Club Tooling Fund

[TedTaylor]

Committees of Clubs as democratic organisations are obliged to act as directed by the members (as at the AGM). While a club that is a Limited Company with a Board also has to consider the implications to the Company it would be assumed that they would listen to the democratic voice and do their level best to implement such decisions. However if they feel the action they are being required to take could lead the Company into trouble they can, after due deliberation and with a proper explanation, as I understand it though I am not an expert, decline to act.

The line that I am taking over the remaking of windscreens is that I am acting as a private individual acting as an intermediary between the supplier and individuals of Clubs, and any manufacturer liability will still be between the manufacturer and the individual. This is the only way it can be done unless I get a proper legal opinion that says otherwise.

This is in part to protect the Club(s) unless they have product liability insurance which most have in their Club Insurance package.

The point about ensuring a supply of body parts by assisting in any way we can is well made. Apart from the banger racing issue there is a danger that nice cars will be purchased and broken purely to give repair panels for people's own favourite cars.

I would support getting a 'spares consortium' going - something that we could investigate with Club Triumph though I am aware that they have a wider range of cars to cater for and any possible investment must reflect this. And yes this means an estate boot seal ........

Ted

[Allen Walker]

Somebody can be more informative about this, but I think the TR Register operates such a scheme, and it is a separate entity (separate company even?) that members are invited to join if they so wish.

This should be the model as far as I'm concerned, but operated as a separate entity that either Register members, CT members, or any other club's members can join and contribute to.

I think the idea of chucking money at a supplier to help them build their capital equipment in the hope they get their arse into gear is the wrong way to do it, tail wagging the dog so to speak.

Sell 'shares' in the 'organisation', gather a fighting fund, see how much you get and how you can use it. If you only get a couple of grand, that limits what you can do. If you get more, then opportunities will open up. You can then go to X supplier, say 'we, the organisation, will guarantee an order for a Y amount of part Z, etc., etc., how much can you do it for?" It's up to the supplier to make it happen.

I know one argument against has been the logistical one, i.e. how to store and distribute the parts. My answer would be, you don't. You get the supplier to do it.

Anyway, my answer, I would be prepared to buy 'shares' in such an 'organisation'.

[James]

The Dolomite club do it as well.

I feel this is something that the main Triumph forum should be handling?

I'll say it again, there's no club without the cars.

I'm not sure if shares etc would work because people only pay up when in need.

[mikeyb]

I think this warrants a peice in the magazine.

I would be up for contributing said dosh. As most are probably aware I have had my own little forrays into producing goods, just a thought about what to have made, b post repeater lenses seem to be hard to get hold of in good nick.

[Jonathan Lewis]

Even if the scheme started off as a proper forum for ascertaining demand for parts within the various clubs' membership and relating that to whatever commercial pressures/considerations the various suppliers might see, that might be a start...

Whilst I am well aware that there are numerous logistical and legal issues at play here, I am not confident that we can rely on the market to provide for what is, after all, an increasingly small pool of cars. To take my own example, I have been waiting for parts for another (non-Triumph) car for some nine months now - OEM is out of stock with no schedule for restock, marque specialist suppliers have no plans to re-make, and local specialist trade suppliers don't want to get involved for a one-off. And the vehicle in question may still be more numerous in the UK than the Triumph 2000... How long before good cars start to be broken for parts (as others have suggested) or even treated as insurance write-offs for relatively trivial damage simply because a repair cannot be costed/undertaken within the insurer's view of what constitutes a reasonable timescale?...

So yes, provided that someone can come up with a model that would appear to stand some chance of addressing these concerns (and even perhaps help fund suppliers in the re-manufacture of vital but low-demand parts, provided that - in Allen's words - it is not simply "chucking money" at them), I too would be prepared to consider buying shares in such a scheme.

Regards,

[Allen Walker]

Of course Earlparts are in a unique position in that it is they, and only they, that are ever likely to be able to supply panels. This means that it does need a more cooperative approach where they are concerned.

[David Withers]

Well, this post has been on all evening. so far, only 4 of us have said yes.

This needs to be 30 or 40 before we can do anything.

So?

I'm sorry but I have to declare "no interest" in contributing to a fund for panel tooling or the like for the following reasons:

I've already invested quite heavily in bringing my car to a condition where corrosion is non-existent and major item replacement should not be needed. Further, it covers only a very low annual mileage, mainly of 'local urban' nature, so the chances of a heavy accident are relatively low.

[englishbull]

Well, this post has been on all evening. so far, only 4 of us have said yes.

This needs to be 30 or 40 before we can do anything.

So?

But all members do not have access to a computer and if they do ,do they use the Forum?

Perhaps it should be put to vote in the Magazine?

Neil is only 5 mins away from me and when I last spoke with him (2 weeks ago) he told me that housing for the Press is a long.long way off from being completed unfortunately due to funding..........

Also another point to bear in mind is..............Neil also advised me that the sales of Triumph Big Six panels and parts is not as good as Austin etc, that Earlparts also deal in and his profit lies with these sales........................

Therefore if and when the press becomes active I would guess that he will concentrate on non Triumph parts and really can you blame him?.................if this is were his profit will be made to pay for the press.

He did also say that if he was to start making panels for the Big Sixes then the first port of call would probably be MK2 front wings and repair panels.

What about register members (those with the building skills,or those that know somebody in the trade..............I don't know but am willing to labour) help build the Tooling Shed?

[valencia]

Just briefly, I would support panels before anything else. They are the most essential item and what is likely to see our cars off the road if we cannot get replacements.
We should have an article in Six Appeal to broaden the debate and gauge support.
Michael Hasleden.

[James]

I'm sorry but I have to declare "no interest" in contributing to a fund for panel tooling or the like for the following reasons:

I've already invested quite heavily in bringing my car to a condition where corrosion is non-existent and major item replacement should not be needed. Further, it covers only a very low annual mileage, mainly of 'local urban' nature, so the chances of a heavy accident are relatively low.

Isn't there a statistic that says most accidents are within a mile of home?