Statement of Andrew Hood (Nov 2021)

Having been a member of NSRC since starting to play squash, around 2007, I now find myself “permanently excluded” from the club principally for questioning and challenging the actions of previous and current Committee members/Directors.

Background

Many of you will recollect the events of the hostile ousting of the Nick Duckworth-led Committee via the instigation of the Extraordinary General Meeting of October 2020 orchestrated by Roger Cockle and Gawain Briars. You might also recollect that I, along with Shaun Walsh (former club Treasurer), expressed serious concerns that members, with little understanding of the veracity of the serious allegations being bandied about particularly within the email of 26 August sent by Cockle, were being asked to decide on the wholesale removal and replacement of the Duckworth-led Committee

Shaun and I subsequently offered, free of charge, our professional expertise to undertake an independent investigation to establish the facts and veracity of the several statements submitted by both the Committee and the EGM proposers.

Whilst the Duckworth-led Committee accepted our, eminently sensible, proposal the Cockle/Briars led EGM proponents rejected it. My belief is that our proposal was rejected purely because they did not want any close examination of their allegations which, to an extent, have now been proven in court to have been false and/or inaccurate. My further belief is that, thereafter, Briars viewed me as an enemy simply for questioning the appropriateness of his joint instigation of the EGM.

Following their success in ousting the Duckworth-led Committee at that EGM I became increasingly concerned about decisions being made by the Briars-led – “Gang of Four” – Committee (Briars, Payne, O’Connor and Hargreaves).

One particular decision that stood out as being wholly irrational was the Committee’s decision to release all staff save for the two managers, Hargreaves and Emery. What was particularly notable was the Committee’s minuted statement of 4 November 2020

• “The process of releasing staff was discussed. Consideration was given to the current situation regarding lockdown, however, it was felt that there was no prospect of further staff requirements in the immediate future, even post lockdown, and there were no alternative positions. The decision to release all the casual staff was confirmed and the process was finalised.”

Whom did they expect, following the end of lockdown and the re-opening of the club, would cover the 114 hours/week that the club was, and remains, required to be open to members? The answer came in the Committee’s pronouncement in late December – that from 4 January 2021 the club would be open for just 37 hours/week despite all Covid related legal restrictions having been lifted.

It’s worth noting at this point that the Committee had, inexplicably, dismissed the most (in my view) cost effective member of staff, Noah Duckworth, when he could have been retained on furlough without cost. Further the Committee had, apparently without seeking professional advice (as suggested by the minutes), arrived at the conclusion that Noah Duckworth was not an employee but a casual worker and processed his dismissal on that basis.

As is set out elsewhere on this site that action will prove to have been a costly misjudgement as the courts have, since, judged him to have been an employee . His unfair dismissal litigation claim, amongst other equally serious claims, against the club is now progressing to the main hearing in March 2022.

The Committee’s unilateral pronouncement of a reduction in the opening hours of the club from 114/week to 37/week came without proper explanation and, bizarrely, the notification to members portrayed this pronouncement as being something to celebrate.

By this time I’d decided to stand for election onto the board of directors at the forthcoming AGM, 13 January 2021, and submitted two nomination forms on 27 December 2020. One in respect of standing as Premises Chair in opposition to Gerry Hargreaves the other as an ordinary Committee member. Neil Boston similarly submitted two nomination forms, the second being in respect of standing as Treasurer in opposition to Richard O’Connor. The relevance of these dual nominations will become clear later.

Build-up to instigation of Illegal Disciplinary Proceedings

On the 23 December 2020 I wrote to the Chairman, Gawain Briars, questioning his authority in imposing such curtailed premises opening hours without membership consultation as is legally required. I eventually received a response 6 days later falsely stating, “The authority is provided for in the Articles of Association”.

In reality, contrary to his statement, the Articles specifically require the approval of the membership to alter premises opening hours – most definitely not simply by unilateral decree of the Committee.

Additionally, instead of providing a straightforward explanation for the decision to curtail opening hours, he invited me simply to read the minutes.

Having already received several similarly unsatisfactory responses to previous reasonable, straightforward queries I was disinclined to accept such continuing nonsense. My response was a polite ultimatum;

• “I’d be grateful if you’d extend to me the courtesy of providing a direct and adequate response to my specific queries and to not simply refer me to the 58 pages which constitute the Articles and your minutes. If I don’t receive an adequate and full response today I will take action with or without further reference to you as I see fit.”

Briars’ response;

• “I am most perturbed to read the content of your below email. You have threatened me, as Chairman of the squash club, which I do not take kindly to. I am notifying the committee of your action for their consideration.

• In addition, you have been writing to my personal email address without my permission or authorisation. Desist immediately from doing so.”

To portray my ultimatum as being in some way menacing is simply bizarre and deliberately misrepresentative. Ultimatums are a fact of daily life and are quite normal. For example, If you don’t pay your gas bill the provider will, eventually, issue an ultimatum – pay your gas bill or we’ll commence legal proceedings.

Similarly, if you don’t pay your squash club membership fee the club will, eventually, issue an ultimatum – pay your membership fee or your membership will be suspended. These are normal, real life ultimatums, as was mine. Not menacing threats as Briars portrayed my ultimatum to be.

One final, rather pertinent, example of an ultimatum made in peculiarly similar circumstances is that made by the current club Secretary, Steve Payne, to the then Chairman, Nick Duckworth. He states:

• “Please reply within the next 7 days or I feel that I would have to take further action”.

That Steve Payne voted for me to be disciplined for expressing the same sentiment he’d expressed to a previous Chairman clearly demonstrates an astonishing level of hypocrisy.

Lastly, having exchanged several polite email communications over a period of time via our personal email addresses, for Briars to now suggest that I’d acted improperly in communicating using that very same personal email address clearly demonstrates considerable irrationality.

Instigation of Illegal Disciplinary Proceedings

That evening, Saturday 29 December 2020, I received an email notifying me that disciplinary proceedings against me had been instigated and that the hearing was to be held on 12 January 2021, the day before the AGM at which I would have automatically become a director due to fewer nominations having been submitted than the number of director positions available.

The notification stated;

• “We have received a complaint from the Chairman of the club that on the 29th December 2020 you sent an email to him in which you stated: “If I don’t receive an adequate and full response today I will take whatever action with or without further reference to you as I see fit.”

• “The complaint is that your above words are an attempt to threaten the Chairman of the club, such actions which are not consistent with the spirit and ethos of the squash club and its membership.”

It transpired that Briars had immediately conceived a way to prevent mine, and Neil Boston’s, election onto the Board of Directors – via the abuse of the Club’s disciplinary procedures. In the space of a few hours he’d convened two unscheduled meetings of the four Directors and issued disciplinary notices.

The first meeting, that afternoon, described in the minutes as a conversation between Directors which I believe to have been, principally, to inform the other three directors of his “cunning plan” – to instigate disciplinary proceedings against Neil Boston and I. The second, that evening, described in the minutes as being an “Emergency Committee meeting” which I believe to have been convened, principally, to rubber stamp and instigate disciplinary proceedings against Neil Boston and I to prevent our election onto the Board of Directors.

On a side note the minutes confirm that the Directors, at that meeting, also voted to disallow our dual nominations (mentioned earlier) despite the Secretary, Steve Payne, confirming that nothing in the Articles prevented dual nominations from being accepted. This they attempted to justify on several spurious grounds. The Treasurer, Richard O’Connor, stated the following;

• “…if we accept the nominations it will cause negative unintended consequences on the Committee and its functioning, and would ultimately not be in the best interest of the Club and its members.”

It’s my understanding that, over the years, Richard O’Connor has not only held two Director positions simultaneously but during one period actually held three Director positions simultaneously. Another clear demonstration of an astonishing level of hypocrisy.

In my view the disallowing of our dual nominations amounts to an abuse of position and power and, I would suggest, would be viewed by any impartial observer to have been a deliberate act of election rigging.

On calling Neil Boston to inform him of this development he confirmed that he’d also received notification of disciplinary proceedings against him as is set out in his statement.

Believing the intention of the Briars-led Committee was to prevent us from becoming directors by expelling us from the club we appointed a solicitor. He wrote to the Committee clearly pointing out, amongst several other procedural failings, the illegitimacy of the disciplinary notices – failing to provide 14 day’s clear notice of a hearing thereby breaching the Articles of Association and the Companies Act.

Following receipt of the Committee’s bullish and perverse response, stating “The disciplinary notices are valid”, our solicitor responded;

• “It seems clear that you are determined to proceed with the discipline and to prevent our clients from standing for the Committee. No doubt, this has been your intention from the beginning.”

• “As we have said, our clients have not been given the time to prepare as provided by the articles. Accordingly, they will not attend the hearing which is not compliant with either the articles or therefore company law. In any event, from your correspondence, the outcome of the “hearings” would seem to be a foregone conclusion.

• “It is disappointing that you have chosen not to engage with our letter in a helpful or meaningful way. Effectively you have pushed this matter, unnecessarily, towards litigation.”

Despite knowing, indeed eventually admitting, that the holding of the disciplinary hearings on the day before the AGM breached the Articles thereby rendering the whole disciplinary procedure illegitimate, the Committee continued with the hearings in our absence.

Further allegations

To emphasise the depths to which these Directors were, and continue to be, happy to sink in order to harm and discredit anyone who dares to question or challenge their activities the following is most definitely worthy of mention.

Just two full working days before the hearing following receipt of the disciplinary notice setting out the solitary, spurious ground for its instigation:

• “The complaint is that your above words are an attempt to threaten the Chairman of the club, such actions which are not consistent with the spirit and ethos of the squash club and its membership.”

I received another email containing a “Disciplinary Pack”. The pack contained a series of 13 further allegations supposedly demonstrating a “Continuing pattern of [poor] behaviour” stretching back over 5 years.

It was obvious that the Directors had undertaken a ‘barrel scraping’ exercise in an attempt to bolster and add a modicum of legitimacy to the flimsy, solitary ground for their hasty instigation of the discipline. They appeared to have asked their loyal, hardly impartial two managers, Hargreaves and Emery, to provide any ‘dirt’ on me. They, of course, obliged with misrepresentative and untrue anecdotes. These additional allegations, being predominantly he said/she said anecdotes are, of course, impossible to prove as being false.

However, one particularly damaging allegation was provably untrue. That allegation being:

• “AH [Andrew Hood] was struck off by England Squash for indecent behaviour (Foul and abusive language at a junior tournament in Holland) [2016].”

For those who are unaware I was, and continue to be, a qualified England Squash Tournament grade referee volunteering my skills in officiating at competitions both in the UK and overseas. I can categorically confirm that I’ve never officiated at any tournament in Holland and have never been struck off by England Squash for any reason let alone indecent behaviour. Obviously England Squash can and, indeed, has confirmed the same. The allegation is wholly false.

Outcome of illegal Disciplinary Proceedings

The following day, the morning of the AGM (13 January 2021), I received the “Decision of the Disciplinary Panel”. Unsurprisingly the decision was guilty . I say unsurprisingly as the disciplinary panel comprised the same directors who’d voted to instigate the disciplinary proceedings. They’d effectively acted as Prosecutor, Judge, Jury and Executioner. Hardly impartial.

Surprisingly, however, unlike Neil Boston my punishment was not expulsion. To this day I’m unsure of exactly what my punishment was meant to be as the Decision statement was self-contradictory nonsense;

• “Decision of the Disciplinary Panel”

• “The Panel found that the allegations have been upheld. The conclusion of the panel is that from 12 midday Wednesday 13th January 2021 you are suspended as a member of the Club for 6 months.

• “Your suspension will start when the Club fully opens and on your return you will be expected to sign up to a Code of Conduct regarding your future behaviour.”

Of course, the above two statements are mutually exclusive. My suspension could not possibly start on two separate dates, both on 13 January and the day when the club fully re-opens. On pointing out this glaring error and requesting clarification none was forthcoming.

Regardless of the Directors’ refusal to either acknowledge or clarify their clear error it became apparent that the membership suspension punishment had commenced on 13 January. As per the following indicators. My name and contact details had been removed from the Member Directory, I was prevented from logging on to the members area of the club site and I no longer received member updates.

Further Illegitimate punishment – Temporary 6 months Exclusion

On 4 June I received an email form the Secretary, Steve Payne, notifying me as follows;

• “I am writing on behalf of the Committee to confirm that your 6 month exclusion will commence from the 1st July 2021 and run up until the 31st December 2021 (“the exclusion period”), at which point you will be required to apply to the Committee (but at no earlier date) if you wish to re-join.”

The Committee appeared to have decided to ignore their glaring error in respect of the self-contradictory Disciplinary Decision and were acting as though they hadn’t imposed the membership suspension as did clearly happen, demonstrated by the above mentioned indicators.

Most significantly, though, they appeared to have forgotten what they’d written to me in April following my legitimate attendance at the club as the guest of a member. On no less than five occasions in that letter reference was made to the imposed suspension which they were now attempting to portray as not having been implemented. I quote from that letter;

“First and foremost you are currently suspended”

“…you had attempted to enter the premises last Wednesday to play while suspended”

“your actions were in contravention of your suspension”

“Please note that you will be informed when your suspension has been completed”

“…it is important, if you wish to return at the earliest date, to abide by your current suspension”

Just to reiterate, the Disciplinary penalty was a suspension of membership, which didn’t preclude my attendance as a guest.

The arbitrary imposition of this additional penalty simply serves to further demonstrate these Directors’ contempt for due process and their belief that they’re able to abuse their positions of power without fear of retribution.

My response was to not only demonstrate the absurdity of their attempt to rewrite history but to express my own view of their abuses and to remind them of their legal obligations as Directors of an Incorporated Company regulated by the Companies Act 2006. The full correspondence can be viewed at the following link.

• “Following your recent formal admission, that you wilfully breached the Articles of Association in your unseemly rush to ensure that Neil Boston and I were disciplined and expelled/suspended from the club in advance of the 13 January AGM, I find the content of your letter (set out below) in compounding that illegal act quite breath-taking.”

• “The above, along with so many other actions of this committee, simply serves to further demonstrate your clear contempt for due process, your indisputable arrogance, your extraordinary dearth of scruples and your absolute moral bankruptcy.”

• “Make no mistake, I intend to ensure that each and every one of you is held accountable for your actions/inactions to the fullest extent that the law allows.”

• “Make no mistake, I intend to ensure that your actions/inactions are publicised throughout the squash world.”

Further Disciplinary Hearing and Permanent Exclusion

Some weeks later I received notification of a further disciplinary hearing, to be held on 9 August 2021, following which my solicitor responded setting out his view of the further proceedings being an abuse of power and of its inappropriateness whilst a legal dispute was ongoing.

Nonetheless a proposal was tabled to the Committee – “that the current committee recuse themselves from your proposed disciplinary hearing, set for 9 August 2021, and instead that we mutually agree an independent party to investigate this matter and publish their findings to both parties.”

As expected the proposal was rejected and the second hearing went ahead. Of course, the Board would never accept any kind of independent investigation knowing the extent of their own wrongdoing.

On 16 August I received notification of the outcome of the hearing and, as expected was found guilty of the allegation that “The emails in general showed a lack of respect and a threatening tone which was felt not to be in line with the ethos of the Club and respect that should be shown to other members.”

As with the first discipline the Committee acted as Prosecutor, Judge, Jury and Executioner so the outcome, allegation upheld, was always going to be a foregone conclusion.

The penalty, as the heading states, was permanent exclusion from the club.

My final response was clear and to the point;

“Permanently excluded? Really?

About as permanent as your temporary hold on power which you, so cowardly, abuse.

You’re running out of road.”

Summary

If you’ve read your way to this point I would expect you to have understood the point of publicising this statement and that no summary is necessary.

Next Steps

I intend to continue to follow through with the promises I made to the Directors which I’m happy to reiterate;

“Make no mistake, I intend to ensure that each and every one of you is held accountable for your actions/inactions to the fullest extent that the law allows.”

“Make no mistake, I intend to ensure that your actions/inactions are publicised throughout the squash world.”

To these ends my solicitor is preparing papers to be sent to court and I shall be continuing to expose and publicise the ongoing wrongdoing of this Board of Directors.

< Back to the Andrew Hood & Neil Boston Page