Statement of Neil Boston (Nov 2021)

As you may know, I was expelled from Nottingham Squash Rackets Club in January 2021. What you may not know is how and why this happened and that it was the result of an illegal process.

Background

When the call went out for members to apply for election to Committee positions at last January’s AGM I decided to put myself forward. With 34 continuous years’ experience of board level positions, including the last 9 years working in our family fitness and wellness business, I felt I would be a considerable asset for the Committee as I also had time on my hands since my semi-retirement.

Within two days of submitting my nomination the Committee convened what they described as an “Emergency Committee Meeting”.

The subsequent meeting minutes stated that this illegal meeting had been convened to consider;

• NSRC Committee: “…potential disciplinary matters regarding two members who had put their names forward as potential Committee members…the proposed disciplinary notices to be sent out today (29th December). The issues had arisen in light of the parties being nominated for the Committee and that serious issues had crystallised to which answers need to be provided prior to the election at the forthcoming AGM”-

• “In respect of NB [Neil Boston, the disciplinary notice would be sent out] on the grounds of being a party to a misleading, possibly defamatory members update published by the previous Committee.”

The reality is that the, so-called, “emergency” had been manufactured by the Chairman, Gawain Briars, following an interchange of emails with Andrew Hood that morning. Andrew Hood had asked Briars to answer a very simple question following the Committee’s unilateral pronouncement that the Club’s opening hours were to be reduced from 114/week down to 37/week from 4 January 2021. That question being;

• Andrew Hood: “I feel it wholly reasonable and necessary to question your authority in imposing such curtailed premises opening hours without membership consultation”.

As the Articles of Association are clear in requiring membership approval for any alteration to the Club’s opening hours Briars, in order to provide an honest answer, would have had to admit breaching the Articles and, therefore, company law. Predictably Briars’ response failed to provide a satisfactory answer.

Andrew Hood had no option but to deliver an 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 responded thus;

• “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.”

Through his deliberate misinterpretation, portraying the above ultimatum as being menacingly threatening and the taking of mock offence at Andrew Hood’s ultimatum, Briars had immediately conceived a way to prevent the election onto the Board of Directors of two fiercely independent minded members – via the abuse of the Club’s disciplinary procedures.

Instigation of Illegal Disciplinary Proceedings

That evening I, along with Andrew Hood, received notices informing us of disciplinary hearings to be held on 12 January 2021, the day before the AGM. We would have automatically become directors at that AGM due to fewer nominations having been submitted than the number of director positions available.

Knowing the intention of the Committee, 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 that the disciplinary procedure was illegitimate the Committee continued with the hearing in my absence. Unsurprisingly I was found guilty. I say unsurprisingly as the disciplinary panel comprised the same directors who’d voted to instigate the disciplinary procedure. They effectively acted as Prosecutor, Judge, Jury and Executioner.

The following day, the morning of the AGM (13 January 2021), I received notification of my expulsion from the Club effective from mid-day.

On 6 May 2021, in response to our letter of claim, the Club’s insurers wrote to our solicitor stating the following;

• “It has been acknowledged that your Clients were afforded [only] 12 days’ notice of the disciplinary hearings, rather than the full 14 days’ notice as required by the Articles.”

This statement clearly contradicts the Committee’s previous, categorical statement – “ The disciplinary notices are valid” –made in their bullish letter to our solicitor of 11 January 2021, some months earlier.

It is quite simply an admission that the disciplinary proceedings were illegal.

Commentary

The grounds upon which the Committee had based their instigation of disciplinary proceedings against me, “of being a party to a misleading, possibly defamatory members update published by the previous Committee”, related to the content of a members update issued by the previous, Nick Duckworth-led, Committee.

That members update was issued on 8 October 2020, the best part of 3 months prior to the instigation of these disciplinary proceedings against me.

If the directors genuinely considered the matter to have been so serious as to have warranted expulsion they would surely have instigated disciplinary proceedings immediately, or in short time after, they came to power at the Extraordinary General Meeting of 13 October 2020. They wouldn’t have waited the best part of 3 months.

Summary

The reality is that disciplinary proceedings were instigated against me for one reason alone. That reason being to prevent my election to the board of directors of Nottingham Squash Rackets Club. I was expelled the day before the 13 January 2021 AGM.

Further, the Committee knew full well that they were acting unlawfully and have admitted as such.

Why would they go to such lengths as to act unlawfully?

Simply because they didn’t want anyone on the board of directors who might question or challenge in any way their myriad illegal/illegitimate activities which have continued to this day.

Next Steps

I am determined to see this matter through and my solicitor is preparing papers to be sent to court.

My Hope is that a more reasonable Committee is elected to save the Club from the unnecessary costs of litigation.

< Back to the Andrew Hood & Neil Boston Page