Hi thanks for your question. My name's XXXXX XXXXX I'm going to assist you with it.
Could you first just confirm for me that this is a private members' clug (i.e. an unincorporated association with, possibly, fee paying members)? Alternatively does the club have legal status as company (either limited by guarantee or shares)?
Secondly, could you give me a little more background on the nature of the maladministration, please.
Look forward to hearing from you.
Hi Frederick, I see that you have asked another question regarding this.
In order to be able to provide you an accurate answer I do need the information above. This is to ensure that my answer is on point and as helpful as possible.
The club is a private members club registered under the Friendly Societies Act and there is an annual membership fee. The rules are clear that when an allegation is made to the committee a copy must be made available to the person accused before any hearing takes place. This did not happen, but the committee conducted a hearing and imposed the maximum period of suspension of 12 months on an unsubstantiated accusation in direct infringement of club rules. I believe this is maladministration and I can prove it has happened on other occasions.
I'm going to have to opt out of this but another expert should along shortly. Please dont respond to this or it will come back to my inbox.
It now seems that the committee has actively taken part in seeking information to support the complaint. I believe it is beholden on the committee to make a decision on the complaint itself and not to set up an enquiry to attempt to justify it. This is because members of the committee might be friends with the complainant. The committee has already withheld provision of the complaint to me before deciding to suspend me in breach of the club rules and natural justice. A copy of the complaint has now been sent to me, three weeks after being suspended.
It has now emerged that the committee has been actively asking for evidence to support the complaint. I believe this is wrong and that they should be confining their activities to the complaint itself because members of the committee might be friends of the complainant and they should not take sides.
do you know the background to my case?