[quote=“Veritas” post=7703]
Actually every squadron with a CWC is a trust. The CWC are the trustees. [/quote]
Actually, I think you’ll find that all CWC members are in fact Leprechauns and all squadron funds are stored in pots of gold at the end of rainbows.
I think I read that in an AP or PAM at some point. Or maybe it was the Charities Act, or possibly the Leprechaun Act?
Hi all, I have been busy digging and what a find….
After a phone call to an old friends they opened my eyes to a letter the 863 chairman has sent to many chair persons within the wing. This letter might shed some light on many of your questions.
I have removed many of the names as I don’t believe it is fair to name and shame in the public domain. Unless you really deserve it… please do not research their name and post them.
[attachment=67]Letterfrom863chairmantothewingchairpersonsPage1.pdf[/attachment]
[attachment=70]Letterfrom863chairmantothewingchairpersonsPage2.pdf[/attachment]
[attachment=71]Letterfrom863chairmantothewingchairpersonsPage3.pdf[/attachment]
[attachment=72]Letterfrom863chairmantothewingchairpersonsPage4.pdf[/attachment]
[attachment=68]Letterfrom863chairmantothewingchairpersonsPage5.pdf[/attachment]
I can only sympathise for the wing chairman, Mr C as you will know him, from reading between the lines of this letter it sounds to me as if the wing chairman funded the squadron allowing it to continue as the existing whilst the CWC had been suspended. If the wing chairman did not do this how was the squadron to operate?
So the squadron stays open for a few more months ‘thanks to the chairman and wing staff’ and the CWC try and accuse them of using their position to take all the money from the little squadrons for themselves, [bad evil villain laugh] :evil: .
You will all no doubt see the use of adjective’s and long waffle sentience’s which contains a lot of bol***ks and not much evidence, I’m feeling a bit of deja-vu.
Enjoy your read.
what is the max size a pdf can be?
i have been on the sqn for over 2 years, and i have seen the commitment all the staff and cadets put in to every activity, and it is so sad to not be able to be on the sqn and see everyone enjoying themselves at the moment
Yes I am a new parent to 863 SUSPENDED Squadron, through no fault of the cadets! I have a horrible feeling I do know Veritas but after reading what I have, I wish I didn’t!! I have only met the person once and that was enough! My child is devastated and I am disappointed by the behaviour of supposedly adults in the committee. Do you know Veritas?
fd74, I don’t however most on this have thread have wondered whether it could be the Chairman. Anonymous, it seems to be a rubbish situation and I hope you get your Squadron back soon without any grief!
Interesting how they use the smoke and mirrors of “child safeguarding” failures to mask their intent.
If all the things Veritas mentioned happened, all the apologies and dismissals, for which BTW there is no proof whatsoever, then why did the Commandant shut the unit down unless she thought you were all beyond redemption! Surely she would have come long to your famous meetings and said sorry as well, or answer B!
I would reopen it with a new number and new civcom and take legal action to recover the financial assets stolen from the previous Squadrond fund. you parents hold the real power, mobilise and organise and get rid of this self serving bunch as is your right.
For you to think that you have a role in ATC safeguarding procedures is frankly enough to tell you to sling yer hook- you do think you are in charge of the unit and perhaps a unit named Thurston with a new number would be the only way to break your web of lies and deceit.
If I was your Wing Chairman I would be at Sue, Grabbit and Run first thing next week to seek satisfaction.
…And stop calling yourselves ‘trustees’ as well. It’s weird.
lol
Interestingly, the police haven’t seen fit to charge anyone about all these “accusations” against the Sqn/Wing/HQ staff. I wonder how long it will be before they are knocking on the door of this shower.
Im sure my firm could do a good deal… Must say, I’d do it for free just for the pleasure of cross-examining Veritas in Court.
I think I read that in an AP or PAM at some point. Or maybe it was the Charities Act, or possibly the Leprechaun Act?[/quote]
Whether AP, PAM, Charities Act or Leprechaun Act, I am quite confident that Veritas and his fellow thieves will STILL be unable to find a reference that supports their position and will instead resort to pompous bluster (see above).
IF the status of CWCs is as suggested the Charity Commission would have sent out revised guidance to every single squadron, under separate cover by now as the situation seems to be black and white, superceding the ACPs.
The Charity Commission will no doubt be consulted by the authors of the new ACP, to ensure that any loopholes are closed and the heirarchy retain the ability to deal with problems and mavericks, without recourse.
I would just like to remind everyone that no swearing is tolerated (no matter how heinous the postings), and that this is a discussion forum open to the public, so please be mindful of your accusations.
You have no direct proof that any poster is connect to this squadron (except those who have admitted so), and I would be wary of adding 2+2 lest you get 5.
I don’t think I’ve commented so far, but I am in amazement that things can get to this level without someone stepping in before.
It’s quite scary to see how bad things can get over very little actual problems!
The problem someone who should know better (after all you shouldn’t be Chairman or exec of a committee without being acquainted with “house rules”) is accusing people of acting out of malice, when all they are doing is following said house rules and sees the professional apologies and others seemingly discredited and apparently gone as result as a victory.
However my experience of some who join CWCs is we’ll do our own thing and act like a 5 year olds if told no.
Someone crowing as they are, need bringing down a peg or two.
The only victory here, is or will be a pyrrhic one.
I just hope that the cadets that were once part of this amazing squadron come back to it when it opens. As some have gone to other squadrons after being told to do so on a temporary basis by the Air commadore.
All three of the positions you mention about being missing, if you knew anything about the military (which you most clearly don’t as you have never served and if you had you wouldn’t have such a self self self attitude) then those positions change all the time. The military can change the time frames on those postings as it sees fit, some can be 18 months some can extend to 3 years. It’s all down to the unit posting the individual there and if the individual wants to extend they put a request in, if not they go back to their proper job.
I take you haven’t either as you would know it is Air Commodore, Air Commadore B)
Now that would be an interesting little development which would stop any incestuous developments, but why not limit the length of service to 3 years for the main three positions, revert to standard member of Civ Com for next 3 years, then take on a ‘main’ role again after the break.