|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Mar 14, 2014 15:52:19 GMT
CASC Gift aid for Clubs Part 2
See link below
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Mar 14, 2014 20:33:59 GMT
Thank you so much for that. I need to see if we can qualify do you have details for this ?
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Mar 14, 2014 21:01:32 GMT
Thank you so much for that. I need to see if we can qualify do you have details for this ? Just download Casc application form (registration) Will send a link when I can get the missus off facebook
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Mar 14, 2014 21:04:39 GMT
Oh bless her
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Mar 14, 2014 21:06:04 GMT
Thank you so much for that. I need to see if we can qualify do you have details for this ? Just download Casc application form (registration) Will send a link when I can get the missus off facebook %" text=" " /> At Last.... www.hmrc.gov.uk/charities/casc/register.htmregs cs
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Mar 14, 2014 21:13:29 GMT
We can only do this if we are on the list of eligible sports from the sports council ... sadly we are not
But maybe I need to see if we can be as snooker is
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on Mar 14, 2014 21:56:37 GMT
We can only do this if we are on the list of eligible sports from the sports council ... sadly we are not But maybe I need to see if we can be as snooker is Hi Chris I would have thought billiards is covered under snooker so we should be ok, never hurts to apply, they can only say yes or no! Regs cs
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Mar 14, 2014 22:01:08 GMT
AEBBA tried the sports council several years ago and were rejected, may be different now of course.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Apr 19, 2014 8:52:13 GMT
An update.
I was tasked with leading the search for a truck replacement at the AGM and as such should provide an update on what has happened.
I agreed to do almost all the deliveries up until the Surrey Open which has now passed and Northants kindly collected from there via Simon Coleman and his firm.
A lot of time initially was lost over uncertainty whether the truck replacement ECU could be activated. Every ECU specialist traceable was approached and the realisation was that none of them had the software available to activate a twenty year old ECU. The amounts Mercedes wanted were still prohibitive to spend on a twenty year old truck. A couple of further well meaning suggestions on activating the replacement ECU followed which again proved fruitless. The truck is thus scrap value for legal road use. The ECU was bypassed to connect the fuel pump direct and permanently live pumping which allowed the tables (hate to think what the exhaust emissions were!) to be moved (very slowly) in the current crisis from the Post Office Club.
Fund raising in the meantime had started in earnest.
Simon Coleman was approached at Bournemouth to discuss sourcing a van through his firm which has some 600 vehicles. A replacement must come from a trusted source with a service history as my investigations have suggested that clocking is rife in the used van market. The plan was to identify a vehicle and for Simon to try it out when collecting the tables from Surrey. Simon and I both had a few busy weeks (jury service for ne) and the search on van specs only began in earnest a fortnight before Surrey. We were looking for a high roof panel van which has a lower floor and higher payload than a Luton. It became evident that I was finding it extremely difficult to identify, let alone source, a replacement truck.
The problem is still maximum payload against storage space. The replacement must have 2 metre high headroom internally, two metres of wall space clear of wheel arches and be able to carry 1400kg (nine tables plus kit and driver) minimum, up to the 3.5 ton gross weight limit for anyone to drive.
The realisation was that the tables will not fit in a normal high roof LWB panel van and this has been a major setback. Simon was thus advised to collect from Surrey in a Luton. Few Lutons have a payload of more than 1100kg (without tail lift) hence I am trying to look at MWB rather than normal LWB but these are few and far between, an Iveco daily MWB looks possible but finding specs has eluded me so far and I am awaiting a reply from a dealer. The additional problem with a Luton is the loading height and that a tail-lift cannot be used because it reduces the payload by the weight of the tail-lift. tail-lifts also have to regular safety checks and be certified.
It is very difficult to find specs on the unusual derivatives of the vans we are targeting, MWB Luton (not normal LWB) or EXTRA high roof panel van. Simon Coleman took a look around his companies fleet for ideas and after consulting the fleet men up there warned that a single vehicle fulfilling, legally and safely, our needs may not exist.
Panel vans carry more but have wheel arches and side doors to make loading and strapping difficult and very few have 2 metre headroom. The potential solutions such as Renault low loader have poor reliability reviews. I do not have any major van suppliers close to me and would appreciate anyone who does taking a look at possible targets.
Even to carry a maximum of eight tables is so close to breaking the law with a MWB Luton even with only one driver that I am not happy with that solution. Also there were a lot of comments at Bournemouth this year about the lack of a practice table, especially for those who are not regular players but still enjoy Bournemouth. Several opens would also like a ninth table.
The alternative is to get a small ‘van’ trailer in addition (must be under 750kg gross weight) and take fewer tables on the replacement van (similar to the setup I use). Small trailers under 750kgs (loaded) do not count on the gross weight or driver licencing rules and thus the 3500kg limit can be slightly breached for any driver prior to 2013 licence (it's changed again). Problem here is extra storage, more skilled driving and can be a sod to find parking space at destinations. Simon Coleman concurs with this view and the AEBBA committee have been advised. Discussions are taking place this weekend to give me directions on how to proceed.
If the small van trailer is the way forward then is what we would need ideally is to take three tables on a small van trailer and six on a MWB Luton (stored on end as now) or extra high roof panel van (four on their end in only 1 metre of wallspace, not 2, at front and two on their sides between wheel arches). All anciliary kit to go on the van. The trailer would only be needed for hires of more than six or seven tables.
The immediate problem is additional expense so please keep the donations coming!
Chris Saville.
|
|
|
Post by iang on Apr 19, 2014 19:44:49 GMT
Horsham & District Bar Billiards have agreed to have a Truck Fund collecting box at our Masters competiton & at our Finals Night. 18th & 20th May for all players to make indvidual donations.
|
|
|
Post by Ros on Apr 20, 2014 10:18:01 GMT
I used to own a Ford Transit Horsebox - this was an Aluminium Luton body, with 2 heavy wooden ramps (rear and side), metal partitioning and a wooden floor on a LWB twin wheel chassis.
Its unladen weight (as measured at a public weighbridge) was just over 2200 kgs, leaving a payload of 1300kg for 2 horses, driver and passengers.
Appreciated that a Luton body is fairly high off the ground, but other than that, I am surprised that you can't find a LWB Transit Luton without tail-lift for the sort of payload you are looking for.
Transits have big advantages too, in that they are dead easy to drive and simple to maintain.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Apr 20, 2014 11:16:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by triplex on Apr 20, 2014 15:50:55 GMT
When looking for a Luton it is very difficult confirming the total payload as the majority of them are not built from the factory line as normal panel vans. Generally all Luton's which are originally sold to companies and fleet are sold as chassis cabs then have the Luton box purchased from there preferred body builder. Which in general means you need to access each one separately and not as a whole as it depends where the body was built and what of, then you can assess the weight of it. That's why everywhere you look on the web you will get different payloads.
|
|
|
Post by Ros on Apr 20, 2014 18:14:13 GMT
Yes, I'd looked at that article - but the Transit in that example has a tail lift. Luton bodies vary a lot in weight too and I agree that it is very difficult to find out unladen weights. This article (although from 2008) makes an interesting read: linkThe suggestion is that a vehicle/trailer combination exceeds 3.5T, then a tacho must be fitted. However, from research I've done, it seems the combo could still be driven by pre '97 licence holders. I'm not sure if an operators licence is needed in that situation. You could well be right that trailers under 750kgs don't count, but that would need careful verification before we commit to anything.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Apr 20, 2014 19:02:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ros on Apr 20, 2014 19:33:57 GMT
There are more than 2 sets of legislation that could apply, Chris! (As the rest of your post makes clear)
I was only quoting that article in my first statement - and fully appreciate that the article might be wrong or out of date or both.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on Apr 20, 2014 19:43:36 GMT
There are more than 2 sets of legislation that could apply, Chris! (As the rest of your post makes clear) I was only quoting that article in my first statement - and fully appreciate that the article might be wrong or out of date or both. Cheers Ros,
What else have I missed please? this is a real minefield.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by Ros on Apr 21, 2014 9:25:10 GMT
I don't necessarily think you have missed anything, Chris. Your last couple of posts seem to cover all the bases.
I was merely defending myself from this statement: "You are mixing up two completely different sets of legislation Ros, " by pointing out that there are at least 2 different sets of legislation that apply - as your own post later confirmed.
While trying to find some weights for luton bodies online (and the different manufacturers are remarkably cagey about publishing them!) I read numerous forum threads where even experienced vehicle operators could not agree on what was allowable, these of course were further complicated by the fact that the rules are constantly changing!
I agree that the only definitive information is that published by the government - it is a pity that some of that appears as clear as mud in terms of how our organisation and activities would be categorised.
Going back to the luton bodies possibility, there is also some info out there that there are ultra lightweight versions of the Vauxhall Movano, with a low slung luton body, that have payloads in excess of 1500kgs. But as these are fairly new, we would need to up the fundraising significantly to buy one.
What seems clear (from the article I posted and other similar ones) is that the industry, over the last few years, has been trying to develop lighter bodies (both in panel vans and box/lutons) in an effort to keep up with legislation.
Going back to my original post - I don't think we should write off the idea of a luton body, possibly on a Transit LWB chassis, as being too heavy without a bit more looking around. Maybe we should phone a few of the coachbuilders who make the luton bodies?
The Iveco Daily seems to get pretty bad press for reliability across the web.
|
|
beefy
Distinguished Member
T
Posts: 753
|
Post by beefy on Apr 22, 2014 16:42:07 GMT
I think most will fail on the open to the community part, especially the bit about membership fees. as far as I am aware and correct me if I am wrong the AEBBA isn't a club in that we don't pay membership fees and are technically not members. Do all the leagues pay an affiliation fees ?
Your club is open to the whole community if: •anyone can be a member - without discrimination •all the members can use the facilities - without discrimination •the level of fees doesn't discourage membership or use of the facilities
The way I interpret this, i am not a lawyer is, if we were all paying an annual subscription and in return the opens were free to all members we might stand more chance.
Now there is an idea, solves the problem of the lesser supported ones.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 14, 2014 13:50:13 GMT
We are very close to a decision on a 2008 (58 reg) Citroen Relay L3H3 extra high roof (2.1 metre high loadspace) 2.2lt panel van for 11k including VAT, MOT, fully serviced, warrantee, warranted 49k miles, FSH etc.
The Citroen Relay / Fiat Ducato / Peugeot Boxer all have the same lightweight stressed steel square shaped body and is the only van that will fit our needs on 1400kg payload, low floor and square panel van shape. The alternatives such as Ford Transit have a poor reputation as they get older for reliability and expensively short service intervals. Nissan and Renault offerings have narrow roofs which make vertical storage difficult. The Relay also has the rear wheels set further back which spreads the weight better and allows more wall space in front of the wheel arch for the necessary two metres needed for two tables side by side.
I have hunted high and low for L3H3 Fiats in our price range which have the best economy rating but can only find the longer L4H3 maxi which has a higher tare weight and brings us back into potential overloading the 3500kg legal limit.
Thus at this time donations are vital to cut down the amount we need to borrow to cover the potential purchase.
Comments welcomed.
Sav.
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on May 14, 2014 16:33:29 GMT
Slightly surprised to hear that the Citroen Relay has a better reliability record than the Ford Transit, I would have thought the opposite would apply based on experiences my customers have had with both types of vehicles. Maintenance costs on the Relay also show as more expensive than a Transit on the leasing systems that I use for contract hire so think that ongoing costs to AEBBA may prove to be more for a Relay although perhaps this would be negligible if we can use a friendly garage for servicing. I have made a couple of calls to contacts that I have to see if they have any alternatives that could be considered.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 15, 2014 8:56:14 GMT
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the input. I would remind you that we have a very specific requirement in a van.
2 metres high headroom internally.
2 metres wall space in front of the wheel arch. Tables must be stored in front of the rear axle or there is a danger of overloading the rear axle maximum load.
Essential rectangular shape of the body so that the roof width is as wide as possible for the tables to stand in without being miles from the wall on the floor and difficult to secure. www.autoexpress.co.uk/fiat/ducato-van/64553/fiat-ducato-pictures/page/1/0
Maximum kerbside weight cannot be more than 2100kgs, so must be a small engine version and L3 (length 3) not L4 maxi length vans
Reliability.
Niceties are long service intervals and cheaper insurance and better fuel consumption.
An awful lot of research over several weeks has gone into this by myself with help from Simon Coleman through his firm and the only van that fits our unique bill is the Ducato/Relay/Boxer bodyshape. It is very rectangular, has low floor for better loading and is no more than 2100kg kerbside weight. None of these points can be breached.
Every delivery man I have met over the last couple of months has been quizzed and I have not yet found one with a good word for Transits once they are a few years old compared with the Fiat derivatives, new transit vans are fine but things start to go wrong. That's partly why I am having so much trouble sourcing a fiat/citroen as the self employed couriers are buying them. That is partly why I am shying away from transits and their shape is not as rectangular
I have searched high and low for the more desirable Fiat in our price range but have not found one with low mileage. The relay has a transit joint venture engine with better service intervals than the normal transit and is the only one I have found in L3H3 (length 3 height 3) format.
Time is now money as I cannot transport the tables during the summer and AEBBA are having to hire a van at increased cost, also the increased inconvenience that the van must be unloaded Sunday night / crack of dawn Monday morning to return the hire van first thing Monday.
www.autoexpress.co.uk/citroen/relay
I don't have any alternatives as my other suggestion of a slightly smaller van with van trailer has caused concern over additional expense and driveability.
The company I am contemplating buying from have agreed to a £500 refundable deposit whilst the van is being prepared so I plan on securing it for a few days so we don't lose it. That will give a little time for yours and others research to compliment my own. Thus we still need donations urgently at the critical point of decision. The company has a second L3H3 relay for £12k with only 23k warranted miles on the clock, but this is just too far for our current financial position.
As a joking aside has anyone got £50k?? for the almost ideal solution? home.mobile.de/HEIMANN-FAHRZEUGBAU#des_175995392 click on the pictures to see all 8
Sav.
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on May 15, 2014 10:04:42 GMT
Unfortunately the vehicles that my contacts have would be out of the price range we are looking at as they are all much newer and with very low mileage.... most of them Transit 350 LWB or Vauxhall Movano L3 High Roof Vans less than 6 months old with about 8,000 miles which I could buy for around £15-16k thanks to the large discount that they receive when they buy them new for their rental fleet. Although the price you have been offered is not unreasonable, I do have concerns about the Citroen Relay simply because I hear reports that the suspension on these vehicles are vulnerable if they are continually used near their maximum payload, which I would guess would be the situation with the van that AEBBA will use. The couriers that you have spoken to probably need a large van for the "bulk" that they carry rather than the "weight" so perhaps do not have that problem. I would suggest that getting costs to uprate the suspension (if that is possible on that model?) may be worth considering and that the tables certainly should not be stored in the vehicle between each hire as that would put a continual strain on the suspension and could lead to long-term problems which we all want to avoid. I look forward to seeing the new van in action, hopefully in time for the Sussex Open.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2014 10:24:38 GMT
Hi all,
Surely the 'used at maximum payload' issue is true when the vehicle is used as it would be for a small business i.e. daily.
Is it not the case that the AEBBA truck would be used about 20-30 times PER YEAR and emptied after use?
I am no expert, on this topic or indeed any other, but wouldn't it be worth keeping in mind the very limited use and spend as little as reflects this?
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 15, 2014 10:41:05 GMT
Cheers Dave
As I have stressed elsewhere I am no expert in the used van market and am feeling a very heavy worry and responsibility for a potentially incorrect decision.
Movano / Nissan high roofs are less useful as a sole solution as there is much more lean in towards the top of the van,
see picture 6 www.middlesexandsurreycommercials.co.uk/used-vans/vauxhall-movano-west-molesey-201402041550515
Not good for strapping 1.95 metre high tables to the side as nowhere near the wall at the bottom, cannot load them rearwards centrally as the rear axle will be overloaded in my view.
If suspension problems are a contra indication on the Citroen Relay then I will back off and not reserve the target van, no point as the van will be loaded to maximum, heavier suspension = more cost, more tare weight = lower payload.
I await further suggestions as I'm out of bright ideas.
Sav
|
|
|
Post by triplex on May 15, 2014 10:50:06 GMT
I have to agree totally with Lorin, with couriers they are fully loaded every day and possibly some are overloaded so the suspension, Leaf Springs etc are being put under strain on a permanent basis.
With the amount of times the vehicle will be used for AEBBA I seriously don't think this is a concern we need to worry about, let alone spend more money on.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 15, 2014 11:08:30 GMT
I think the concern is that the tables will remain on the van at times when they are used frequently, thus the suspension could be stressed for weeks at a time.
|
|
|
Post by triplex on May 15, 2014 11:19:42 GMT
Did we suffer with suspension problems with our last van?
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 15, 2014 11:21:00 GMT
Only corrosion
|
|
|
Post by BB Warrior on May 15, 2014 11:55:27 GMT
I think the concern is that the tables will remain on the van at times when they are used frequently, thus the suspension could be stressed for weeks at a time. Yes, that is exactly the concern that I have, especially as we no longer have the Post Office Club as a permanent home for the tables. Provided that the tables are unloaded after every hire then (perhaps) the suspension will not be a problem. With regards to couriers, I must disagree with the points made as most of these carry large bulky items that are not necessarily particularly heavy, so they carry volume rather than excessive weight which should be the main concern for AEBBA, especially as tyres burst under the weight of the tables on the old truck which was frequently overloaded. Personally, I do not see what harm there would be in somebody finding out a price to get the suspension uprated (if it is possible on this model) before we commit to buying the van....even if we then don't actally do that at this time? One thing that I am pretty sure of is that it would be cheaper to uprate the suspension than to have to replace the entire suspension unit were it to fail in the future. I will leave it to others to make the decisions and say no more other than to hope that the "experts" here will be proved correct and that there is no cause for concern so please feel free to ignore my comments! They are only based on 29 years in the motor industry supplying nearly 200 vans a year to my customers, many of whom are courier companies, and none of them have had any problems with their vehicles as a result of my advice.
|
|