Rayleigh 362 Posted February 12, 2019 I still don't understand that if riders are still owed money from the Rye House management then why has that not been paid from the bond? or, if the bond was not paid, why has the BSPA not sued the Rye House management? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chris116 754 Posted February 12, 2019 41 minutes ago, Rayleigh said: I still don't understand that if riders are still owed money from the Rye House management then why has that not been paid from the bond? or, if the bond was not paid, why has the BSPA not sued the Rye House management? The BSPA only use the bond to pay standard rates. If riders had a contract that paid them more then they have to sue the Rye House promotion and a major part of that was recently made bankrupt! The situation appears to be that the riders have been paid at standard rate but therefore still feel they are owed money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayleigh 362 Posted February 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Chris116 said: The BSPA only use the bond to pay standard rates. If riders had a contract that paid them more then they have to sue the Rye House promotion and a major part of that was recently made bankrupt! The situation appears to be that the riders have been paid at standard rate but therefore still feel they are owed money. Thanks Chris, but as Carter & Bailey Ltd who owns the leasehold of the stadium and according to Companies House is still active but with Robert Scott not Warren Scott as director, then the BSPA could address their issues there or would this action open a "can of worms" for the BSPA? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cityrebel 2,960 Posted February 12, 2019 31 minutes ago, Rayleigh said: Thanks Chris, but as Carter & Bailey Ltd who owns the leasehold of the stadium and according to Companies House is still active but with Robert Scott not Warren Scott as director, then the BSPA could address their issues there or would this action open a "can of worms" for the BSPA? You will probably find that the leaseholders Carter & Bailey are a 'different' company to the speedway promoters BMR. If that's the case, then they might not be liable for the latter's debt. Of course, i could be wrong. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayleigh 362 Posted February 14, 2019 On 2/12/2019 at 10:30 AM, Chris116 said: The BSPA only use the bond to pay standard rates. If riders had a contract that paid them more then they have to sue the Rye House promotion and a major part of that was recently made bankrupt! The situation appears to be that the riders have been paid at standard rate but therefore still feel they are owed money. If that is true Chris then that is ridiculous. The Bond is there to cover ANY debts incurred by a promotion, who is to say the debt to a rider is too large or the debt to a landlord is too excessive, the bond should be there to make sure in the event of a promotor not fulfilling his obligations the BSPA will make good these debts (presumably the BSPA did not get paid in full themselves). Maybe the debts were so large that the BSPA exhausted the bond without paying everybody in full, if this is the case then BSPA should list in detail how the bond was distributed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Smith 5,645 Posted February 14, 2019 17 minutes ago, Rayleigh said: If that is true Chris then that is ridiculous. The Bond is there to cover ANY debts incurred by a promotion, who is to say the debt to a rider is too large or the debt to a landlord is too excessive, the bond should be there to make sure in the event of a promotor not fulfilling his obligations the BSPA will make good these debts (presumably the BSPA did not get paid in full themselves). Maybe the debts were so large that the BSPA exhausted the bond without paying everybody in full, if this is the case then BSPA should list in detail how the bond was distributed. The debt owed by the Rye House promotion was way above the Bond amount. The standard rate allows the BSPA to split the amount owed evenly for all 7 rider's. A bar has to be set somewhere. Would you think it's fair if a No1 is owed £50,000 and a No7 owed £2,000, should the No7 miss out because the No1 takes all the Bond?!? I'm not sure but, Bomber's the only Rye rider I've seen saying he's owed money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigcatdiary 3,156 Posted February 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Rayleigh said: Maybe the debts were so large that the BSPA exhausted the bond without paying everybody in full, if this is the case then BSPA should list in detail how the bond was distributed. And whenever have the BSPA ever done that Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayleigh 362 Posted February 14, 2019 2 hours ago, Daniel Smith said: The debt owed by the Rye House promotion was way above the Bond amount. The standard rate allows the BSPA to split the amount owed evenly for all 7 rider's. A bar has to be set somewhere. Would you think it's fair if a No1 is owed £50,000 and a No7 owed £2,000, should the No7 miss out because the No1 takes all the Bond?!? I'm not sure but, Bomber's the only Rye rider I've seen saying he's owed money. How much was the total debt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Smith 5,645 Posted February 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Rayleigh said: How much was the total debt? £100,000+. That is the owners whole debt, including the stupid MX track installation etc Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayleigh 362 Posted February 14, 2019 20 minutes ago, Daniel Smith said: £100,000+. That is the owners whole debt, including the stupid MX track installation etc But surely the Bond (I believe to be 50K - 60K) is to only cover Speedway related debts. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
89buttons 749 Posted February 14, 2019 4 hours ago, Daniel Smith said: The debt owed by the Rye House promotion was way above the Bond amount. The standard rate allows the BSPA to split the amount owed evenly for all 7 rider's. A bar has to be set somewhere. Would you think it's fair if a No1 is owed £50,000 and a No7 owed £2,000, should the No7 miss out because the No1 takes all the Bond?!? I'm not sure but, Bomber's the only Rye rider I've seen saying he's owed money. Aaron Summers made it known a week or two back he’s owed money still, as are other team members. Said he hasn’t wanted to come out publicly but felt any riders paying the club to use the track for practise days being laid on in jan and feb should know they’re lining the pockets of people still owe other riders money and wanted to explain his disgust that they are able to earn revenue from the track while still owing riders money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Smith 5,645 Posted February 14, 2019 14 minutes ago, Rayleigh said: But surely the Bond (I believe to be 50K - 60K) is to only cover Speedway related debts. It does, but you asked what the promotions debt is. Speedway debt is around the £70,000 - £80,000. It's more than the bond and in total own over £100,000. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cityrebel 2,960 Posted February 14, 2019 1 hour ago, 89buttons said: Aaron Summers made it known a week or two back he’s owed money still, as are other team members. Said he hasn’t wanted to come out publicly but felt any riders paying the club to use the track for practise days being laid on in jan and feb should know they’re lining the pockets of people still owe other riders money and wanted to explain his disgust that they are able to earn revenue from the track while still owing riders money. As an unlicensed track, there's very little BSPA can do about it. Maybe the riders could sue the promoters for loss of earnings. Probably more chance of getting blood out of a stone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SPEEDY69 1,238 Posted February 14, 2019 7 hours ago, Daniel Smith said: The debt owed by the Rye House promotion was way above the Bond amount. The standard rate allows the BSPA to split the amount owed evenly for all 7 rider's. A bar has to be set somewhere. Would you think it's fair if a No1 is owed £50,000 and a No7 owed £2,000, should the No7 miss out because the No1 takes all the Bond?!? I'm not sure but, Bomber's the only Rye rider I've seen saying he's owed money. Doesn't mean he's the only one though, just that others don't choose to make it public. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fromafar 10,225 Posted February 14, 2019 10 hours ago, Daniel Smith said: The debt owed by the Rye House promotion was way above the Bond amount. The standard rate allows the BSPA to split the amount owed evenly for all 7 rider's. A bar has to be set somewhere. Would you think it's fair if a No1 is owed £50,000 and a No7 owed £2,000, should the No7 miss out because the No1 takes all the Bond?!? I'm not sure but, Bomber's the only Rye rider I've seen saying he's owed money. Aaron Summers is saying he still owed money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites