Well, Well, Well, Sean! We finally agree on something I will seize this rare opportunity to second all ya postings relating to Chris above..................smile
In addition I would like to add that I find the Z clubs stance on this issue appalling !, as far as I am concerned the club should put all resources and pressure to bear on this rogue trader (I will call him this since everybody seems too scared to name him despite a court judgment against him). If it means giving up a little advertising revenue then so be it.
Unless of course we are into the realms of the old Z boy network in which case the club should examine its conscience very carefully, If the person who spearheaded the decision to entertain the revenue generated by the said traders adverts was in government his head would be rolling by now, THE LAW IS THE LAW, the Z club should not be seen to be condoning the position of the rogue trader on the basis of an explanation by a culpable person.
The very least the Z club can do in the circumstances is to distance itself from this rogue trader in every way until he falls in line with the law.
Of course the rogue is at liberty to appeal the decision in the law courts.
On the other hand since the club has very wrongly in my opinion defended this rogue trader’s position by stating Chris was not entirely blameless, it is now obliged to seek a settlement in what is a very distasteful state of affairs.
If the club as stated feels so strongly that the rogue is not entirely to blame for events, then it can ask the trader to put his position forward on this forum, with the sum of £5000.00 held by the club in escrow) owned of course by his cousin for legal purposes, Chris will also be asked to put his position forward on the forum with a copy of the judgment, we can all vote (pre registered members of course) based on our collective knowledge and expertise on all things pertaining to these cars in order to reach a satisfactory conclusion for all the parties concerned, if it is felt that the trader is not to blame his name will be cleared and Chris will be obliged to inform the courts that settlement has been reached and vice versa, of course if both parties are voted to be at fault then a settlement of 2.5K will be given to Chris, of course both parties must agree to this for it to work, I am sure that the club will be able to oversee this and we will all be happy to vote Won't we lads ?????????????
I feel that with such an outcome or at least a more proactive attempt by the Z club to resolve this unfortunate state of affairs, those whose faith in the club has been tested will be reassured that the club really does have its paid and unpaid members interests at the forefront of its agenda, after all without us these cars would no longer exist.
This whole issue gives me a very bitter taste in my mouth; The Z clubs stance reminds me of eBay who seem more interested in collecting commission than cracking down on the fraudulent use of its site / name.
yeah, it's me ! Thanks to sudden job loss and computer meltdown I'm only just back online tonight. Calling Steve with debit card details friday eve to renew membership, as I can't fathom why or how you could function without being a paid up member !
