boardrooms it's a shame we'll be loosing that.

TBH I'd never considered product liability when organising a bulk buy. But having an offer from a body offering to remove my risk for free just for the asking is something I WANT, whether I NEED it or not is irrelevant.

Neither did I.

As to how real the risk is entirely down to debate, there is very little to indicate that there is a risk to the organiser or the club.

I fail to see what further protection the club can provide above the Sale Of Goods Act.

Using this and issues with past bulk buys as an excuse for change is disengenious to the membership

Make sperfect sense to me. How soon before the For Sale section ends up being a poor mans Autotrader? What if it was posted on... lets say Pistonheads... that *anyone* can advertise their car for sale for free on the WSCC for as long as they want? OK it seems unlilkely. It's unlikely I'd contract Polio but I still get vaccinated...

As I've said I think the new rules give too much freedom to non members in our For Sale areas.

We can and should let non members put their car up for sale on the WSCC website for one reason alone and that is because it ultimatly benifits the expansion of the club and the membership.

It draws people in to the website and gives choice.

We could quiet easily pre-vet these adverts to stop the "poor man's Autotrader" from happening.

Allowing the freedom in the Ebay links page goes some way to helping.

As some of you may already know my other postings go under the name of M******E. The reason for posting under mhc is that I am still under (censorship or pre moderation) when using that name, otherwise I would post under M******E. The reason the fee of £120 is being introduced is to allow (hobbyist I do like that term) members like myself to sell and advertise products that may be of use to fellow members. This is much more reasonable than the sponsership fee of £600 that I was first asked to pay. I have no problems with the £120 , therefore I will pay it. But I also hope that anyone with a tagline on their postings which is in any shape or form an advert also pays the £120. This will go some way to eash the income problem that this club seems to have. Regarding the queries over the bulk buys, they have always worked in the past to the advantage of the members and I see no reason for that not to continue in its present form. So please do not let the dead hand of regulation and sponser demands halt these schemes. Lets us all not loose sight of the fact that this club exists from its very earlist days to help its members in the pursuit of their love affair with their cars.

On a very different point, how long does life membership last?

MHC I'm glad to hear that you'd pay the £120 to continue to provide the unique service you do to the membership.

In future I think that one committee member should post up the changes and field the questions and comment.

IMHO input from Scott was not helpfull and confused the issue (not just for me either) and that is genuinely not a dig at you Scott.

One message from one committee member is much easier to understand and comment on.

Chaz.

[Norman Verona]

Mark, If only it was as easy as you state.

Nothing to do with a BB but along the same lines. This is a famous case.

A chap was changing his brake pads on his drive. He was struggling to get the pistons back. His next door neighbour comes out, wanders over and offers to help as he's a car mechanic. He fits the brake pads. The following week the owner of the car is killed when his car leaves the road and hits a tree. On examanition the cars rear brake pipes were found to be rusty and one had split, losing all brakes.

The insurer sued the neighbour on the grounds that he worked on the car as a professional he should have checked the rera pipes (remember he only refitted the front pads).

The insurer won the case, the mechanic lost all his possessions including his house.

Still sure no one will sue you if you organise a BB and something goes wrong. However unlikely, and I agree it is very, very unlikely why take the chance. As it happens I did take the chance but all that says is that I'm a headstrong fool. But then again the L7C weren't prepared to make it official as they were scared of any consequences.

[pete g]

so what protection does going through the club give ?. if i did another group buy and they say [ok go ahead] what extra protection do i now have ?.

i dont think i have any more protection at all .

[Norman Verona]

I would say that it's the club taking responsibility. The Lotus 7 Club wouldn't take this responsibility for my bulk buy so I had to take the risk. I clearly remember a committee member saying he wasn't prepared to risk his house (he was wrong on that as the club was a limited company).

Maybe a committee member should answer this.

[Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman]

Maybe a committee member should answer this.

I think the clubs insurance company will have a stance to. I'd assume this had already been considered and checked, be interesting to hear their view.

[chazpowerslide]

so what protection does going through the club give ?. if i did another group buy and they say [ok go ahead] what extra protection do i now have ?.

i dont think i have any more protection at all .

Neither do I.

I would say that it's the club taking responsibility. The Lotus 7 Club wouldn't take this responsibility for my bulk buy so I had to take the risk. I clearly remember a committee member saying he wasn't prepared to risk his house (he was wrong on that as the club was a limited company).

Maybe a committee member should answer this.

Do you think the present committee would risk the club let alone their own houses on a member organised bulk buy?

I think the clubs insurance company will have a stance to. I'd assume this had already been considered and checked, be interesting to hear their view.

So would I

I'd be interested to see exactly what protection the club will offer, how the risk is covered and who ultimately assumes accountability if it all goes **** up.

Assuming that in reality there is any real risk at all.

GriegM, I'm afraid I no longer have the written opinion of counsel obtained when I did the first bulk buy.

However I do clearly remember that it stated that my status made no difference to my potential liability. The scenario was that a member gets his new jack, jacks up the car and slides underneath. The car slides off the jack and kills the chap under it. His insurers claim against me, the provider of the jack as being liable due to inadequate warnings as to safety.

The point was also made that even if I won the resultant case the costs would bankrupt me.

It matters not if you are really liable, I've seen many taken to court by insurance companies where there was no liability but the "target" paid up as it was cheaper than fighting the case in court.

Anyway, I'm not a lawyer and will leave you all to carry on. If you arrange for a BB and the members contract with the supplier and pay over the money does not mean you will not be sued, rightly or wrongly, if, say, the supplier runs off with the members money.

I've said it, others have said it, why not lets see how it works and go from there.

Yours was a different circumstance was it not?

You took the money from the participants and therefore the contract of sale was with you.

We are talking about a bulk buy organised by a member where the participants pay the company.

The contract of sale is different.

I cannot see how the BB organiser/club could be held liable.

Mark, If only it was as easy as you state.

Nothing to do with a BB but along the same lines. This is a famous case.

A chap was changing his brake pads on his drive. He was struggling to get the pistons back. His next door neighbour comes out, wanders over and offers to help as he's a car mechanic. He fits the brake pads. The following week the owner of the car is killed when his car leaves the road and hits a tree. On examanition the cars rear brake pipes were found to be rusty and one had split, losing all brakes.

The insurer sued the neighbour on the grounds that he worked on the car as a professional he should have checked the rera pipes (remember he only refitted the front pads).

The insurer won the case, the mechanic lost all his possessions including his house.

Still sure no one will sue you if you organise a BB and something goes wrong. However unlikely, and I agree it is very, very unlikely why take the chance. As it happens I did take the chance but all that says is that I'm a headstrong fool. But then again the L7C weren't prepared to make it official as they were scared of any consequences.

Completly different case Norm and not relavent to the discussion on the bulk buys we are talking about.

You are looking at apples and talking about oranges IMHO.

Chaz.

[Norman Verona]

I said it wasn't a BB. But you could end up in similar circumstances if yo organise something and, even though you don't do the "selling" it goes wrong and someone wants compensation.

Say, that did happen. Are you insured? Will you be willing to take that risk. Even if you have no responsibility it doesn't stop someone taking you to court for compensation.

I've said enough. You'll do as you see fit.

[markcoopers]

Norm, I would love to to the transcript of that case as I could drive a lorry through it legally as you state it.....urban myth.

Norm your bulk buys I think involved you importing goods from china and then distributing as the manufacture had none. Essentialy you were the importer of record and thus had to satisfy EU law on product liability and with it the guarantees states in the sale and conditions of goods act. I suspect this is why you had the legal advice you had. It simply is not connected to a chap in the uk asking "X" wheel maker for a discount if he can get 10 orders... Or Member lead Bulk Buy as we used to call them. So your "Could" is not relevant and as such would ask that you stick to the factual points made and not offer confusing conjecture around asking if you're covered....you are.

Anyhow back to the main points.

Can we allow member bulk buys like we used to please and can members sell in parts for sale and cars for sale non members stuff?

[Luapno]

What does the £120 give me then if I am organising a bulk buy? by inference the Club is underwriting/endorsing the validity/quality of the products I have for sale, as I can see there is no other benefit.

If there is no benefit to me as a seller or the people buying my products why charge £120 ?

It doesn't make any sense to me, but then again not a lot does these days

[GreigM]

However, I would respectively suggest you're not giving this a chance. All you need do is send something like this to the committee (I trust there will be a nominated person dealing with this)

"I have negotiated a price for polished ali cam covers for Duratecs/Zetecs with Mikes Engineering Company. They will make these for £120 each. They need a minimum of 10 orders. Members will pay directly. Can this be approved outside the Trade Members scheme. Thank you"

Firstly you should have an answer within 24 hours. If it's in the affirmative (as I would expect the above scenario to be) then you've had to spend 30 seconds and wait up to 24 hours for a go ahead. Hardly show stopping. However, if the response is in the negative I would hope a full explanation would be forthcoming. For example:

"Mark, sorry we can't approve this BB as Johns Castings Ltd will do same for £72 and need no minimum orders"

Just to bring some clarity to the discussion - I find this statement slightly (and others) slightly misleading as to WHO is applying for the temporary trade membership.

It looks like Norman is suggesting the WSCC member is contacting the committee asking for the temporary Trade Membership. From my reading this would not be correct, the member is to encourage the seller to apply for a Trade Membership, and the trade membership will be applied to the seller and the member's status will not be changed.

If the trade membership were to be applied to an individual member who wasn't a legal trader this could be very very bad for both the WSCC and the member involved. Can someone confirm this is NOT the case?

[Norman Verona]

The Webmaster said:

I do think however that, if a member comes up with a knockout suggestion for a supplier offering a bulk discount, we could (by committee dispensation) offer the supplier an exceptional three/four months' free trade membership in order to be able to make the offer. That would keep the direct customer/supplier relationship, and would be automatically pre-moderated.

I read this as, in practice, as I've described.

So, if the VX front cover manufacturing BB came up in the future, it would run as it is now but with Club authorisation with the supplier being given Trade Member Status for a limited period.

If I'm wrong then I apologise in advance but I fail to see how else this type of BB can run.

The Trade Membership will not, for the most part, be BB's as we know them. I see it being an opportunity for the main suppliers to make periodical offers. Maybe monthly. The difference is who's doing the selling and who's buying.

[Mark (smokey mow)]

The Trade Membership will not, for the most part, be BB's as we know them. I see it being an opportunity for the main suppliers to make periodical offers. Maybe monthly. The difference is who's doing the selling and who's buying.

This is very much how it operates on a couple of other forums I frequent.

As an example one of the traders on those forums is a vehicle breaker who will periodically posts when they have a new car in, or some rare/interesting parts that would be tempting to the members. I recently bought a rare diff off one of these forum traders as a result of their trade advert. If they were not on the forum then I would have been at the mercy of ebay to try and source one.

Other examples are small motorsports companies that offer vehicle set-up and alignment, specialist retailers and members who are "weekend" traders in their free time.

The big advantage of the the Trader status is that it gives all these diverse companies a platform to reach their target customers, freely advertise and offer parts and services without falling foul of the that clubs advertising rules.

[Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman]

Indeed, and the trade membership is a great step forward.

to continue Norman's example though; in practice, I actually fail to see how the recent cam belt infill buy could run at all.

if as stated, the idea with BB's is to protect the club and members, surely this includes some kind of legal protection or its pointless? (We're back to enforcing everything being sold by a commercial business venture).

yet how could the clubs insurers possibly take on the risk attached to the infill? It's a design (I think originally from a major engine tuners that they've let Paul have?) that Paul supplied to a CNC specialist, so they'll claim they're working to his design, it was then anodised by yet another company. There isn't a single company that you can point your finger at if one some how took out an engine. Only Paul, and now the club, cause some how it's legitimised the product.

I'm not for one moment by the way suggesting there are or will be any issues whatsoever with the infill!