Nnwrf Members Meeting

[weathergirls]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

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,

please do carry on boring everyone.

 

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

 

if you are a member yhou will know the answer.

 

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

 

same answer as question 1.

 

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.

 

one of them takes great joy in reading about herself.

 

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

 

same answer as 1and 2.

 

WE THE MEMBERS are you sure you are eligible to be include yourself  in this category.

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

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

 

 

[foster]

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

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I'm not going to be drawn into any altercation over my points

1/ I THINK YOU MUST HAVE MISS READ MY POST

( it reads why did the nnwrf not notify the police and let them take action ) it say's nothing about taking them to court ? that would be upto the crown prosecutor

2/ AGAIN i will ask why you the nnwrf have not taken action against the two other partys if they have faulted on the settlement agreement and bring a END to this

3/ in answer i'm not that frank and yes they are very nice people hope they are both keeping well

 

[urchin]

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

I know precious little about racing, but plenty about the duties and responsibilities of committee members, as well as the definition of theft and dishonesty - and THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS BORROWING CLUB FUNDS

people like this fraudster (and many more if you trawl the internet) may attempt to use the 'borrowing' line in court as a defense, but it doesn't work!

 

[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

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I'm not going to be drawn into any altercation over my points

1/ I THINK YOU MUST HAVE MISS READ MY POST

( it reads why did the nnwrf not notify the police and let them take action ) it say's nothing about taking them to court ? that would be upto the crown prosecutor

2/ AGAIN i will ask why you the nnwrf have not taken action against the two other partys if they have faulted on the settlement agreement and bring a END to this

3/ in answer i'm not that frank and yes they are very nice people hope they are both keeping well

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Well we don't have any other member by that name... our meeting and questions were for NNWRF members and seeing you don't come under that category and were not at our meeting i am not obliged to answers you

Unless you can prove you are a NNWRF member by adding your full name,,,

 

[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,

Well the only Frank i know who has raced some years is Franky & Betty from Stockton (lovely couple) .... and if you are him i first would like to welcome you to k9 and also wouldn't mind answering your questions .... but before i do could you confirm if you are him .... or is this just another alias winding people up

It was also said at the BWRA meeting about people/persons come on k9 under assumed names , that bans would be enforced

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I'm sorry if that's the only frank you know but its not my fault if you only know 1 frank.

yes it was said that people / person's under assumed name's AND NOT LETTING MEMBERS NO WHO THEY WERE i think you forgot that bit would be banned from posting on k9

 

[foster]

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

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I'm not going to be drawn into any altercation over my points

1/ I THINK YOU MUST HAVE MISS READ MY POST

( it reads why did the nnwrf not notify the police and let them take action ) it say's nothing about taking them to court ? that would be upto the crown prosecutor

2/ AGAIN i will ask why you the nnwrf have not taken action against the two other partys if they have faulted on the settlement agreement and bring a END to this

3/ in answer i'm not that frank and yes they are very nice people hope they are both keeping well

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Well we don't have any other member by that name... our meeting and questions were for NNWRF members and seeing you don't come under that category and were not at our meeting i am not obliged to answers you

Unless you can prove you are a NNWRF member by adding your full name,,,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I find it sad that the members who could not attend your meeting also k9 members who have to read about the said two every time you can bring them up are not going to get answer's to my question's WHAT ARE YOU THE NNWRF WORRIED ABOUT is it the truth coming out if not why not answer my points

 

[Paws123]

I will answer your point when you give your full name so every k9 member is aware of who you are simple really, if you can not give your name then i will take it you are fake and dishonest like the people you seem so hellbent on defending

Failing that you could give me your membership number in your NNWRF membership book then i know who i am talking to

 

[marielou]

I find it sad that the members who could not attend your meeting also k9 members who have to read about the said two every time you can bring them up are not going to get answer's to my question's WHAT ARE YOU THE NNWRF WORRIED ABOUT is it the truth coming out if not why not answer my points

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Just a casual observation but you do seem to be awfully well informed about past K9 rows for a new member, you must have been reading an awful lot of archives before joining.

Welcome to K9 Frank

 

[foster]

Unfortunatly this dispute as not only been long standing on k9

 

[Paws123]

Unfortunatly this dispute as not only been long standing on k9

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes it [SIZE=14pt]AS[/SIZE] LOL

Or should i say "yes it has"

 

[foster]

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

so you don't agree with this

1/ I GO BACK TO MY POST WHY NOT SORT IT OUT WITH THE TWO BY GOING BACK TO COURT

 

[weathergirls]

QUOTE(foster @ Oct 24 2007, 01:49 PM[/color)
1/ I GO BACK TO MY POST WHY NOT SORT IT OUT WITH THE TWO BY GOING BACK TO COURT

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO WASTE ANYMORE TIME OR MEMBERS MONEY KEEP GOING BACK TO COURT THEY HAVE NO CONCIENCE AND NO INTENTIONS OF EVER PAYING ANYTHING BACK THE GOOD THING IS THE NNWRF MEMBERS ARE RID OF THEM FOR GOOD FROM THIS ORGANISATION AND ALL SUSPISSIONS ABOUT THEM HAVE BEEN PROVEN BY THEIR ACTIONS

BY THE WAY :clown: HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN THE LAST THREAT WAS TO TAKE US TO COURT FOR WITHDRAWING WEATHERSONS MEMBERSHIP WERE STILL WAITING

 

[nettle]

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

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I've been speaking to my father inlaw Jeff Willoughby from Beighton, he says he started racing in the early 60s and says he's never heard of a Frank Foster.

He's asked me to inquire what was the racing names of you dogs.

And before you ask, I do know the racing names of Jeffs dogs

Jayne

 

[Paws123]

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
so you don't agree with this

1/ I GO BACK TO MY POST WHY NOT SORT IT OUT WITH THE TWO BY GOING BACK TO COURT

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

If the said 2 handed copies over of all the Old NWRF accounts, bank statements , drug test results etc like was agreed in country court mediation settlement and came true to there word , we would send them off to a accountant ...they would also gain £1000 offered off 2 racing people for these records

How ever if their book/records were all above board then at that point would i stop posting & bring Tony & Yvonne up all the time on K9 & track sides and hopefully the £50 what ever in change, that was handed back along with equipment a while ago was all that was left in the Old NWRF account

But if the books/records showed a discrepancy then i am sure legal action IE police courts etc would be taken if they refused to pay back x amount...i honestly believe there was a considerable amount of money taken over the years from the Old NWRF members by the said two

Theres one simple easy solution for the said two to clear there names and that HAND OVER COPIES OF THE ABOVE AND PROVE ME AND A LOT MORE PEOPLE WRONG ....

QUOTE FOSTER 1/ I GO BACK TO MY POST WHY NOT SORT IT OUT WITH THE TWO BY GOING BACK TO COURT

QUOTE WEATHERGIRLS: WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO WASTE ANYMORE TIME OR MEMBERS MONEY KEEP GOING BACK TO COURT THEY HAVE NO CONCIENCE AND NO INTENTIONS OF EVER PAYING ANYTHING BACK

If Tony and Yvonne did as above and hand the stated paperwork over and court proceedings need to take place yet again I PERSONALLY WOULD PAY FOR IT MYSELF

So Frank i will leave the ball in your court

 

[Tony Taylor]

A few points I'd like answers to regarding the meeting;

1) Why was a vote held last sunday when clearly only a small percentage of the NNWRF memberhip was present?

Wouldn't it be better to have held a vote this weekend at the champs when we can reasonably expect to get a majority of members present at one time? A voting slip could be handed out to everyone who presents a membership card and put in a box at weigh in. The count could be verified by an independant witness and at least the vote could be seen to be democratic.

Linda canvassed some of the far flung regions and read out their votes which IIRC were in favour of a lesser ban. Similarly when she canvassed the NW the larger majority were against a life ban. Where the votes of those not present taken into consideration with the result?

2) were both Bruce and Di joint treasures? Did they both have a mandate to sign for NNWRF funds. Regardless of whether they both conspired to take the money only the person with the mandate to sign for funds has committed the theft in strict legal terms.

3) Was there any agreement with the Bellwoods regarding the return of the money? It seems foolish of them to have returned the money and yet still have received such the most severe penalty possible from both organisations with no guarrentee of protection from prosecution. They would have been better off keeping the money - it's not as if they would hve been treated worse.

4) If money has been taken out of a bank acount fraudulently then that fraud is against the bank not the person holding the account the money is taken from. The bank has no mandate to allow money to be drawn from any accounts without agreement from the account holders, usually shown by signature. That is unless the account holders have been shown to be negligent, eg giving out passwords etc. Is there any evidence or suggestion from the bank the account has been handled negligently by the NNWRF?

 

[ahorsnall]

A few points I'd like answers to regarding the meeting;
1) Why was a vote held last sunday when clearly only a small percentage of the NNWRF memberhip was present?

Wouldn't it be better to have held a vote this weekend at the champs when we can reasonably expect to get a majority of members present at one time? A voting slip could be handed out to everyone who presents a membership card and put in a box at weigh in. The count could be verified by an independant witness and at least the vote could be seen to be democratic.

Linda canvassed some of the far flung regions and read out their votes which IIRC were in favour of a lesser ban. Similarly when she canvassed the NW the larger majority were against a life ban. Where the votes of those not present taken into consideration with the result?

2) were both Bruce and Di joint treasures? Did they both have a mandate to sign for NNWRF funds. Regardless of whether they both conspired to take the money only the person with the mandate to sign for funds has committed the theft in strict legal terms.

3) Was there any agreement with the Bellwoods regarding the return of the money? It seems foolish of them to have returned the money and yet still have received such the most severe penalty possible from both organisations with no guarrentee of protection from prosecution. They would have been better off keeping the money - it's not as if they would hve been treated worse.

4) If money has been taken out of a bank acount fraudulently then that fraud is against the bank not the person holding the account the money is taken from. The bank has no mandate to allow money to be drawn from any accounts without agreement from the account holders, usually shown by signature. That is unless the account holders have been shown to be negligent, eg giving out passwords etc. Is there any evidence or suggestion from the bank the account has been handled negligently by the NNWRF?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

wasnt you at the meeting tony? why didnt you ask then :- " as that would have been the time to ask not a week later on k9 ?

 

[john m]

Quote Dee (If the said 2 handed copies over of all the Old NWRF accounts, bank statements , drug test results etc like was agreed in country court mediation settlement and came true to there word , we would send them off to a accountant ...they would also gain £1000 offered off 2 racing people for these records) unquote

Not quite correct Dee, the monies were on offer to whippet rescue for the accounts, not that you will ever have to pay up. To my mind there are only two reasons why you will not show accounts of the publics money, one, is that you never kept accounts although you have said you have and two, the accounts do not ring true, either way it shows the contempt in which the public members were held.

 

[kenny m]

i aggree with tony on this one,why ban them for life?these people have helped a lot of racers over the years myself included,and god the work they have done i think a years ban max,would have been ample and the members would be getting tore into sumet else,wheres our loyaltys here,becouse the members a quick to throw stones without looking at what these two have put into the sport,they have done wrong but they tryed to put it right, and they still get treated like sh,, its wrong and the bwra are wrong what have they done to the bwra for them to ban them? we all want good members in this game not kicking them out,anyway get on with it as always just all watch what yous are doing and enjoy your raceing it might be your last if the knives come out, :thumbsup:

 

[weathergirls]

A few points I'd like answers to regarding the meeting;

1) Why was a vote held last sunday when clearly only a small percentage of the NNWRF memberhip was present?

Wouldn't it be better to have held a vote this weekend at the champs when we can reasonably expect to get a majority of members present at one time? A voting slip could be handed out to everyone who presents a membership card and put in a box at weigh in. The count could be verified by an independant witness and at least the vote could be seen to be democratic.

--------------

it was the best time to have the meeting as the coming weekend is a championship event we will be far too busy

------------------

Linda canvassed some of the far flung regions and read out their votes which IIRC were in favour of a lesser ban.

--------------------

I did not canvas the far flung regions as you put it Dee did I gave out the feed back from the South

----------------------

Similarly when she canvassed the NW the larger majority were against a life ban. Where the votes of those not present taken into consideration with the result?

-------------------------

remind me when did I canvass the North West your wrong again

-----------------------

2) were both Bruce and Di joint treasures? Did they both have a mandate to sign for NNWRF funds. Regardless of whether they both conspired to take the money only the person with the mandate to sign for funds has committed the theft in strict legal terms.

 

--------------------------------

Di was treasurer Bruce was secretary therfor he also had a responsibility

--------------------------

 

3) Was there any agreement with the Bellwoods regarding the return of the money?

--------------

you know there was

-----------------------

It seems foolish of them to have returned the money and yet still have received such the most severe penalty possible from both organisations with no guarrentee of protection from prosecution. They would have been better off keeping the money - it's not as if they would hve been treated worse.

 

------------------------------

what action the BWRA take is nothing to do with the NNWRF

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

4) If money has been taken out of a bank acount fraudulently then that fraud is against the bank not the person holding the account the money is taken from. The bank has no mandate to allow money to be drawn from any accounts without agreement from the account holders, usually shown by signature

That is unless the account holders have been shown to be negligent, eg giving out passwords etc. Is there any evidence or suggestion from the bank the account has been handled negligently by the NNWRF?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

 

----------------------------

there were no passwords given out to any of the committee it was a business current account with two signatories there could be the possibiity of forged signature on cheques but there was also a lot of cash taken at opens that hadn't found its way to the bank

[/quote -------------------------------

 

[Have tried to answer your points Tony however why you need to keep asking the same questions on here when you were at the meeting and had the opportunity to put them to the committee face to face is beyond me

 

if the committee had dealt with this situation and given a short term ban without consulting the members do you honestly believe it woud have been accepted I think not. Whatever ban was given out affects them both not only because of their positions on the committee but they were also joint members. It was'nt an easy descision to come to as Bruce and Di were/are friends of committee members outside of NNWRF. They have accepted and expected this outcome from the NNWRF BUT not the BWRA descision

 

Dee has worked very hard over the past few weeks with the bank in order to get as much of the members money back as possible and she should be commended for it the rest of the committee are very grateful

 

[milly]

i aggree with tony on this one,why ban them for life?these people have helped a lot of racers over the years myself included,and god the work they have done i think a years ban max,would have been ample and the members would be getting tore into sumet else,wheres our loyaltys here,becouse the members a quick to throw stones without looking at what these two have put into the sport,they have done wrong but they tryed to put it right, and they still get treated like sh,, its wrong and the bwra are wrong what have they done to the bwra for them to ban them? we all want good members in this game not kicking them out,anyway get on with it as always just all watch what yous are doing and enjoy your raceing it might be your last if the knives come out,  :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

It's a pitty Kenny, you and all the people that Bruce & Di have helped didn't come to the meeting and stand up for them. And give characters reference to the members, then maybe the outcome would have been different.

Geoff