Nnwrf Members Meeting

[rodders]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

Quote"""" meant to add at the end,'or what was the point of attending the meeting'
Well after the previous few years no point whatsoever as there will be a EGM within the next two or  three months called by someone who probably was not even there  because something that was decided does not please them--

steve--

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

:lol: Dont say we've got to go through it all again :wacko:

 

[ahorsnall]

why have meetings ? if if you disagree with what was voted on then complain after ?its like saying we just keep bringing it up to you get what you want?ALL CANT GET WHAT THEY WANT ALL THE TIME.so if you go to the meetings you have one vote each so majority rules thats our it should be sorry :thumbsup:

 

[tanyia]

Quote"""" meant to add at the end,'or what was the point of attending the meeting'
Well after the previous few years no point whatsoever as there will be a EGM within the next two or  three months called by someone who probably was not even there  because something that was decided does not please them--

steve--

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

:lol: Dont say we've got to go through it all again :wacko:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Wound,nt think so the NNWRF have gone by the book so no need

 

[mutley]

shtum

 

[foster]

I was disappointed, but not suprised, at the conduct of the two meetings on sunday.
The NNWRF spokesperson did say that the NNWRF committee were looking for a life time ban even though the membership they had already canvassed had indicated a lesser ban was appropiate. Whilst it's perhaps understandable that the committee are angry with their ex committeee members because of the problems they have caused for them it would appear the committee have influenced the vote, and I'm not at all sure the majority of NNWRF members would agree this descision. Using hearsay evidence of previous misdeeds by the Bellwoods without a scrap of proof to give extra weight to the committeees desire for a life time ban only proves justice by kangaroo court.While I think it's totaly reasonable for the Bellwoods to be punished a life ban is excessive IMO. I can't help feel the Bellwoods have been made a scapegoat.

I'm not at all sure the BWRA ban is constitutional. It would be far more appropiate that such a serious punishment be decided by a postal vote. There's no evidence that the AGM was representative of the entire membership but it was obvious given the prevoius NNWRF vote which way any vote ( in which the BWRA chairman spoke against the Bellwoods) would go. It seems odd to me a vote to ban the Bellwoods was allowed yet proposals to ban others were apparently ignored. A sub text for using a ban of the Bellwoods to force a ban for others who have stolen from the NWRF seemed to be going on.

Another unjust lifetime ban in the history of the BWRA. Those involved should be ashamed of themselves especially considering the skeletons some of the more vocal proponents have in their cupboards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

1/ i have to agree with what said here, i would say that not only this matter should not have been allowed to have a hearing at the bwra A.G.M but the only reason for it was to yet again bring up and try to ban other member's, and it costed the Bellwoods a life ban,

2/ could someone tell me what B.W.R.A rule the bellwoods broke that got them a life ban, the chairman should never allowed this to happen and any vote taken should go out to all the members, people were asking on k9 before this agm if proposal and voting would take place and was told NO i would think thats why members did'nt attened and any committee up for election should be put out to all members not the few who could attened the agm its a members run organization that mean's ALL MEMBERS NOT JUST THE ONE'S LUCKY ENOUGH TO ATTEND

3/ the committee/s keep going on about being sued with regard the drug testing and opened a can of worms banning two members from the bwra when they have done nothing wrong in that organization, if the Bellwoods sort legal proceedings against the bwra members and committee and could win, i hope that the committee noted the members who voted for a ban, and don't want help from the members who voted against the ban and not forgetting the members who did'nt have the right to there vote, but could be involved in legal proceeding as they are part of a members run organization

 

[Paws123]

oh look a new name typical (w00t)

gaz

 

[thesonofpork]

wasnt there thank god!! but herd what went on, think the outcome was a bit harsh, found out that 2 people went up for treasurer and it was voted on on the day which i think is unbelieavable as every member should have a say and not the few that could make it. and why every year does the same thing keep getting brought up???? whatever has happened has gone nobody can change it just should be let be now. it keeps getting boring. everyone under different names as they dont have balls big enough to do it under there own!!! i have done it in fun not to get at people, we all no who the culprits are 9 times out of 10,. usually its me lol.

have spoken about both meetings not just one

 

[Karen-Coral]

IMHO-

After whats happened- Any self respecting person/people would have banned themselves from the sport and not waited for a meeting to decide the outcome.

A simple letter to the Fed/BWRA of their intentions/self ban would have sufficed and stopped a lot of gossip/speculation leading up to this meeting.

The committees then would only have had to ok/file it-end of.

Karen B.

 

[ahorsnall]

IMHO-
After whats happened- Any self respecting person/people would have banned themselves from the sport and not waited for a meeting to decide the outcome.

A simple letter to the Fed/BWRA of their intentions/self ban would have sufficed and stopped a lot of gossip/speculation leading up to this meeting.

The committees then would only have had to ok/file it-end of.

Karen B.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

couldnt agree more :thumbsup:

 

[weathergirls]

firstly I would like to make it clear the NNWRF committee did NOT at any time ask the BWRA to take any action whatsoever against the Bellwoods one of the reasons for this was the BWRA committee's (of the day) refusal to back the NNWRF during the ongoing Weatherson / Ragnoli situation. The NNWRF committee will never ask the BWRA to deal with any problem that arises within this organisation, for one thing both organisations run under different rules and constitution, We the NNWRF committee also would not take action against a member because they had broken a BWRA rule, after all if a person gets sacked from their job it doesn't mean they can never get another

The action taken against the Bellwoods by the BWRA was asked for by a BWRA member at a BWRA AGM and has nothing to do with the NNWRF, however myself being a BWRA member and rep as well as being NNWRF chairman did speak on behalf of the NNWRF when this proposal was put forward stating

" WHILST THE BELLWOODS HAD DONE WRONG THEY HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE NNWRF COMMITTEE AND MEMBERS POSSIBLY MORE SEVERELY BECAUSE THEY WERE COMMITTEE MEMBERS THE NNWRF COMMITTEE ARE NOT ASKING THE BWRA TO TAKE ANY ACTION AGAINST THEM IT WOULD BE UNFAIR OF THEM TO DO SO WHEN BWRA MEMBERS HAVE BEEN RACING ALONGSIDE TWO MEMBERS WHO HAVE COST THE NNWRF A LOT MORE "

The only other imput from the NNWRF at this BWRA meeting was to suggest both organisations work together and have a drug testing programme to cover all

The Bellwoods should have the right to appeal to the BWRA that is their basic human right I hope they take it up

BACK ON TOPIC

This topic started as a report from the NNWRF MEMBERS MEETING Dee has spent the last few weeks contacting NNWRF members that we knew would not be able to attend, because of the feedback that was coming through many discussions between the committee have taken place on how we approach and deal with this difficult situation it was agreed that we stand together and put forward to the members the reccomendation for a lifetime ban members were informed of this and our reasons for it any input from the members would be listened to and discussed and any further proposals from the members would lead to a vote, which was done

The meeting was orderley and any one who wanted to speak did so anyone who did not for some reason want to speak at that time now appear to want to do so behind their computer screens well sorry BUT THAT IS NOT THE WAY IT'S DONE

 

[Karen-Coral]

IMHO-
After whats happened- Any self respecting person/people would have banned themselves from the sport and not waited for a meeting to decide the outcome.

A simple letter to the Fed/BWRA of their intentions/self ban would have sufficed and stopped a lot of gossip/speculation leading up to this meeting.

The committees then would only have had to ok/file it-end of.

Karen B.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

couldnt agree more :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I also agree with Karen on this subject ---just for a change!!!!

What is the most important bit has been missed that being the FRAUD part ----- the serious aspect -----the couple in question could quite easily have been inside for Christmas never mind a life time ban ---

any person who will rob persons less well off than themselves /will cheat with any rules in the book/be it /weighing dogs /drugs/picking what they run with/ seeding of dogs / the list is endless -----and i for one want to see fair play for all---

they are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not a good roll model to represent our sport---

Having said all that ----there are worse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!not many thank God!!!!

Steve

 

[rob67]

IMO anyone that was at either of the meetings had an opportunity to comment on any of the issues discussed, there was a break in the BWRA meeting where I'm sure anyone could have approached any of the committee and voiced their concern's. Anyone that wasn't at the meetings had ample opportunity to contact any of the committee member's also with their concern's or thoughts.

As far as I am aware, any meeting called for within any organisation will not have 100% of it's member's there, I am also sure that no organisation will ballot every member on every decision and change.

Anyone with half a brain could forsee that the Bruce and Di situation would crop up in the BWRA meeting, if you had an opinion on it and you weren't there then perhaps it would have been wise to speak to your regional reps and have them pass on your comments.

The fed committee have handled a difficult situation within their own organisation and handled it well, the final decision was held with a majority vote...............no different to other organisations. The talk about court action against people is in my opinion ridiculous as we all know it reqiores monetary funds to do this.............something that seemed to be in short supply in some households.

Lets get on with racing our dogs.

 

[rob67]

Forgot to say it's me not Rob

chris

 

[Karen-Coral]

Actually- Court action is not ridiculous nor ruled out-as in such cases 'the bank' themselves may choose to take further action....Its their prerogative and this could well be out of the committees hands.

Karen

 

[rob67]

Didn't mean that court action against the Bellwoods was ridiculous, more their court action against anyone that might ban them,was related to this comment......................

if the Bellwoods sort legal proceedings against the bwra members and committee and could win, i hope that the committee noted the members who voted for a ban, and don't want help from the members who voted against the ban and not forgetting the members who did'nt have the right to there vote, but could be involved in legal proceeding as they are part of a members run organization

(quoted from Foster)
hope that clears it up

chris

 

[Karen-Coral]

:thumbsup:

 

[Scillonian]

As an Ex-Racer IMO the NNWRF have handled this situation extremely well. What some members are failing to understand is that the Bellwoods have committed "a Criminal Act" by fruadulently/stealing monies from the Members. As Steve or Karen has already stated that if the Bellwoods had any decency they would have immediately resigned as members from both Organisations. I cannot foresee that either of them could show their face in the whippet racing without feeling very embarrassed the way they have stolen monies from the Members.

All I can say they are very fortunate they were not reported directly to the Police and prosecuted under the Theft Act and this would then mean they would have a Criminal record, which I'm sure they do not wish to have. The top and botton line here is they have been completely dishonest when put into a position of trust and this is the way the members have been repaid. :rant:

The Bellwoods may not be "out of the woods" yet because the Banks may have a completely different view and may take their own legal action.

As the old saying goes "Honesty IS the best Policy" Joan Hemmings (R.Ch. Saxon Tiger)

 

[tanyia]

IMHO-
After whats happened- Any self respecting person/people would have banned themselves from the sport and not waited for a meeting to decide the outcome.

A simple letter to the Fed/BWRA of their intentions/self ban would have sufficed and stopped a lot of gossip/speculation leading up to this meeting.

The committees then would only have had to ok/file it-end of.

Karen B.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

couldnt agree more :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I also agree with Karen on this subject ---just for a change!!!!

What is the most important bit has been missed that being the FRAUD part ----- the serious aspect -----the couple in question could quite easily have been inside for Christmas never mind a life time ban ---

any person who will rob persons less well off than themselves /will cheat with any rules in the book/be it /weighing dogs /drugs/picking what they run with/ seeding of dogs / the list is endless -----and i for one want to see fair play for all---

they are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not a good roll model to represent our sport---

Having said all that ----there are worse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!not many thank God!!!!

Steve

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

After being more fully informed as we were not able to go to the meeting I agree. We can not have such dishonest people in the sport. I cant see how thay could ever face fellow racers again.

 

[foster]

hi my name is frank,

i have raced some years now and love the sport. I try to keep up with what's happening and have raced with all party involved and got on well with all, i will not say anymore about myself, this topic is not about me,

1/ why have both Bellwoods been banned for life ?? only 1 was treasurer and able to BORROW the members money ??

2/ why did the nnwrf not notify the police and let them take action, that would be a real deterrent for anyone put in a position of trust, from borrowing money without asking.

and the rest of the membership could get on with what they want to do RACE DOGS

3/ The other two who keep coming up in every topic: " some can bring them into "

Did i hear right ?? that all party's ie the nnwrf and the ( other two ) went to mediation a settlement agreement was made in the county court ?? SO WHY ARE WE STILL HEARING ABOUT THIS.

if one of the party's fault on this settlement agreement take them back to court AND WIN

WE THE MEMBERS should NOT have to hear about this at every given chance

it was dealt with in the way the Bellwoods should have been by the court

 

[Paws123]

Why would we have to take the Bellwood's to court they didn't refuse to pay back the money they took, or hand equipment over .... like the other two

As for you not wanting to hear about Tony and Yvonne at every given chance ...why would members not want to be reminded that they still have monies in the possession belonging to MEMBERS ...shall we just let them keep it FRANK ???

Here have a peek-a-boo that these:

For Sale Nwrf, equipment for sale

N.W.R.F. FOLDED, TONY WEATHERSON

N.W.R.F. RESIGN.

(By the way FRANK rowland is another of hellbounds names ...along with others they have used )

The fraud unit of the bank may well inform the police as of yet , but a time limit has been set for the Bellwood's to repay the full amount taken back

The way i see it is....one rule can not be given to one person/persons and them/they allowed to be different for others ...any person/persons defrauding either one of our organizations should be banned ...theres no room in this sport for people who thieve others moneys put in trust of them .... just as well they live in the uk , as some country's cut your hands off for taking other possessions without consent