In this website, I often refer to the fact that the Lincoln and District Indoor Bowling Club Co Ltd (LIBC) is a CASC registered club. The Community Amateur Sports Club (CASC) scheme was introduced in 2002 as an option for clubs to register with HMRC  (the tax man) and receive tax reliefs in return for the club committing to always comply with a set of regulations. LIBC joined in 2004. More - click here.

On the evening of Thursday the 26th October 2023 the Lincoln and District Indoor Bowling Club Co Ltd (LIBC) Board of Directors (BofD) sat down to a board meeting and decided to revoke my life membership and shareholding. Arbitrarily, not following any legal process, just sat down and did it! Then informed me afterwards, no warning, no interaction, nothing. This website is about supplying you, the reader, with the necessary background for you to decide if what they did was justified or not. And if what I did to incur their wrath was justified or not. Or just enjoy the cartoons!

 

EXAMPLES of my early correspondence with the LIBC Board of Directors (BofD):

 

  • Jun 2018 from President to me: "..... Your vast knowledge and expertise relating to IT has been invaluable to the club over many years ..... I for one appreciate everything that you have done. I hope that we may continue to work for our mutual benefit for many years to come." 

 

  • Jun 2020 from President to me: "..... Without your knowledge David I feel we would be in a sorry state. We hope that we can continue working together in the foreseeable future." 

 

  • Apr 2021 from General Manager to me: "..... Thank you for all of your hard work over the last 15 years or so which has been invaluable to me personally and saved the club many tens of thousands of pounds. You were responsible for bringing the club into the 21st century.... "

Correspondence with the LIBC Board of Directors (BofD) over the last 2½ years:

  • Sep 2021 Qty 1 message from me to LIBC Board of Directors (BofD), stating lack of CASC compliance, having restricted members' rights over many years.

  • Oct 2021 to 10 Mar 2022 discussion(!!), about the implementation of a CASC compliant governance.

    • 11 Mar 2022 to 31 Jul 2022 silence.

  • 1 Aug 2022 Qty 1 message from me to BofD, pointing out GDPR errors.

    • 3 Aug 2022 to 11 Feb 2023 silence.

  • 12 Feb/Mar 2023 further “discussions”, about CASC compliance.

    • 2 Mar 2022 to 17 Aug 2023 silence.

  • 18 Aug 2023 to 8 Sep “discussions”,  about GDPR failings and methods used to implement directorates, etc.

  • OCT 2023 letter from BofD to me, ”At a meeting of the Board of Directors held on Thursday 26th October 2023 it was unanimously agreed that your Membership/shareholding of Lincoln & District Indoor bowling Club be revoked with immediate effect. Your email dated 6th September 2023 asked for a review of your complaints against us. We submitted your complaints to be independently reviewed by our governing body, the EIBA (English Indoor Bowling Association). Their decision was that your complaints were not upheld. The review by the EIBA followed an accumulation of 2 years of unfounded allegations by you aimed at the Directors of the company. During this period of perceived bullying some senior directors decided to resign because of your actions. This cannot be allowed to continue." 

 

DID I DESERVE SUCH TREATMENT? Well, all I need to do to prove my innocence is:

  1. Show that there was no such thing as a "review by the EIBA" and that the EIBA did not examine my complaints.
  2. Show that my allegations contained evidence and references so that they could not be termed "unfounded".
  3. Show that my behaviour was not "bullying".

 

That's my aim. I shouldn't have to, but I have given up on the "innocent until proven guilty "bit! So, here goes:

  1. "review by the EIBA"? I spoke to Peter Thompson, Chief Executive of the EIBA. He stated that the EIBA had not examined my complaints, there had not been a review. He's my witness for the defence.

  2. "Unfounded allegations"? The Cambridge dictionary says that a claim is "Unfounded" if it is not based on fact. ​​​​You can check my allegations on this website's Errors  page. You will see that any allegations I make ARE based on facts, all being supported by referenced arguments and evidence.

  3. And as for "bullying", thankfully, all interactions between myself and the BofD have been by letters or emails and I have retained copies of ALL of them. You can view an anonymized version of the relevant correspondence - click here. My informing the BofD of their errors was no more a case of bullying than it is when a solicitor gives their client some bad news about the legality, or rather the illegality of their actions. Or a policeman who provides proof of the illegal behaviour of a criminal - I suppose the criminal might dislike it, might object strongly saying that it upset them, but it wouldn’t be bullying.

It gets worse, for the BofD, that is. Their action was not legal anyway, and wouldn't have been even if they had been telling the truth. There are rules that must be followed.  Sport Resolutions says: "There is a well-established common law concept that disciplinary procedures must satisfy the requirements of natural justice.....i.e. disciplinary procedures/rules must be fair, clear and transparent ....". And CASC demands that disciplinary procedures must be "open and transparent and include an independent appeals process.

 

  • Natural justice "fair, clear and transparent"? CASC "open and transparent"? How could it be when the BofD admit that they took their decision to revoke my membership and shareholding at their board meeting? No-one other than directors present, least of all me. And I didn't even know it was happening. And the directors are my accusers, so hardly fair and impartial!

 

  • "Include an independent appeals process” - On 13 Dec 2023, after initially refusing to discuss the matter with me, the BofD made the offer of "You have until 1st February 2024 to submit an appeal to the Company Secretary. Any appeal will be heard at the AGM due in March 2024".  Independent? How can it be when it was the BofD who took the decision to revoke my membership and shareholding in the first place. And they organise, chair and run the AGM.

 

I could simply trust the Company Secretary and the BofD to be an impartial accuser, trial organiser, judge, jury, appeal organiser and executioner, but you will hopefully understand if I don't.

Do you think the BofD's behaviour was even remotely legal and/or CASC compliant?

 

And I discovered on 1 Feb 2024 that the LIBC has its own "Complaints, Disciplinary & Appeals Procedure", something that the BofD failed to mention. I found references to it in both the LIBC Code of Conduct, pages 1 and 6, and the LIBC Safeguarding and Child Protection Policy page 21, with review dates of October 2022 (downloaded from our previous website). It appears to be an essential part of both these processes so it must exist. I have emailed the Company Secretary and requested a copy and will update when I receive a reply. Of course the big question is: why didn't they use it? The EIBA's discipline and appeals procedures document states that: "Every club must have a written disciplinary procedure and expulsion provision .... and when a disciplinary matter arises, this must be strictly adhered to". And the BofD like referencing the EIBA, don't they?

Time for a little story - Dastardly Dan stole little Johnny's bike, but when interviewed by the police he told them that Johnny's mum had given him permission to take it. But the police then discovered that dastardly Dan was telling a despicable lie, that Johnny's mum had never said any such thing.

 

So, who now owns the bike? Obviously, because the excuse was shown to be a lie, and there had been no legal process, Johnny still owns the bike, always did.

 

And I still own my membership and company share. Always did! 

 

If you want to know details of the LIBC Board of Director's (BofD) major failure in CASC compliance, click here.

 

If you want to know details about more of the BofD's errors, or as they prefer to call them, "unfounded allegations", click here.

 

To see some useful background information related to the subjects discussed on this website -  click here.