 |
|
 |
||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||
|
Warning! This is the drivers only page, if you're not a driver, you shouldn't be reading it.
Mr G Bunter Secretary BriSCA F2 Ltd Nylands Charlton Horethorne Sherborne DT9 4NG
17th January 2010
Dear Mr Bunter,
Following a recent meeting of the F2 BSCDA committee, it was resolved that I write to you to request a joint meeting between BriSCA F2 Ltd and the F2 BSCDA.
The purpose of the meeting would be to discuss all aspects of Formula 2 Stockcars, with particular reference to the statement issued by BriSCA F2 Ltd on 17th November 2009.
We feel that it is in all of our best interests to hold this meeting to make a genuine and determined effort to reach agreement on all manner of subjects.
We are perfectly happy for this to be either a full meeting or a smaller meeting with a predetermined number of delegates from both parties.
It would be appreciated if a written response to this request were received within fourteen days of receipt.
Yours Sincerely
BSCDA F2 Secretary
CC. Jeff Lindsay, Darren Bingley, Dave Harley, Ian Gardiner, Trevor Harris, James Thackra, Colin Higman
Secretary BSCDA F2 PENKRIDGE ST19 5SY January 31st 2010 Dear BriSCA F2 promoters will always be prepared to meet with active drivers who are dedicated to the future of BriSCA F2 Stock Car Racing. Unfortunately, after many years of fine stewardship of the BSCDA F2 from the likes of former Chairmen such as Brian Smith and Bill Batten, the 2009 season will be associated with a distinct change in stance and attitude from the BSCDA F2. Much of this hostility and mistrust and has been brought about by the current Chairman of the BSCDA F2, and in turn, that has contributed to BriSCA F2 pursuing a course of restructuring and streamlining. Since the change in the organisation of BriSCA F2, the BSCDA F2 Chairman has published untrue, misleading and damaging statements on a public internet forum, and has actively discouraged drivers from licensing for the new season. BriSCA F2 promoters therefore feel it inappropriate to enter into further discussion with a Chairman who can act so irresponsibly and with a willingness to disrupt. It is regrettable that the members of the BSCDA F2 committee who were invited, did not attend the BriSCA F2 Forum last week, which was a very productive meeting for all sides of the sport. Whilst the Chairman of the BSCDA F2 is at large, and is continuing to use a public internet forum (The Home of BriSCA F2 Supporters) to encourage the disruption of the new season, BriSCA F2 promoters do not see the merit in a further meeting at the present time. Yours faithfully Crispen Rosevear (Chairman Brisca F2)
Tyre Testing Following the meeting at Cowdenbeath on Saturday 16th May, the outside rear tyre from the George McMillan 100 car was taken and sent away for routine analysis. It is pleasing to report that the result showed the tyre to be perfectly normal.
Chris Burgoyne (647) was found guilty of being in breach of Rule 213 of the 2009 Stock Car Racing Rules and Regulations. The fuel sample taken from his car following the British Championship at Arena Essex on 26th April exceeded the maximum permitted manganese content. He is suspended from racing for one month, and may return on Saturday June 20th 2009 Steve Green Junior (154) was found guilty of being in breach of Rule 213 of the 2009 Stock Car Racing Rules and Regulations. The fuel sample taken from his car following the British Championship at Arena Essex on 26th April was found to contain other than the permitted fuel and additive. He is suspended from racing for three months. As he has been suspended for a period, this has been taken into account and he may return to racing on August 15th 2009 David Hogg (66) was found guilty of being in breach of Rule 206 (10) of the 2009 Stock Car Racing Rules and Regulations. Following an inspection of his carburetor at Cowdenbeath on Saturday May 16th 2009, he was found to be using a carburetor from a Ford V6 engine. He has been suspended from racing for twelve months.
07/05/09 Finances In the 10 years that I have been involved with formula 2 stockcars, I think the question that I have heard asked most by drivers is; “What happens to all the money from our Licence Fees”. I have never been in a position to answer this question, until now. I have made extensive enquiries regarding the finances and have set out below some of the figures along with various comments and observations. It is my opinion that there has not been any real financial control exercised for some considerable time. This has resulted in annual trading losses being shown year on year. Almost all areas of income and expenditure need close examination to turn this round. Income. £ Income generated from the sale of driver’s licences in 2008 49,445 Income generated from the sale of transponders in 2008 24,680 Other items of income in 2008 were; Mechanics licences 7,750 Permit fees from promoters 6,471 World Qualifier fees from drivers (£5) 4,080 Refund of postage for magazine from publishers 2,623 Sundry income 1,743 96,792 Perhaps it would be appropriate at this stage, to explain the above. Licence Fees. The figure for driver’s licences includes 30 associate members at £45; the rest is what the drivers have paid. An amount of £25 per driver and £25 per associate is taken from this figure and paid over to the publishers of the Unloaded 7.3 Magazine. For that £25, both the drivers and associates get 10 copies of the magazine per year delivered to their home address. Transponders. There are some unfortunate circumstances surrounding the sale of these units, and I will explain this in a separate item. Mechanics Licences. Mechanics licences are sold at £50 each, the above figure therefore, represents the sale of 155. The amount raised from the sale of mechanics licences is distributed between the promoters. A calculation is made of average driver’s attendance at their track for the season, this is coupled with the number of meetings held, and a percentage is formulated. Each promoter then receives an amount equal to that percentage of the total amount raised from the sale of licences. Permit Fees from Promoters. These are the fees that the Promoters have to pay to stage stock car meetings. They pay an annual licence fee, which is currently £50. They also pay fees to stage meetings and these are; £16 to hold an Ordinary meeting; £25 to hold a Championship meeting; £1000 to hold the Semi-finals and £2000 to hold the World Final. In my opinion some of these fees are unrealistic and seriously outdated. I have enquired when they were last increased; the answer was they have not been increased within the last 10 years. I do not see any reason for them to have remained unchanged for such a long period of time, especially when annual losses are being shown. If they had been increased at the same rate as the drivers licence fee, the accounts would be in a far healthier state. World Qualifier fees from Drivers. This is the £5 fee that driver’s pay at each World Championship qualifying round. This amount is moved into the World Championship fund along with the promoters fees mentioned above, plus any sponsorship money received. Refund of postage for magazine from publishers. This is a complicated one to explain. I was always under the impression that the driver’s newsletter was sent out with the Unloaded 7.3 Magazine, but apparently it is the other way round, the magazine is sent out with the newsletter. At first sight, these two would appear to amount to the same thing, but there is a very subtle difference. We pay the postage costs to have the newsletter delivered; the magazine publishers send the magazine with it and pay the additional postage costs. This all sounds fine until you examine the individual costs involved. The figure shown in the accounts for mailing the newsletter, is approx £6800. There are around 600 drivers and associates who each receive 10 newsletters per year. This means that there are approx 6000 newsletters delivered annually. To establish the cost of sending out each newsletter, we need to divide the £6800 by 6000, this is £1.13. The same number of drivers and associates also receive the same number of magazines, but the publishers refund us for the additional postage costs and the figure shown in the accounts for this is £2623. We need to divide this figure by the number of magazines sent out. £2623 divided by 6000 = 43p. To obtain the correct figure for postage of the newsletter we simply deduct 43p from 1.13p, which is 70p. This means that it costs 70p to send out a newsletter which normally consists of 2 or 3 A4 pages folded in half, yet it only costs an additional 43p to send out a magazine which consists of 14 A4 pages unfolded. This folded/unfolded business is very relevant by the way, as the postage costs for A4 unfolded are far greater than A4 folded. I am far from convinced that these are the correct postage costs. Perhaps we should ask for this to be done the other way round, let the magazine publishers pay to send out the magazine, and we’ll pay the difference to have our newsletter included, or better still, put the newsletter on the BSCDA website and save the cost of postage and printing which is an additional £1500. Total saving, £8300. Expenditure. £ Purchase of transponders 25,308 Magazine fees for drivers and associates 15,700 Prizes 10,277 Newsletter Costs 8,343 Repayment of Mechanics Licence Fees 7,976 Printing Costs 6,733 Honorariums 6,377 Tech Officer & Weighing Officer 3,873 Expenses 3,467 Duratec Engine 2,500 BSCDA Grant 1,500 Sundry Expenses 1,361 Accountancy 1,322 Postage 1,153 Website 1,000 Bank Charges 301 104,191 Transponder costs. I will deal with this in a separate item. Magazine Fees for Drivers & Associates. This is the £25 fee per driver & associate that I previously mentioned above, this is what is paid to the publishers of the magazine and represents 574 drivers and 30 associates. Prizes. This is broken down to; Novice of the Year £350, National Points Champion £1,000, World Championship Prize Fund £7,500, Whites & Yellows Championships £1,250 and a Trophy costing £177. The only thing to mention here is regarding the Whites & Yellows Championships; I am informed that because each track has to stage a W&Y Championship; the promoter is allowed to claim a fee of £250 towards the prize-fund. As you can see, only 5 have bothered to claim. Perhaps this proves that this is an unnecessary expense, and that the promoters should just pay the prize-money themselves. Newsletter Costs. This is the cost of printing & mailing the newsletter as previously detailed above. Repayment of Mechanics Licence Fees. This is the amount that has been claimed by the promoters as previously detailed above. Printing Costs. This includes items such as Letterheads, Rulebooks, Log Books, National Fixture Lists, Mechanics Licences, Licence Application Forms, etc. I will be pushing for alternative quotes for all this printing. Unless this is done, we will not know if the price we are paying is competitive. Honorariums. Honorariums are paid to the following; BSCDA Secretary, Grading Officer, Weighing Officer, Licensing Officer, SCRBC Secretary, Brisca F2 Secretary, Brisca F2 Company Secretary. Technical Officer & Weighing Officer. These are the travelling expenses of these 2 officials. Expenses. These are the expenses for holding meetings and travelling. Duratec Engine. These are the costs associated with the development of the engine. I am led to believe that the engine is now to be sold off, and is expected to generate an income of around £1400. Don’t quote me on this, as details are pretty vague. I will probably find out more during the year. BSCDA Grant. This is the amount that we receive annually to enable us to carry out our functions. All other items of expenditure are fairly self-explanatory. It can be clearly seen from the above figures, that the expenditure is far greater than the income. This does of course mean that some changes will have to be made to redress the situation. It appears to me, that there hasn’t been a serious attempt for quite some time to find a solution to the problem. It looks like an increase in the Driver’s Licence fee has been seen as the only means of generating additional income, but there are several other areas as previously mentioned that need to be examined. Transponders. It has taken extensive enquiries to obtain the correct information regarding this item. On first examination of the accounts, it was abundantly clear to me that there was a problem with the sales and purchases of these units. I was not happy with the opening stock figures at the commencement of the year, the sales & purchase figures during the year, and the closing stock figures at the end of the year. It took me several attempts with both the Secretary and the Accountant to establish the true figures. Initially, I was informed that there was an opening stock of 24 units, and that there had been purchases of 150 units, and that the closing stock was 3 units. It doesn’t take a genius to work out that the number of units that had been sold was 171. I was not convinced that these were the correct figures, and following my persistence, there were changes made to the figures. The opening stock figure was revised to 17, the purchases figure was revised to 125 and the closing stock figure was revised to 4. This resulted in there now being a sales figure of 138 units. If we examine the purchases figure shown in the accounts for these units (£25308), it is easy to establish the individual cost price, which is £25308 divided by 125 = £202.46. We have already seen that there were sales of 138 units during the year and the sales figures shown in the accounts is £24680, we can now establish the selling price for each unit. £24680 divided by 138 = £178.84, which represents an average loss of £23.62 per unit. On making further enquiries I was informed that these units were being sold to F2 drivers and Saloon drivers at £170, and to other formulas at £180. The split of the 138 was; F2-75 units, Saloons -10 units, F1- 50 units, Rebels -3 units. If we consider the 63 units that were sold to “outside bodies”, this gives us the following; 63 units at a cost of £202.46 = £12755. 10 of these were sold at £170 and 53 were sold at £180, which generates a total income of £11240. This represents a loss on sales of £1515. Further to this, I made enquiries to AMB to find out their selling price of these transponders. At that time, which was January 2009, they were £245 each. If we had sold these units at £230 each, which would have been quite a good price, we would have made a modest profit of around 12%, which would have amounted to £1764. If we then consider that we should have been selling the transponders to F2 drivers at a minimum of cost price, this would have prevented a further loss on sales of £2434.50. The conclusion of this means that we would have had additional income of; 1515.00 (Which was the loss made on sales to outside bodies) 1764.00 (Which was the 12% profit we could have made from the above sales) 2434.50 (Which was the loss made on sales to F2 drivers) 5713.50 Total. To prevent this kind of thing from happening does not require any special kind of effort, it is simply a matter of exercising sound financial control. This report will no doubt prove to be unpopular in certain quarters, and in spite of the risk of being branded as a troublemaker, it is my intention to pass this information to the people that elected me. I said in my election address, that I would open up lines of communication, and that I am a believer in giving answers to questions that people are perfectly entitled to ask. 06/05/09 Just to bring you all up to date with the situation regarding the carburettor checks that we have been carrying out recently. Your drivers committee, the BSCDA, were concerned that nowhere near enough checks were being carried out on carburettors. The Technical Scrutineer does have a gauge for checking these but owing to its nature, the carburettor top needed to be removed to enable checks to be made. It was felt that this situation was inconvenient and therefore decided to have a pair of gauges made to enable them to be checked without the need to remove the top. The objective was to be able to check large numbers of carburettors quickly and accurately, which is something that we have not been able to do before. The gauges have been precision engineered by a reputable engine builder who was well aware of their purpose. Because the Technical Scrutineers gauge was exactly 26mm and 27mm, the new gauges have been manufactured .003” oversize and should not therefore, be able to be inserted into either of the carburettor chokes. We are well aware of various opinions regarding the sizes of carburettor chokes, and as such, deliberately intended to use these gauges as a first indication of a problem. Should these gauges enter a carburettor choke, further detailed examination would take place. At the British Championship held at Arena Essex on 26th April, checks were carried out on the carburettors of all 48 cars present. The cars belonging to 877 Eddie Darby and H29 Cor Schutter, were found with carburettors that appeared to have oversized chokes. Following further detailed examination of the carburettors, both showed signs of being modified and were confirmed as being oversize. Both drivers were informed of the situation and neither driver disputed the findings. They were instructed to change the carburettors and subsequently both were allowed to race. The matter was reported to the Board of Control, and a meeting was convened to determine what penalty, if any, was to be issued. The findings of the meeting were as follows; At the British Championship meeting at Arena Essex on Sunday April 26th, all cars presented for scrutineering were subjected to a carburettor choke size check. The cars of Eddie Darby (877) and Cor Schutter (H29) were found to be fitted with carburettors on which the chokes were oversize, as the technical infringement was discovered pre meeting these drivers were given the opportunity to correct this fault before racing. The drivers in question have not been penalised, as any car that fails pre race scrutineering may always be re presented, and subsequently passed. We must stress that it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that their car complies with the Rule Book. In this case these two drivers are extremely fortunate, had they taken to the track to race and the infringement discovered, they would have been penalised. The Board of Control and the Technical Officer will endeavour to do as many pre race checks as possible, where time and circumstances permit. We ask that you respect the work that we are doing and your co operation at meetings is appreciated. On that same day, the tyres of all race winners and most second placed cars were checked with the chemical analyser. It was not felt necessary to confiscate any tyres to be sent away for further analysis. Following the British Championship Final, the first 8 cars were held on track whilst the first 6 cars were checked for track width, axle offset, tyre analysis and weighing. The first 4 cars were removed to the scrutineering bay for further checks. All 4 had rocker covers removed and had their carburettors re-checked. The first 3 had a sample of fuel taken which will be analysed in line with the current rulebook. Because of various comments that I have read since that day, I would like to clarify the procedure of re-checking the carburettors following the Final. Because we had plenty of time, and all carburettor tops were removed, the initial check was carried out with the Technical Scrutineers gauge. The 26mm gauge did enter the 26mm choke of the carburettor on the 886 Chris Bradbury car. The 27mm gauge did not enter the 27mm choke. A secondary check was carried out with the new 26mm gauge which is as previously stated,.003” oversize. This gauge would not enter the 26mm choke. A further detailed examination was made by both the Technical Scrutineer and myself, we were both completely satisfied that the choke was as standard and without modification. Please be aware that neither the Technical Scrutineer nor I, would ever fail to bring to light, any breach of the regulations irrespective of the driver concerned. And likewise, we would never accuse a driver of a breach of the regulations if that were not the case. We have since carried out further carburettor checks at Barford on Sunday 3rd May and at Belle Vue on Monday 4th May, all carburettors checked were found to be in accordance with the regulations. 91 cars were checked at these 2 meetings making a total of 139 checks up to now. It is our intention to continue with this for the foreseeable future and to also introduce new checks when we have the required equipment available. It is pleasing to note that virtually every driver has welcomed these checks and have been most co-operative which has been a great assistance to us in our endeavours.
Jeff Lindsay Chairman
17/04/09 There has been more tyre testing carried out recently. The Northampton meeting held on Good Friday and the first midweek meeting at Skegness on 16th April were targeted. At the Skegness meeting, particular emphasis was also placed on Lower Front Bumper Hoops, Roof Colours, Seat Plates and Wheel Track Widths. It was pleasing to note, in spite of recent concerns, that not a single car had to be pulled up on either the bumper hoops or the roof colours. There were however, a few problems with both the seat plates and the track widths. Seat plates are covered in rule 211, track widths are covered in rule 207. 17/04/09 Following a successful appeal, George Turriccki 186, has had his 12 months suspension reduced to just 3 months. The appeal board resolved to suspend 1 month of this which means that George would remain suspended from racing for 2 months. 27/03/09 Just to let you all know that I have spoken to Birmingham Race Official Paul Gerrard, and voiced your concerns regarding the format that has been adopted at the opening meetings. A lot of drivers have complained about the number of cars that have been placed in the heats, which has resulted in quite a lot of damage for some. Apparently the Promoter has issued instructions as to how he wants the meetings to be run, and these are quite a bit different from the old Incarace format. I have stressed the point that we are not happy with approaching 40 cars per heat, and over 40 cars in the consolation. Paul said that he was having a meeting with the Promoter this week and he assured me that he will express our concerns. 23/03/09 Tyre and Fuel Checks. At the Birmingham meeting held on Saturday 21st March, there was a series of tyre and fuel checks carried out. The tyre tests were carried out on the first 3 in the Final plus the winners of the heats and the consolation, and 3 others chosen at random. Although the checks revealed some differences in the tyres for both Durometer readings and Sniffer readings, it was deemed to be unecessary to confiscate any tyres, as the differences were not significant. Fuel samples were taken from 2 cars that had both won races on the night, and these will be analysed in line with the normal procedure. It should be noted that these checks were carried out without any prior warning being given, the Technical Scrutineer, Ian Gardiner, appeared at the meeting just as the Final was lining up on track. This is a tactic that will be employed throughout the season at all tracks, and was welcomed by a large number of the drivers present.
23/03/09 Disciplinary hearings. Following the disciplinary hearings held last week, George Turriccki 186 has received a 12 month suspension from racing. The disciplinary panel resolved to suspend 10 months of this, which effectively means that George cannot race for 2 months starting from the date of the hearing which was 19th March. On the same night, a hearing involving Mick Sworder 152, resolved that there was no case to answer and that no further action was to be taken.
17/03/09 Two disciplinary hearings will take place later this week. The first involves George Turiccki 186, who was reported for an incident which occurred at Birmingham Wheels on Saturday 7th March. The second involves Mick Sworder 152, who was reported for an incident which occurred at the same track on Saturday 14th March. Further details and outcomes will be provided following the hearings.
09/03/09 BEN FUND GENERAL INFORMATION ARE YOU OFF WORK DUE TO A RACING INJURY If so you need to contact Ben Fund Treasurer Sharon Blood on 07759 719813 (day time) 01283 216582 (evenings) or by e-mail benfund@362racing.com WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO MAKE A CLAIM FROM THE FUND You will need to provide a copy of the sick note provided by your doctor or hospital, this is required to support your claim. You will also need to give a brief description on what happened, where and at what meeting the accident occurred to back up your claim. All of this information needs to be provided to the Ben Fund Treasurer either by e-mail or sent in the post to Sharon Blood 29 Oak Close, Castle Gresley, Swadlincote Derbyshire DE11 9RU WHAT AM I ENTITLED TO FROM THE BSCDA F2 BEN FUND You are entitled to £50.00 per week for a maximum of 5 weeks or for the number of weeks that your sick note is for if less than 5. If you race during the period of your sick note then any claim from the Ben Fund will automatically become void. WHEN AND HOW WILL I RECEIVE PAYMENT A cheque will be sent to the driver making the claim upon receipt of all relevant documentation. The payment will be sent to the address given in your supporting documents. 03/03/09 Control of Formula 2. I have had requests from several drivers for an explanation about who controls Formula 2 Stockcars. The controlling body is ‘The Stock Car Racing Board of Control F2 Ltd’. This company was set up in 1996 and is usually referred to as ‘The Board of Control’; it is made up of members who must be either a Promoter or a Competitor. There is no limit to the number of members, but they must be equal in number. In other words, how ever many Promoter members there are, there should be an equal number of Competitor members. A Competitor member is a person who represents the drivers. The company is controlled by 6 Directors, 3 elected by the Promoter members and 3 elected by the Competitor members. The Promoter members have formed themselves into a body which is Brisca F2 Ltd, and the Competitor members have done the same and that is the BSCDA. The present Directors are; Mr D Bingley Mr G Bunter (Vice Chairman & Secretary) Mr D Coventry Mr D Harley Mr J Lindsay Mr D Pierce (Chairman) Each of these Directors has 1 vote, but in the event of a ‘tie’ of votes, the Chairman has an additional or casting vote. According to the Company’s Articles of Association, The Chairman and Vice Chairman must always be from the Promoter members. This means that the Directors elected by the Promoter members would always be capable of having an overall control. In spite of the fact that the rulebook states that the controlling body is ‘The Stock Car Racing Board of Control’, the real controlling body is the Promoters.
Tyres Following the announcement by the then Chairman of Brisca, Gordon McDougal, that a 3 year agreement for the supply of tyres to Brisca F2, had been awarded to Yokohama, a statement was placed on the Brisca F2 website outlining the details of the agreement. This stated that the price of the tyre was to be £36.59 + VAT (£43) and that this price would be maintained throughout the 3 years with the only increases being in line with the RPI (Retail Prices Index). On 7th January this year, I received information that there had been an increase in the price of tyres and the new price was to be £46.50. Following several telephone calls, I was informed that there had been an amendment to this new price, and that it had now been “agreed” that it would be £45. I immediately sent an email to the Brisca Secretary Graham Bunter, objecting to this price increase. There were 2 reasons for the objection, firstly, we had been informed that the price was to be maintained throughout the 3 years, and secondly, the RPI was 3% at that time and the proposed increase represented 6.94%. Graham informed me that no increase in the price of the tyres had been agreed with anyone. I decided to ring Polley Motorsport and did in fact speak to George himself. During our conversation, it became apparent that we may have been mis-informed with regard to the terms of the agreement. I had never seen this agreement, and asked George to arrange for a copy to be sent. This was done immediately. I can tell you that the agreement did not state that the price would be maintained throughout the 3 years, nor did it have any reference whatsoever to the RPI. This matter was discussed at the Annual General Meeting of the Board of Control in January, both Yokohama GB and Polley Motorsport were present. Yokohama GB stated that this increase had been applied by Yokohama Japan, and that they had no choice but to pass it on. They said that the new price of the tyre should have been £46.50 but Yokohama GB, Polley Motorsport and the tyre sub dealers had each agreed to take a 50p cut bringing the price down to £45. This however, still left you, the drivers, having to bear the lion’s share with an increase of £2 per tyre. At the meeting, I asked for an explanation why the statement on the Brisca website contained such inaccuracies, unfortunately, no one was able to answer this question. We are just left to wonder how mistakes like this can be made. In fairness, some of the promoters at that meeting appeared to express a genuine surprise regarding this matter. They appeared to be under the impression that the agreement was as stated on the Brisca website and they weren’t too pleased about all this. Nevertheless, somebody somewhere must have known that these clauses were not in the agreement because it had been signed. This is of course unless it was signed without being read. You’ll have to make your own minds up on that one.
|
 |
 |
|
| Site Map |