Proposed Sale of BRITANNIA RESCUE

[morganf4]

Is anyone else worried about this sale? I’ve no idea as to whether the sale makes financial sense, although I am unhappy about the general cut back on CSMA activities/services.

From a classic car owners point of view I have a concern. I have only once had to call on BR for help, when the head gasket went on my Mini mark 1 traveller. The mechanic had great difficulty in attaching the car to his vehicle using the frame that lifts the front wheels off the ground to tow it home. The wheels were too small and too close together and the car was too short and too near the ground for the frame to rise very far off the ground. He was unhappy with the situation, but felt, as we hadn’t got far to go, he would just drive slowly. On the way back we discussed the problem and the mechanic said a flat bed often has to be sent for low sports cars. He also said some rescue services would no longer take older cars.

The only guarantees that Liverpool Victoria seem to be giving are on price not service.

Perhaps in the longer term we’ll have to put up with a lesser service, from another provider, as part of our insurance cover. Unfortunately LV won’t insure all my classics.

[heaps]

I too have concerns regarding this sale, I have had excellent service in the past and like you run a very low car, 1965 Singer Chamois built for sprints/hillclimbs along with several other classics. I have tried most other providers in the past and am more than happy to stay with Britannia but as you imply price isnt everything, service is.
I miss that additional classic car orientated magazine and as modern cars don't do much for me apart from getting from A to B, I tend to read little of the main magazine.
I only discovered this forum by chance and i'm sure it would be used more if it was given some space in the magazine.
Well thats my 5p's worth
Colin

[rowancott]

Just to say that I know of someone who is going to the CSMA EGM and is planning to vote NO and willing to be a proxy. So, if you still have your proxy voting cards and want to vote NO send me a private message and I'll give you his details for the form.

Cheers

Alan Giles

[rowancott]

Having been away for a long weekend, I have come back to a report of the EGM from the proxy who expressed some of our views as follows:

It's very late and a long day, but suffice it to say that at one (early) point of the meeting a motion from the floor to have the whole EGM thrown out in favour of a full postal ballot, which I spoke in support of, was only defeated on a straight show of hands by 93 to 94 votes against!

That's how close it got. Sadly, after that the 1000's of proxy votes the Board had in their back pockets came into play...they kept quiet about that and talked about a "full debate" until they had to show their hand (having known all the time the result was a foregone conclusion.)

I don't think the Chairman will forget me though...

He was "kind" enough to tell me that I had personally offended him when I told him and the meeting that they had overstepped the limits of Directors' authority by taking their own decision to run a period of "exclusivity" to negotiate with LVic rather than hold an open auction. I said that not only should they be ashamed of that, but that they should resign or be sacked for overstepping their authority.

I have to tell you all that my response to his expression of upset was a one word "Good!" response.

On a lighter note, I'm pleased to report that the NEDs on the platform did prove to be alive rather than dead since they all got up at the end of the meeting - I was unsure for a while since they sat mute and immobile for the whole pantomine.

The voting went as follows:

1) Motion from the floor to abandon the EGM and go to a full postal ballot of all the members:

(by show of hands) For: 93 Against: 94

2) My move to make this a poll as it was so close (individual votes without proxies):

For: 64 Against: 78

3) Their legal advice that as more than 5 people had voted "For" 2) above, they needed to do a proxy vote on this:

For: 102 Against: 8269

At this point it becomes clear that the whole EGM is a foregone conclusion as we now know how many proxies the Board and Board supporters hold.

4) Final vote at the end on the EGM motion to proceed with the sale:

For: 9628 Against: 45

Bear in mind that by the end several people had drifted away from the meeting anyway - obviously it had run on and the result was as we know already settled.

I for one have expressed my thanks to "phalanx" for being at the meeting and expressing our disquiet at the nature and method of the sale. Only time will show us what heppens next and if my prediction that this will lead to the demise of the CSMA will prove to be the case.

Best wishes to all, Alan Giles