what do you think of this

[hotrod]

 

spot on some had to do that when the split came

and what happens if some one reports one to the shu? after all they are su rings

 

 

[Guest bigda]

as his rings  are still the property of the shu for that year and his resignation will not apply to the shu, till after there  audit,  they have  no real reason   to change anything to aid the member  as  at the same time the shu  went  out there way to supply him with  his rings when he asked for them,  politically  or not   they are only doing what the shu members  ask of them  and that is   run the union as the shu, and not as any other  :-/

[me]

as his rings  are still the property of the shu for that year and his resignation will not apply to the shu, till after there  audit,  they have  no real reason   to change anything to aid the member  as  at the same time the shu  went  out there way to supply him with  his rings when he asked for them,  politically  or not   they are only doing what the shu members  ask of them  and that is   run the union as the shu, and not as any other  :-/

 

I am a member and I am not asking them to act in such a stupid ignorant manner. When the people running the sport in Scotland act with such poor grace no wonder membership numbers are tumbling year on year. Plus remember by acting in such a manner the SHU sre effectively condemning the majority of nearly a hundred young pigeons to death and then next week they will pop up campaigning against sparrowhawks!

 

[Guest]

and what happens if some one reports one to the shu? after all they are su rings

 

 

yes thats a problem but at least he can race them bigda grow up

[PIGEON_MAN]

I asked the question earlier does he have to be a member of the SHU to register the rings, I believe the answear was yes,the guy is not a member of the SHU so what are they supposed to do break their own rules because he had problems with the club.

[jimmy white]

 

I am a member and I am not asking them to act in such a stupid ignorant manner. When the people running the sport in Scotland act with such poor grace no wonder membership numbers are tumbling year on year. Plus remember by acting in such a manner the SHU sre effectively condemning the majority of nearly a hundred young pigeons to death and then next week they will pop up campaigning against sparrowhawks!

 

this off course is true,, well said "me"

[Guest bigda]

 

I am a member and I am not asking them to act in such a stupid ignorant manner. When the people running the sport in Scotland act with such poor grace no wonder membership numbers are tumbling year on year. Plus remember by acting in such a manner the SHU sre effectively condemning the majority of nearly a hundred young pigeons to death and then next week they will pop up campaigning against sparrowhawks!

you may suggest that to be the case  but the position the shu has  it cant allow any out side interference,  or under mine it authority,  and there is  not a  club in Britain or a union  in the world that would let  some one undermine there authority,

and i am sure the rpra  would defend its own  to the  hilt

there are plenty out there    they   are called the poor me"s tribe,  who at the end of the  day only  bother about there self,  and are  always seeking the high ground,  and try to get  one daft enough to take up there plight. the shu have done nothing wrong through my rose tinted glasses 8) 8)

[Guest bigda]

you need to watch,  what you say there mate,  as the have the power to invite you in, to explain greig  

[Guest Greig the doo Drysdale]

you need to watch,  what you say there mate,  as the have the power to invite you in, to explain greig  

 

Thanks for the advice mate but I would be happy to tell them its a joke

[Guest redwhiteblue]

 

I am a member and I am not asking them to act in such a stupid ignorant manner. When the people running the sport in Scotland act with such poor grace no wonder membership numbers are tumbling year on year. Plus remember by acting in such a manner the SHU sre effectively condemning the majority of nearly a hundred young pigeons to death and then next week they will pop up campaigning against sparrowhawks!

 

at least we agree on something me, sometimes i think its an inhouse problem in scotland with the secretary and president you are all aware of the problems this year i had wi the shu/cheat but we won't go down that road just now

[Guest bigda]

 

Thanks for the advice mate but I would be happy to tell them its a joke

 

glad to give you advice, but its not the joke part that they would have you for, its the  deformation of character  and the old bit  

[JADE]

the problem is the member and his former club. he cannot have rings registered if he is not a current member. if he falls out with his club and resigns why would they register his rings for him as there is obviously bad feeling between them. all he has to do is join the shu  as an individual member then he can register the rings. whats the problem? do the rpra sell rings to non members? i think not.

[Guest]

I asked the question earlier does he have to be a member of the SHU to register the rings, I believe the answear was yes,the guy is not a member of the SHU so what are they supposed to do break their own rules because he had problems with the club.

 

This is the nub of the matter and I think it would take a Barrister to sort out, here’s how I see it

1 Do you have to be a member of the SHU to register rings?

NO – I for example am not a member but have transferred rings in the past. Why would I be entitled, I assume because I am a member of a recognised Union. However if this is the reason, I never had to supply my RPRA credentials to prove I am a member. That begs a further question; do the home unions contact each other for info to verify this? If they do I have not given permission and there is no rule that allows and there is no disclaimer on the transfer form which says they will contact other organisations for verification. That would be a clear breach of the data protection act.

2 Can the SHU sell rings to non members?

Again the answer must be NO. Each member of the SHU pays a membership to belong and receive the benefits of membership. If anyone can purchase rings (one of the important aspects of membership) then there would be no point in being members, besides of course other benefits.

3 Why would a member be supplied with rings without having paid their annual subscription?

Well  in this instance, it has happened because of good faith between two parties.

The fancier when ordering rings , was supporting his union, by putting in his order he was helping the Union estimate and order its rings and be ready at the earliest possible time for ring distribution.

The Union was acting efficiently in the fancier’s interest, planning for as early distribution as possible and was believing that the member intended to stay with the Union because why would he order rings otherwise?

4 Who owns the rings?

Hell I ain’t got a clue. Does the fancier have a bill of sale, a receipt? Or does that matter? Has he made payment and has the payment been accepted? If payment hasn’t been made, why has he been provided with rings?

5 Who owns the pigeons?

Well there’s no doubt here in my mind they belong to the fancier. For the purposes of racing however they will need to be registered ‘for ownership’.

6 So who has broken rules?

Well for me it’s clear the SHU have broken their own rules, they have supplied rings to a member who has not paid his subscription. This for me is the point of law, not of morality, because as stated above I believe both parties acted in good faith and I have sympathy for both.

As to the ex member, I do not believe he has broken any rules. He made a request for rings, nothing illegal and he was supplied with them.  However I think what a court of law would be interested in would be the chronology of this. When the fancier rung his birds was it after the due date for paying his annual contribution to the SHU and secondly when he rung his birds was he aware that he would no longer remain a member of the SHU, I think his intent at this time maybe important.

7 What would be the outcome

Who knows?? However to me it seems that there needs to be common sense on both sides. The SHU needs to know ring orders as early as possible for its efficient service to its member. Waiting for every subscription to be paid may cause untold disruption.

A court of law however would I think be saying why have such a rule i.e. you can only have rings if you are a fully paid up member and then ignore its rule? In those circumstances I think they would be compelled to find for the fancier and instruct the Union to register the rings in the fanciers name, however it may be tempered by the fancier’s intent, did he knowingly ring his birds when he knew he was not going to renew his membership?

The SHU may well have had similar situations in the past where perhaps a fancier has ordered rings, received and defaulted. Perhaps the inflammatory situation here is that the fancier has moved unions and stirred up nationalistic prejudices. But a union recognised by the FCI.

If I were the SHU  would ask permission to check that this fancier is now a member of the RPRA and if he is , take his money and register the rings with him. The alternative, well the fancier has made payment so can’t be done as a defaulter (unless he failed to resign prior to the SHU AGM), he can not return the rings without damaging the pigeons, that would be out of the question. The fancier can’t be stopped from joining the RPRA other than the RPRA has reason to reject him.

The outcome for me is the SHU needs to look at its policy of ring distribution. It could decide that no rings will be distributed without payment of annual fee or it may add a rule dissalowing any distributed rings to be raced with any FCI union unless the annual fee and rings are paid for?

Seems such a simple issue but certainly ain’t!

These are the thought off the top of my head and happy to be corrected/ criticised, the matter needs a quick solution though

 

[me]

 

This is the nub of the matter and I think it would take a Barrister to sort out, here’s how I see it

1 Do you have to be a member of the SHU to register rings?

NO – I for example am not a member but have transferred rings in the past. Why would I be entitled, I assume because I am a member of a recognised Union. However if this is the reason, I never had to supply my RPRA credentials to prove I am a member. That begs a further question; do the home unions contact each other for info to verify this? If they do I have not given permission and there is no rule that allows and there is no disclaimer on the transfer form which says they will contact other organisations for verification. That would be a clear breach of the data protection act.

2 Can the SHU sell rings to non members?

Again the answer must be NO. Each member of the SHU pays a membership to belong and receive the benefits of membership. If anyone can purchase rings (one of the important aspects of membership) then there would be no point in being members, besides of course other benefits.

3 Why would a member be supplied with rings without having paid their annual subscription?

Well  in this instance, it has happened because of good faith between two parties.

The fancier when ordering rings , was supporting his union, by putting in his order he was helping the Union estimate and order its rings and be ready at the earliest possible time for ring distribution.

The Union was acting efficiently in the fancier’s interest, planning for as early distribution as possible and was believing that the member intended to stay with the Union because why would he order rings otherwise?

4 Who owns the rings?

Hell I ain’t got a clue. Does the fancier have a bill of sale, a receipt? Or does that matter? Has he made payment and has the payment been accepted? If payment hasn’t been made, why has he been provided with rings?

5 Who owns the pigeons?

Well there’s no doubt here in my mind they belong to the fancier. For the purposes of racing however they will need to be registered ‘for ownership’.

6 So who has broken rules?

Well for me it’s clear the SHU have broken their own rules, they have supplied rings to a member who has not paid his subscription. This for me is the point of law, not of morality, because as stated above I believe both parties acted in good faith and I have sympathy for both.

As to the ex member, I do not believe he has broken any rules. He made a request for rings, nothing illegal and he was supplied with them.  However I think what a court of law would be interested in would be the chronology of this. When the fancier rung his birds was it after the due date for paying his annual contribution to the SHU and secondly when he rung his birds was he aware that he would no longer remain a member of the SHU, I think his intent at this time maybe important.

7 What would be the outcome

Who knows?? However to me it seems that there needs to be common sense on both sides. The SHU needs to know ring orders as early as possible for its efficient service to its member. Waiting for every subscription to be paid may cause untold disruption.

A court of law however would I think be saying why have such a rule i.e. you can only have rings if you are a fully paid up member and then ignore its rule? In those circumstances I think they would be compelled to find for the fancier and instruct the Union to register the rings in the fanciers name, however it may be tempered by the fancier’s intent, did he knowingly ring his birds when he knew he was not going to renew his membership?

The SHU may well have had similar situations in the past where perhaps a fancier has ordered rings, received and defaulted. Perhaps the inflammatory situation here is that the fancier has moved unions and stirred up nationalistic prejudices. But a union recognised by the FCI.

If I were the SHU  would ask permission to check that this fancier is now a member of the RPRA and if he is , take his money and register the rings with him. The alternative, well the fancier has made payment so can’t be done as a defaulter (unless he failed to resign prior to the SHU AGM), he can not return the rings without damaging the pigeons, that would be out of the question. The fancier can’t be stopped from joining the RPRA other than the RPRA has reason to reject him.

The outcome for me is the SHU needs to look at its policy of ring distribution. It could decide that no rings will be distributed without payment of annual fee or it may add a rule dissalowing any distributed rings to be raced with any FCI union unless the annual fee and rings are paid for?

Seems such a simple issue but certainly ain’t!

These are the thought off the top of my head and happy to be corrected/ criticised, the matter needs a quick solution though

 

You don't need to be a member of either the shu or the rpra to transfer birds into your name, what is needed is a bit of commonsense not petty political point scoring.

 

The main concern here should be the welfare of the birds, that is clearly not something that is bothering the shu too much and that is disappointing.

 

 

[naedoos]

heres the facts of the whole story ,he ordered his rings through his club sometime in august/september 100 rings got his rings on or shortly after 4th jan 2009 ,by this time politics where going wild in renfrew fed ,a club from out side the boundary tried to muscle into the fed lawers letters ,shu appeals,you name it ,most of big murdy's club were for them getting in but the rest of the fed or most of them were against them getting in as they didnt apply properly ie they were told last year to get a member to put in a notice of motion to change the boundary, and they could have got in no bother but they tried to come in by force ie lawers ,so with all the fighting  the big man got fed up and saw what we have in our club (harmony) so he applied and got in, this was february/march and handed in a letter to his old club secretary resigning ,so he had rung nearly 60/70 youngbirds by that time ,after he resigned his old club split with anothr four members leaving to join another club in renfrew fed the rest left renfrew fed to  start up a new fed with one more club in renfrew and the dumbarton club  6/7 lofts/ west of scotland fed ,now  these clubs have made a new fed called west strathclyde fed .as i have said the big man is no way political he just wants to race his birds in peace ,then this $hite .

 

£13 solves it then (shrug)

 

 

[Guest]

 

£13 solves it then (shrug)

 

 

   :)

[Guest]

i think the timming of ordering  the rings and moveing to the rpra is very important in this and some other cases he ordered them half way through the previous season witch is the rules of that union and then he decided to join another union now i dont know if he tried to hand back the rings but i do know of other cases like this where the fancier did try to hand them back or refused to take them and was told if he didnt take and pay for them he would be dept suspended as has happened to others the thing is if someone decides to go to another union there should be a common change over period and common sence should prevail as me has allready said the birds that thease rings dont care whats on them so why not just regester them as N/A membership as allbear said he has done thats what the rpra does no problem done it for years with them

[Roland]

Frank I think you hit the nail on the head when say '..............and common sence should prevail ....'

Unfortunately that seems to be a bridge to far for many, and against their ego and self importance for many others.

Obviously don't know the wheres and whyfors in this case, but 'Common Sense does seem to be lack.

[Guest]

Frank I think you hit the nail on the head when say '..............and common sence should prevail ....'

Unfortunately that seems to be a bridge to far for many, and against their ego and self importance for many others.

Obviously don't know the wheres and whyfors in this case, but 'Common Sense does seem to be lack.

 

i can understand any union trying to keep its members but at the end of the day if a fancier wants to go elsewhere why be awkward the thing is  before we joined the rpra their was no choice take it or chuck the doo,s now scottish fanciers have a choice it wont suit every body but it does me

[BLACK W F]

The thing is whats he doing with SHU rings if he resiegned at agm  who give him the rings he should not have the rings  thats my understanding but if i was him i would pay the £13  after all what can you do with it 1 bag of corn then tell them to get to *expletive removed* once registered  

[Guest Denny]

My good friend(JOHN MURDOCH) (MURDY TO HIS FRIENDS ) got rings from his old club (shu) after a lot of fighting in the renfrew fed( WHEN IT SPLIT),he resigned  at HIS CLUBS agm by letter and joined my club in clydebank (rpra) . this week he tried to transfer a su pigeon sent cheque and transfer ,the shu kept the cheque and refused the transfer ,he phoned and asked why and was given the bums rush (fobed off) he then asked about his 100 su rings this years and was told unless he joined the shu (payed his years dues ) the rings would not be registered in his name and therefore he would not be able to race them at all. Let me tell you this guy is no way political at all he just wants to race his pigeons , he phoned the SHU PRESIDENT IAN NOBLE  and was told the same $hite ,his young bird rings were in limbo unless he joined the shu this year (ps before he resigned he contact linda brooks at the shu and told her what he was going to do and( WAS TOLD BY HER EVERYTHING WOULD BE OK ABOUT HIS 2009 RINGS) ,WHAT IS MY FRIEND TO DO NOW I ASK ? and what do you think of the shu for doing this

 

Where is freedom of choice and enfringement of rights?   Let alone theft as they cashed his cheque for nothing in return!