Read Beachcombers blog Matt. Looks like the museum interests of Thanet took a second place to a mediated deal in which the EKMT trustees (meaning those who had not already quit the field like quitter Cllr Bill Hayton)caved in.

If Beachcomber is right then the Preston Steam Museum Trust (which I don't think is yet even registered as a charity not sure) has acquired the assets and a 267,000 legacy left to EKMT.

I phoned the Charity Commission some time back and spoke with a case officer on the EKMT case. I asked that Charity Commission find out about the mediation process and make inquiries about the legacy. If it is bound to provide a maritime museum facility to Ramsgate then it should be used for that purpose by Preston Steam Museum or surrendered into trust to be claimed by any body who emerges to provide such a museum in Ramsgate fulfilling legacy terms.

If there is now a cry of "Rick don't know the facts" then please let it be accompanied by an explanation of why and how the facts were concealed until and beyond what may be a fait accompli.

I did all I could which was to pre-notify the Charity Commission and expect the responsible public body to act.

It is, indeed, looking a bit dire.

David Green's blog has a post on it too.

I did comment at the time the Cervia issue was raised that it seemed odd that it was about three years after Michael Cates quit as EKMT director.

Three years being the civil liability limitation period ?

And as Beachcomber points out the Cervia issue seems, on the face of it, to have been pressed after EKMT were left the Butler legacy £267,000.

I think (not sure) this may have been a disputed elgacy at the time by other beneficiaries of that will. So it may be that there are legacy terms and a judgement for the Charity Commission to look into.

But given that it was me who first told Charity Commission about the legacy (not EKMT). And that EKMT trustees have failed to submit their annual accounts to Charity Commission for three years or more. And given that the terms seem to require that for a trustee to stand down he must be replaced to maintain the trustee number. I feel it is questionable that the remaining named trustees could qualify as "Authorized" to agree settl;ement in High Court pre-action alternative dispute resolution.

It does look as if the Trustees have handed over the legacy and the assets in order to not be sued for their unlimted personal liability re Cervia deterioration.

They can hardly resent or dispute speculation like this since the fact is they have not only kept Thanet in the dark but also the Charity Commission to whom they are answerable at law.

If Mr Cates and the Steam Museum Trust plan to register as a charity and provide a museum service in ramsgate they may be entitled to the legacy. That I think should be determined by the Charity Commission.

Happily if Bill hayton thinks he has skipped his trustee liabilities at EKMT he will now concentrate on the Common Law Information of Treason naming him to Maidstone Justices of the Peace re his duties at Kent Police Authority ?

Would it not be fair to conclude that EKMT furtive conduct is actually characteristic of him ? He has as yet still not explained whether he perjured in High Court evidence on behalf of ex Thanet tory Cllr Maison in 1998. The plaintiff Mrs Mortlock attempted after the case to make crime complaints of perjury against ex Special constable Maison and Police Authority member Hayton. Wonder why police refused the crime complaints .... not a good precedent if any suspicion of Theft Act offences arises re EKMT.

The public consultation at Northdown House was agin an absolute shambles the same as the disposable assets consultation a few days prior. Again TDC employees didn'tg really know what they were talking about, I was told they were hoping Thanet Leisure Force would take it over, two elderly ladies were told it was to be converted into flats and another member of the public informed me they had been told they were waiting to hear from a perspective purchaser.
TDC have no right what so ever to sell the property, as it is they in all their wisdom have allowed it to deteriorate to such an extent it will now cost an absolute fortune to put it back into good repair. TDC didn't even seem aware there was a bungalow in the grounds that also came with the building and 2 more buildings which could have brought in an income, if only some one with some passion about stately houses had taken an interest. TDC should have allowed the family of the deceased original owner the Friends family to intervene when they first tried to save their ancestral home. No TDC chose to victimise the whole Friends family and make their lives absolute hell just because they fought to save this beautiful building.
What it is about TDC that makes them hate all old beautiful buildings and try to pull them all down and build new I will never know, all I can say is I hope next election we get a party in charge of TDC that act for the people and will try and conserve our heritage.

Thanks for the update, Angela. I wonder what the council is playing at some days. In my personal opinion, they certainly need replacing come the next elections.

The last election saw a turn out of 30% or so. For all we know the current council could be representing the majority that voted (not that they represent my view at all). Hope alone will not bring change we have the vote and we should start using it and telling our friends to do likewise.

I agree that our council needs to pull it's finger out in a big way. Not knowing what you even own is unforgivable.