Jump to content


Photo

Bad news from Mallory


  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

#1 Derwent Motorsport

Derwent Motorsport
  • Member

  • 431 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 30 September 2013 - 15:11

Mallory Park Motorsport Limited To Be Put Into Administration 
     30 Sep 13

It is with great regret that Mallory Park Motorsport Limited has today announced that the company has been put into Administration.
 
Mallory Park has been operating as a motorcycle and car race circuit for many years and has much history attaching to the circuit. In 1985 a highly restrictive Noise Notice was attached to Mallory Park Motorsport Limited ('MPML') embracing all circuit activities but, significantly, a number of the provisions within the Notice were very much open to interpretation.
 
MPML has enjoyed a long and fruitful relationship with Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council over the years and a level of understanding had been established to work within the 1985 Notice. Regrettably, however, this arrangement was placed under scrutiny by local residents some of whom were new to the village, who made representations to HBBC to apply the rigid interpretation of the 1985 Notice.
 
MPML and the local authority worked extremely hard with the residents to find a compromise solution but, unfortunately, the council decided to prosecute MPML on five charges of the Notice during 2012 which involved operating on a Saturday over and above the four days agreed in the Notice. The court hearing took place in August 2013 and ruled that MPML was guilty of this breach on the five occasions, but MPML was given the right to take the establishment rights of the 1985 Notice to a higher court.
 
The immediate implication of the Court decision was to oblige MPML to  observe the provision of the 1985 Notice, which allows only for 40 days racing on Sundays  per annum (but with a dispensation to allow four Saturdays per annum) and testing on Wednesdays. MPML was accordingly obliged to cancel all track day operations, resulting in a significant loss of income  (a situation also felt by local businesses and local employers) and use of the track for local community activities - young driver training etc. Overall, the imposition of such restrictions has inevitably led to MPML having a financially unstable business plan. 
 
Following the Court case, MPML immediately implemented the highly  restrictive conditions of the 1985 Notice, thus effectively reducing the circuit activity to two days per week. Significant losses were being incurred which no business can sustain. It was clear that a more dynamic approach needed to be taken to overcome the significant hurdles and two weeks ago MPML developed an innovative three stage Recovery Plan to take Mallory forwards which would hopefully meets the wishes of the residents  and form the basis of a viable business.
 
Very constructive dialogue was held with the Leader of HBBC and senior officials and we were receiving very encouraging reactions from them to the Plan. A fundamental component of the Plan  was the agreement of the Land Owner to reduce the annual lease rental, which had risen by over 40% over the last eight years and had reached untenable levels. Very regrettably, despite intense work by the MPML board, the Land Owner - Titan Properties Ltd - refused to make a substantive offer to allow the Recovery Plan to proceed.
 
British Automobile Racing Club were keen to support MPML (and did so up to the final race meeting yesterday by paying for certain essential supplies allowing the meeting to place) and indeed would have supported MPML to ensure all its trade creditors were paid. To that end, it needed the support of the Landlord with a sustainable rent but, regrettably, this was not possible to achieve.
 
Accordingly, having no firm visibility into 2014 and beyond, MPML directors had no option but to place the company into Administration.
 
The administrator, Ian Robert of Kingston Smith & Partners LLP, commented: "I will be working with all the stakeholders to ensure that Mallory Park will see racing again. I hope the administration process can assist in finding a solution which will be beneficial to all parties concerned."
 
He continued: "To that end, I will be negotiating with the landlord and the council, with the support of the BARC, to ensure that racing can be enjoyed at Mallory Park for years to come. Although it is early days, I am hopeful that, once a solution to the lease is found, all of the company's creditors should receive a substantial dividend, which I understand is very much the driving force behind the continued support of the BARC."
 



Advertisement

#2 Phil Rainford

Phil Rainford
  • Member

  • 5,283 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 30 September 2013 - 15:18

An extremely sad day for British Motorsport :cry:

 

 

PAR



#3 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,064 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 30 September 2013 - 15:33

My reading of this is that MPML have brought this upon themselves by violating the 1985 Notice.  British Motorsport shoots itself in the foot.



#4 MCS

MCS
  • Member

  • 3,520 posts
  • Joined: June 03

Posted 30 September 2013 - 15:50


......Very regrettably, despite intense work by the MPML board, the Land Owner - Titan Properties Ltd - refused to make a substantive offer to allow the Recovery Plan to proceed......
 
 

 

Hang on, am I missing something here?  Titan Properties is owned by Chris Meek.


Edited by MCS, 30 September 2013 - 15:51.


#5 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 7,897 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 30 September 2013 - 15:52

Mallory Park Motorsport Limited To Be Put Into Administration 
     30 Sep 13

~
MPML has enjoyed a long and fruitful relationship with Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council over the years and a level of understanding had been established to work within the 1985 Notice. Regrettably, however, this arrangement was placed under scrutiny by local residents some of whom were new to the village, who made representations to HBBC to apply the rigid interpretation of the 1985 Notice.
~
 

 

That's what annoys me.  Whatever happened to 'grandfather rights'?  These residents knew the circuit existed when they moved to the village and the existence of the circuit and its activities no doubt affected the price they paid for their houses.  If, over the years, the number of track days etc had increased they might have a valid point.

 

Haven't Thruxton had similar issues?



#6 Allan Lupton

Allan Lupton
  • Member

  • 2,963 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 30 September 2013 - 16:03

These residents knew the circuit existed when they moved to the village and the existence of the circuit and its activities no doubt affected the price they paid for their houses. 
 
Haven't Thruxton had similar issues?

Everywhere has that problem.
Aerodromes also suffer from it. Hatfield had an aerodrome from 1930 and a small estate of houses was soon built next to its northern boundary. By the 1980s many thousands of aeroplane movements had taken place, a whole generation of which had been extremely noisy, but we were still getting complaints about our quiet modern airliners from newcomers to that estate. The aerodrome closed in 1993 as did the area's largest employer. Serve 'em right.

#7 cpbell

cpbell
  • Member

  • 661 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 30 September 2013 - 16:05

My reading of this is that MPML have brought this upon themselves by violating the 1985 Notice.  British Motorsport shoots itself in the foot.

As I understand it, the circuit had been allowed to work outside of the notice for years as track days became an ever more important part of the income of most circuits.  Had they not done so, it would have closed years ago.



#8 blacklab

blacklab
  • New Member

  • 20 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 30 September 2013 - 16:37

As a Wednesday Practice day regular, living 3 miles from Mallory , I must say what a sad day this is for British Motorsport both for now & the future.

 

Trying to be fair, I must say there are issues on all sides of this problem.  Nimbys' play some role, especially the two families who have done most of the complaining, MPML who seem to deal with problems in a tactless & unsympathetic way increasing usage under the noses of Hinckley Council who for 25 years have mismanaged their supervision of the 1985 agreement that they should have been supervising.

 

Leicester & Leicestershire has always been a place where people do not realise what they have until they loose it, a visit to the " concrete jungle" of the City would confirm what has been lost. Its ironic that the closure of Mallory comes at a time when the City, and County Councils, are ploughing money into a bid to become the next "City of Culture".

 

There has been a lot of talk locally about Mallory should expand to get bigger more high profile (profitable) events to be able to survive however as far back as I can remember Mallory has always been the poor relation to the other tracks who tend to dominate the event lists.  The size & layout of Mallory, in these days of higher safety standards, will always act against Mallory's ability to host the top events as will the fact it is not within the "Palmer empire", however there should surely be a place for a "clubman's track" whose costs allow people to get started in Motor racing.

 

The success of the Mallory action group will surely encourage some residents around other venues start complaining so I believe other tracks will face increasing pressures to exist.

 

Lets hope that some how Mallory can rise again because at the end of the day the only winners would seem to be the local Council who will suddenly find a new location to satisfy their commitment to meet their housing targets.



#9 Alan Cox

Alan Cox
  • Member

  • 7,510 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 30 September 2013 - 17:08

Whoever thought it was a good idea to flout the prescribed noise limits deserves what has befallen them, sad though it now turns out to be for motor sport enthusiasts, but it shouldn't come as a surprise. I have sympathy with local residents who have been poorly served by their council over a long period.



#10 blacklab

blacklab
  • New Member

  • 20 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 30 September 2013 - 17:26

At the  meeting the council held to Discuss the prosecution of MPML they said that an Ombudsman's report on the councils handling of the situation was due. The CEO had seen a draft copy of the report and it was critical of Hinckley & Bosworth Council.  I have seen nothing about the report in the local press.

 

 


Edited by blacklab, 30 September 2013 - 17:29.


#11 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 30 September 2013 - 18:12

Hang on, am I missing something here?  Titan Properties is owned by Chris Meek.

Yes I noticed this too. The leaseholder who I guess is MPML have been trying to make it work & in the face of rising rent have overstepped the terms of the license issued by the council, not to mention a few locals. I wouldn't mind betting the "drifting" & motocross had more than a little to do with kickstarting the villager's irritations.

 

However the administrator does indicate they'd like to find someone prepared to continue running the circuit, so perhaps it's not entirely over?



#12 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 35,868 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 30 September 2013 - 18:13

That's what annoys me.  Whatever happened to 'grandfather rights'? 

 

They don't exist.

 

There is however a logic to it.  If you could effectively create a nuisance by doing it for a long time, you're destroying the value of the land affected.  It makes it unusable.  That's hardly fair to the neighbouring landowners.  If they want to sell for housing, they can't.

 

The solution is to buy up the affected land.  Mallory Park should have done so pretty much as soon as the track was first used.  Or it should have got the area re-designated as industrial rather than residential.  And certainly they should not have given in in 1985.

 

There might be a solution by turning Mallory Park into an Asset of Community Value (ACV).  Under the Localism Act 2011.  It basically means it can't be sold until interested parties have the chance to buy.  That might mean it would not be sold for housing.

 

That would be up to someone with a stake in the circuit to initiate.



#13 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 5,387 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 30 September 2013 - 23:07

Noise is such a subjective thing. A car that is ok one time is not the next,, or vice versa. Making any competition vehicle 'ok' for noise is nigh impossible. It is not just exhaust but induction, transmission noise, even brake noise. In fact driven hard several factory sporty cars and bikes will not comply in factory standard form.

The NIMBYS should learn that when you buy into an area with potentially noisy, dirty, smelly operations that that is what will happen. While NIMBYS rule the world less and less activity will happen, not just in motorsport which is near doomed but business, waste, aviation, even traffic solutions will be either culled or cost 3 times as much. Which every taxpayer pays with interest. In turn eventually causing the 'system' to fail as nobody can afford to live anymore. That is the few that still have a job. This alone is part of the problem with many governments world wide.

Edited by Lee Nicolle, 30 September 2013 - 23:08.


#14 JacnGille

JacnGille
  • Member

  • 1,533 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 01 October 2013 - 00:24

That's what annoys me.  Whatever happened to 'grandfather rights'?  These residents knew the circuit existed when they moved to the village and the existence of the circuit and its activities no doubt affected the price they paid for their houses.  If, over the years, the number of track days etc had increased they might have a valid point.

 

Haven't Thruxton had similar issues?

 

=1000000000000000000000000000000000!!!!



#15 GMACKIE

GMACKIE
  • Member

  • 1,603 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 01 October 2013 - 02:39

At least there's nostalgia.......hopefully that's not all we will have. :cry:



#16 john aston

john aston
  • Member

  • 780 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 01 October 2013 - 06:44

From the people I have spoken to it is anything but Nimbysim(which is the standard and very lazy argument against anybody who dares to complain about noise). Planning law applies to everybody and plenty of circuits have worked well with planners- Cadwell being a good example. Mallory seems flagrantly to have ignored the legal constraints it was operating under and has started to lose a lot of the local support it has enjoyed for years.  I could listen to racing cars all day - but one man's meat ...



#17 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Nostalgia Forum Moderator

  • 23,381 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 01 October 2013 - 07:26

From the people I have spoken to it is anything but Nimbysim(which is the standard and very lazy argument against anybody who dares to complain about noise). Planning law applies to everybody and plenty of circuits have worked well with planners- Cadwell being a good example. Mallory seems flagrantly to have ignored the legal constraints it was operating under and has started to lose a lot of the local support it has enjoyed for years.  I could listen to racing cars all day - but one man's meat ...

Interesting that - as far as I can see - only Octane has actually quoted the figures. Mallory do seem to have shot themselves in the foot:

 

Following complaints over noise from local residents, the local council took the circuit to court for breach of a ruling made in 1985 limiting the venue to a commercially unviable 92 'noisy days' a year allowance. The circuit had been operating on around 155 noisy days, because the circuit claimed that the restriction had never been enforced and that an understanding had been reached with the council.

http://www.classican...nistration.html

 

Maybe the odd day could have been overlooked. But more than sixty? An extra two-thirds above the allowed number? Sorry, but even as a racing fan, I have to say that's not really acceptable.

 

No doubt there are things we are not being told - especially, it would seem, regarding the relationship between MPML and Titan - but it certainly doesn't particularly look like the sort of NIMBYism which some other circuits have had to endure.



#18 Stephen W

Stephen W
  • Member

  • 11,539 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 01 October 2013 - 07:34

Whoever thought it was a good idea to flout the prescribed noise limits deserves what has befallen them, sad though it now turns out to be for motor sport enthusiasts, but it shouldn't come as a surprise. I have sympathy with local residents who have been poorly served by their council over a long period.

 

 

From the people I have spoken to it is anything but Nimbysim(which is the standard and very lazy argument against anybody who dares to complain about noise). Planning law applies to everybody and plenty of circuits have worked well with planners- Cadwell being a good example. Mallory seems flagrantly to have ignored the legal constraints it was operating under and has started to lose a lot of the local support it has enjoyed for years.  I could listen to racing cars all day - but one man's meat ...

 

I suspect the bankruptcy move is a well considered ploy. Firstly it gets MPML out from under the debt/fine. Secondly it leaves the way open for a 'new company' to take over running Mallory Park. This 'new company' will have completely different management and can distance itself from the mismanagement of MPML. Hopefully the 'new management team' will learn from the colossal cock-up that MPML have perpetrated.



#19 Steve O'Brien

Steve O'Brien
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 01 October 2013 - 08:26

That's what annoys me.  Whatever happened to 'grandfather rights'?  These residents knew the circuit existed when they moved to the village and the existence of the circuit and its activities no doubt affected the price they paid for their houses.  If, over the years, the number of track days etc had increased they might have a valid point.

 

Haven't Thruxton had similar issues?

Im sure Aintree had this problem many years ago.



Advertisement

#20 blacklab

blacklab
  • New Member

  • 20 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 01 October 2013 - 08:35

Race events & Wednesday practice days can easily be understood as "noisy" days & in Mallory's case should easily fit within the 92 Noisy day agreement.

What I find difficult to understand is why the other Mallory activities such as track days & the Chris Walker Racing school have strayed into this noisy debate.

Surely a racing school exists to teach people how to race, track manners, Racing lines, safety etc. why is the machinery they provide  so close to "noisy" limits surely the bikes could be much quieter & still teach people how to race. Track days would seem to be more of an issue since the Bikes / cars are individually owned and though road legal they could be noisier than many true racing cars.

 

Track days generate a lot of income. No Limits who run many days at Mallory allow 40 bikes per group & allow 3 groups to run during the day.

 

The council report on Mallory park can be found at http://moderngov.hin...Ai.aspx?ID=2105



#21 foxyracer

foxyracer
  • New Member

  • 17 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 01 October 2013 - 09:28

Let's hope this isn't as bad as it might seem.  It appears to me that MPML have made a complete mess of running Mallory over the years, not just in terms of adherence to planning rules but I have heard from at least one major organising club that they have been difficult to deal with in the extreme.

Perhaps Chris Meek's refusal to decrease rentals is his way of pushing MPML into administration so that a new, more imaginative and compliant management company can be put in place.  I would have thought he would hold the future of Mallory pretty close to his heart but it has to make business sense.  His reported purchase of additional land suggests he has a strategy and is not giving up on it.  The administrator is also reported as wanting to secure a future for the circuit.

I first went to Mallory in 1967 (very wet F.2 race won by John Surtees!) and I don't think a year has passed since when I haven't been at least once.  More recently, I have attended quite a few Wednesday test days until the noise restrictions meant the more interesting machinery stayed away.  I met a few TNFers as well which was nice.  Having retired from full time work a couple of days ago, I was planning to spend more of my time there not less.....  



#22 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,036 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 01 October 2013 - 10:51

Having retired from full time work a couple of days ago, I was planning to spend more of my time there not less.....  

 

 

Are you married? If so, prepare yourself for a shock...

 

On Mallory though, the version of events just told to me by one of the regulars attendees, suggests that in the longer term, things may not be anything like as bad as they might at first seem.



#23 foxyracer

foxyracer
  • New Member

  • 17 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 01 October 2013 - 12:05

Yes, KayeMod, I have been married for 26 years!  Mallory has two benefits, I'm not under her feet and I'm not with another woman (wouldn't work, I know too many people who go that would tell her!!).



#24 Stephen W

Stephen W
  • Member

  • 11,539 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 02 October 2013 - 07:59

Im sure Aintree had this problem many years ago.

 

Don't recollect problems from the neighbours but the ''racing dates" have been restricted by the Jockey Club due to the development of the golf course in the middle of the club circuit. The Jockey Club have also limited the motor racing season to that of the jump racing off season so after the 10th October approximately there are no 4 or 2 wheel activity on track until two weeks after the Grand National.



#25 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 08 October 2013 - 09:16

On Mallory though, the version of events just told to me by one of the regulars attendees, suggests that in the longer term, things may not be anything like as bad as they might at first seem.

There's two sides to every story & this throws another light on it.

 

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/110435

 

I noted that the term "owners of MP" was attached in news articles to the company closing down, which strictly speaking isn't the case. The company in administration is the leaseholder, not the owner Titan. 

 

If the operating company's income had been halved as indicated here, I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't call in the administrators because they couldn't pay the fine & costs of £25,500.



#26 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 08 October 2013 - 09:28

MPML is a wholly-owned subsidiary company of BARC Ltd. Having read much of the stuff on the web about these difficulties, imho, that seems to be where the fault lies, as noted above, it seems that they simply ignored the restrictions placed upon them..

 

https://www.duedil.c...orsport-limited



#27 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 10 October 2013 - 18:12

MPML is a wholly-owned subsidiary company of BARC Ltd. Having read much of the stuff on the web about these difficulties, imho, that seems to be where the fault lies, as noted above, it seems that they simply ignored the restrictions placed upon them..

 

https://www.duedil.c...orsport-limited

The latest twist here - seems like BARC have pulled a fast one - three days after appointing the administrator...

 

http://www.thisislei...l#axzz2hJSOO8dk



#28 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 10 October 2013 - 19:37

This sort of move is bound to (quite rightly) annoy the residents.

 

Is the BARC still actually a Club, run by the members, or just a front for a commercial company?



#29 TimRTC

TimRTC
  • Member

  • 710 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 11 October 2013 - 08:25

Check out this week's Midweek Motorsport for a detailed exposé of the administration after some forensic accountancy work:

 

http://radiolemans.0...week-motorsport



#30 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 11 October 2013 - 08:31

Check out this week's Midweek Motorsport for a detailed exposé of the administration after some forensic accountancy work:

 

http://radiolemans.0...week-motorsport

Is that on #37 ?


Edited by mfd, 11 October 2013 - 08:31.


#31 TimRTC

TimRTC
  • Member

  • 710 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 11 October 2013 - 09:29

Is that on #37 ?

 

Sorry, should have said. Yes #37, from about 5 min in.



#32 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 11 October 2013 - 09:56

Actually it runs from 8 minutes to 43 minutes and should be made compulsory listening for all those with an interest in Mallory Park, particularly those who have signed the UK Gov petition, which now seems to have completely got the wrong end of the stick.

 

If there are any BARC members on this board, I suggest that they might want to ask some questions.



#33 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Nostalgia Forum Moderator

  • 23,381 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 11 October 2013 - 10:30

Indeed, Pete. John Hindhaugh should be congratulated for that interview. Good to hear the council side - complete with admission that they were too lenient for too long, which has apparently dropped them in the brown stuff - but it does seem to reinforce the impression I'd already gained that MPML's management had hoped they'd simply get away with it. Especially given the mention of works being carried out without planning permission.

 

My main question to the BARC - were I a member - would be along the lines of "Were you made aware of these problems by the management of MPML? If so - why did you not act to regularise the situation? If not - where was the BARC management oversight of your subsidiary?"



#34 Derwent Motorsport

Derwent Motorsport
  • Member

  • 431 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 14 October 2013 - 16:13

Latest from BARC:

 

The BARC announces today with considerable regret that it believes it has now exhausted all discussions with the administrator in respect of Mallory Park. The BARC has been informed that the Landlord, Titan Properties, will not reduce the rent by half as widely previously publicised and in fact will only offer terms for the next twelve months without any commitment towards necessary capital expenditure on track works moving forward.

 

The BARC has also been informed that any possible future agreement from Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council is subject to certain caveats moving forward although we have not seen definitive terms. Clearly the BARC is committed, as it has been over the previous months, to continue operating Motor Sport at Mallory Park, but is not in a position to do so with continuing uncertainty in respect of contractual arrangements with Titan Properties and HBBC.

 

Therefore under these circumstances the BARC has come to the conclusion it is unable to pursue any future involvement with the Mallory Park Circuit.



#35 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,064 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 14 October 2013 - 16:49

So the BARC have been flouting the council's agreement for years, and now want Titan to halve the rent so they can go on doing it?  Unbelievable!



#36 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 14 October 2013 - 17:56

So the BARC have been flouting the council's agreement for years, and now want Titan to halve the rent so they can go on doing it?  Unbelievable!

I think it's been said before, but it certainly is explained in the podcast, Mallory accounts up to the end of 2012 were pretty healthy. They've been pushing out, what now appears to be, a lot of BS to the media, all designed to sleight Titan, H&B Borough Council, not to mention the locals. None of which addresses the facts - they broke their operating agreement.



#37 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 5,956 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 14 October 2013 - 18:13

Were the BARC responsible for motorcycle racing at Mallory and did that play any part in eceeding the number of authorised days?



#38 alansart

alansart
  • Member

  • 3,968 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 14 October 2013 - 19:00

Were the BARC responsible for motorcycle racing at Mallory and did that play any part in eceeding the number of authorised days?

 

Motorcycle racing has always been a big part of Mallory Park racing. 

 

A Motocross layout was added to the left before Gerrards. That seemed to have been used quite a bit over the last few years.



#39 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 14 October 2013 - 21:07

Were the BARC responsible for motorcycle racing at Mallory and did that play any part in eceeding the number of authorised days?

That's a ridiculous suggestion



Advertisement

#40 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 5,956 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 14 October 2013 - 22:34

That's a ridiculous suggestion

It was a question not a suggestion but in what way was it ridiculous?

If the BARC were not responsible for all racing at Mallory then can they be held responsible for the breaking of usage regulations?

#41 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,839 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 14 October 2013 - 23:56

It was a question not a suggestion but in what way was it ridiculous?

If the BARC were not responsible for all racing at Mallory then can they be held responsible for the breaking of usage regulations?

OK Roger, but it seems to infer there was things outside of the control of BARC?


Edited by mfd, 14 October 2013 - 23:59.


#42 blacklab

blacklab
  • New Member

  • 20 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 16:32

Derwent   -  regards post #34

 

Could you tell me where you saw this information - I cannot find it on the BARC site



#43 Giraffe

Giraffe
  • Member

  • 6,956 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 15 October 2013 - 16:55

A post on the Mallory Park website today:

 

http://www.mallorypa...-news&Itemid=79



#44 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 15 October 2013 - 18:33

I have not studied company law but my daughter has; she pointed me towards Companies House GP08 Liquidation and Insolvency, when I asked her why a solvent company would put itself into administration: I believe that this might be the answer:

 

3. What are the effects on a company of being in administration?

When a company enters administration:

  • any pending winding-up petitions will be dismissed or suspended
  • there will be a moratorium on insolvency and other legal proceedings...


#45 Giraffe

Giraffe
  • Member

  • 6,956 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 15 October 2013 - 21:39

 

 What are the effects on a company of being in administration?

When a company enters administration:

  • any pending winding-up petitions will be dismissed or suspended
  • there will be a moratorium on insolvency and other legal proceedings...

It's not rocket science is it, Pete.... :smoking:


Edited by Giraffe, 16 October 2013 - 07:27.


#46 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 October 2013 - 22:22

Apart from BARC saying that they are now out of the game, it's gone a bit quiet.

 

If this is going to be a memorial thread, here's my contribution:

 

10544588946_679a0cf1ef_c.jpg



#47 Phil Rainford

Phil Rainford
  • Member

  • 5,283 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 19 November 2013 - 19:39

Update today....

 

http://www.itv.com/n...y-end-of-month/

 

PAR

 

 



#48 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 19 November 2013 - 22:34

So; that is one piece of good news, MPML are out of business. What about MPMR, the shell company formed by BARC during the administration exercise? Do any of the considerable assets of MPML transfer to MPMR, or have the been sucked in to the BARC black hole?

 

What interest in this fiasco are BARC members taking?

 

We may yet see racing at Mallory again. He said, more in hope than expactation.



#49 zakeriath

zakeriath
  • Member

  • 696 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:31

Just think this time next year we can all buy our new lakeside plot, to build our nice new homes.  Hope the community will be happy with the increased regular traffic and loss of income derived from the track.


Edited by zakeriath, 20 November 2013 - 11:32.


#50 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 20 November 2013 - 13:41

Just think this time next year we can all buy our new lakeside plot, to build our nice new homes.  Hope the community will be happy with the increased regular traffic and loss of income derived from the track.

Did you listen to the broadcast mentioned above?

From 8 minutes to 43 minutes.


Edited by elansprint72, 20 November 2013 - 13:42.