 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@pam w, The previous Interim CEO was also BASI's legal director. He left in the spring of this year after a permanent CEO was appointed and his tenure as Legal Director ended. What is your bet that he will be blamed for everything...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
The ashattery involved in the original BASI actions remains astounding. Perhaps they were taking too much advice from yes men/women like TTT. Maybe a bit more common sense would have been warranted. Is costs and strategy re this on the table for the AGM? Seems like it ought to be high on the list of members' questions even before you consider that they can't now bar SB attending. Plan B - ricin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
| @pam w, The previous Interim CEO was also BASI's legal director. He left in the spring of this year after a permanent CEO was appointed and his tenure as Legal Director ended. What is your bet that he will be blamed for everything... |
Stephen Burke, BASI's recent legal director and interim CEO is, in fact, praised in the recently-published annual report of the Association ...
| Gareth Roberts, chairman, BASI wrote: |
Andrew Lockerbie came into post in January 2015 as CEO. This followed a period of two years in which time Stephen Burke (Legal Director) acted as Interim CEO. It is generally acknowledged that Stephen made a very significant contribution to encouraging teamwork and positive approaches amongst office staff. I do not want to dwell unduly on the period of time before Stephen Burke’s start as ICEO. It is sufficient to say that BASI has moved on from that time, is learning from former mistakes and now aims to move forwards as positively as possible. Since January 2015 Andrew Lockerbie has hit the ground running and brought considerable drive and sound judgement to addressing many of the challenges and tasks facing BASI. I am pleased to report that Andrew has established very positive
working relations with many Members, office staff, Board Members, the Chair (acting as line manager) and many other stakeholders. Andrew has successfully completed two appraisals and reviews since his appointment in January. His knowledge, drive and passion for the Association has resulted in significant progress since January 2015 on a number of fronts. |
Source: http://www.basi.org.uk/docs/FINAL%203950%20BASI%20Annual%20Report%202015%20lo%20res%20for%20web%2023%20Sept%202015.pdf [page 6-7]
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
"It is generally acknowledged that Stephen made a very significant contribution to encouraging teamwork and positive approaches amongst office staff."
High Praise indeed from our Chairman!! that he was positive and encouraging amongst office staff. That statement doesn't say a lot about his decision making as interim CEO and advice to the board on legal matters now does it..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
i am a basi member but i am flabbergasted at what has happened with this over the last 18 months, i think that its safe to say that if these individuals were working for a commercial company most of them would be out of a job, they are just lucky that they work for an organisation with a lot of members who probably cant be bothered / have the time to get them out as basi and skiing are hobbies rather than a full time job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Maybe it's time for the apathetic members to unite and get rid of the board with their vested interests? A petition?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
i think that its safe to say that if these individuals were working for a commercial company most of them would be in a well paid job with another company by now
|
FIFY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BASI's statement this afternoon, via Facebook:
| Quote: |
BASI has now revoked its decision of 1 November 2014 to terminate Simon Butler’s membership. This decision was made on the basis of legal advice obtained. Accordingly Simon remains a member of BASI. As a consequence of this decision the court action raised by Simon (in terms of which he sought suspension and interdict) has been dismissed.
The action of judicial review raised by Simon Butler will now have a first hearing on 18 November 2015. BASI are maintaining their defence to this action. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
which action is now subject to judicial review?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| pam w wrote: |
| which action is now subject to judicial review? |
The decision not to provide Simon with an MoU Stamp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
"This decision was made on the basis of legal advice obtained."
wasn't the original decision to revoke his membership also based on legal advice obtained ? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Edit: this follows on from r@r's post at 17:35
This begs the question as to why they didn't get the same legal advice immediately after the interdict (about 10 months ago from memory). Or maybe they did and were hoping SB would blink. Whatever, a shocking way to treat a member. Why haven't they issued an apology?
Their words above are horribly tendentious. It was SB's action to get the interdict (to preserve his right to work) - it was BASI's action to get it overturned. They didn't have to launch that action, and it's now proven to be a mistake. And 'judicial review'? Maybe it's correct Scottish legal jargon, but it plain terms it's an action for damages, based on BASI denying an MoU stamp (which they had previously granted).
Why can't the BASI board and management speak plainly to members? Anyone would think they had things to hide and/or backsides to cover.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm no legal expert like TTT but isn't 'judicial review' just a process for ascertaining who is correct legally? This then opens up the option for claims in terms of damages?
Happy for legal peeps or TTT to clarify.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@ansta1, maybe. But the average ski instructor isn't an expert on Scottish law. Why can't they say they've been sued for damages? Everyone gets that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@rob@rar, ah, that should be interesting. I hadn't realised the fact that in Scotland judicial review can look at decisions of private bodies, not just public ones. If there is a judicial review of that decision it will presumably measure the entire process up against the tests of reasonableness, fairness, natural justice and all that?
Are BASI not taking a substantial risk in sticking to their decision on this? To judge by discussion on this thread (which I don't entirely understand, being far from the action) the process was more than a tad murky.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
[quote]
But the average basi legal representative doesn't seem to be an expert on law.
[/qoute]
FiIFY
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
In my limited experience of litigation, it's standard practice for "the other guy" to settle on the steps of the court. I have never had anyone give in earlier than that, although I've never taken a case to court which I didn't win. I assume they do it that way for tactical reasons based on cost/ benefit. They're trying to make you give up, and when you manifestly don't, they negotiate as the alternative would cost them significantly more. They know they will not win from the start, but they do not know you have the nuts to stand up to them. SB has demonstrated adequate nuts, it seems.
I haven't seen the original report of what happened here - anyone got a reference?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@pam w, can't help on the legal side of things as I have no idea about the process so wouldn't like to speculate.
Certainly seems like a substantial risk whenever you pursue (or defend) a legal action unless you are very confident in your case. The costs seem to mount up shockingly fast, even before a determination of any damages which might be awarded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@ansta1, bang on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@philwig, the thing is, SB has demonstrated steel nuts for years - nights in the cells for God's sake, and taking on the French establishment - so it's amazing that comes as a surprise to the board and management of the organisation to which SB has paid his dues for 30+ years!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
Update via Facebook:
| Quote: |
Niall, our legal director has just phoned to confirm that BASI have now finally accepted that they were wrong to dismiss Simon from BASI membership and have also accepted that they will now have to pay all of Simon’s legal costs for having to raise the case in Scotland’s highest court, the Court of Session in Edinburgh.
It has also been confirmed that BASI have abandoned their forthcoming disciplinary hearing against Simon for teaching without a licence, which we believe had been fixed after complaints had been made by Megeve based BASI board members.
This now only leaves the matter of BASI’s refusal to issue Simon’s MOU to be decided by the Scottish Court. |
|
So to summarise:
1. BASI have admitted they were wrong to dismiss Simon Butler from BASI membership and will have to pay all of his legal costs
2. BASI have abandoned their disciplinary hearing against him
3. The Court will decide at another hearing (in November I believe?) whether BASI were right to withhold a (previously issued) MOU from him
To use a Tennis analogy, I would say that's Game and Set to SB, and we're just waiting to hear if he's won the match! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I so want TTT to get back and provide his or her view...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Alastair Pink wrote: |
| ... (in November I believe?) |
18th November.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
If BASI directors are joint and several guarantors of BASI debts they'll be cacking it now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ansta1 wrote: |
| I so want TTT to get back and provide his or her view... |
+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Worthy of yet another repost perhaps....
| Alastair Pink wrote: |
| As an outsider (just a skiing punter/customer) I view the unfolding events with the BASI management with incredulity, it's the morbid fascination of watching a train wreck.... |
BASI - the organisation that keeps on giving.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
^ Spin? Er, BASI lost by a couple of own goals. There's another fixture in November. Where's the spin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
BASI it seems were in the wrong to suspend Simon Butler - something I questioned last night (@Tue 29 Sep, 15 16:37).
|
But did you question it ahead of this point despite all the other input and 'evidence' which, as a non basi and in my opinion at least objective observer, was always going to end in this was.
NB. I do not for one second suggest that SB is without any fault in this whole debacle, but some in my view are less at fault than others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
| But did you question it ahead of this point despite all the other input and 'evidence' which, as a non basi and in my opinion at least objective observer, was always going to end in this was. |
^ Couple of comments I wrote last night (one of my few sorties into this thread).
"I do think BASI made an error (and exposed themselves) by removing his license."
Tue 29 Sep, 15 16:37
"for sure this topic is emotive : but lets be sure to present both sides of the argument ?
BASI don't come out of it looking great either."
Tue 29 Sep, 15 20:16
Either way I am out.
Happy to sit back with the popcorn rather than get involved in a food fight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
So no then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
^ go and read the 2nd post of the entire topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
On November 5th last year I wrote
| irie wrote: |
| It is quite obvious that BASI, operating as a private organisation, has become so p*ssed off with SB that it has made an emotional decision to be rid of him but in doing so has left itself open to litigation under civil law. |
The writing was on the wall right from the start. As I also said, BASI should have made a business decision. They didn't, and they're screwed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Haggis_Trap wrote: |
| ^ go and read the 2nd post of the entire topic. |
And for balance pages 29-31 and 38 onwards..... If people would like all of your input for clarity.
(lots of time and bandwidth right now)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I once swatted up about judicial review in England in a planning context. As I understand it the judicial review looks at the exercise of power by a public body (and also, in Scotland, a private one). There are a variety of remedies. An award of damages doesn't necessarily follow even if the complaint is upheld.
See http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Research%20briefings%20and%20fact%20sheets/SB09-75.pdf
A judicial review looks at the process/legality of a decision, rather than the merits of the decision. Hence, a dreadful decision might be deemed to have been arrived at by the correct process. Or, conversely, a good decision arrived at by a faulty process.
So I guess the Court will be looking at the process whereby MOUs were awarded to some people and not others. Or awarded to some and then rescinded. Or whatever it was that happened.
As I read it, if SB's action is successful, the outcome might be for the Court to ask BASI to think again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| pam w wrote: |
| to think again. |
It's tempting to set the saga to Flower of Scotland. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| laundryman wrote: |
| pam w wrote: |
| to think again. |
It's tempting to set the saga to Flower of Scotland. |
Tsk tsk.
"Tae think again"
Get it right..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
l, the outcome might be for the Court to ask BASI to think again.
|
Or even to start thinking in the first place.
Honestly - many many people on here and elsewhere, have recommended Basi to stop this farce.
It's been an unnecessary but massive waste of money, time, goodwill. Think of all the initiatives that haven't had any attention while the board and organisation have been wrapped up in this foolish and self destructive obsession.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
