CCF v Surrey

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Scott Freeman
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Scott Freeman » Fri May 13, 2011 6:22 pm

Ian Thompson wrote:
Scott Freeman wrote:I believe that new for old when you deal with insurance is normal, but frankly I think we would have been happy with second hand had we had guarantees that they were working.
New for old is normal for most insurance policies, but that's not the case if the lender is claiming against the borrower for a loss. The law says the borrower's liability (if they are liable at all) is the value of the clocks at the time of loss. If the clocks were, say, 5 years old, you would be entitled to the value of 5 year old clocks.

With the confused versions of events described in this thread, It seems to me that the chances of anyone successfully claiming against anyone else for the loss of the clocks is low. It seems to me that the lesson everyone should learn from this is to agree responsibilities up front and put it all in writing.

Fair enough. As I say, we would have been happy for replacement 2nd hand clocks. No-one is now looking to make any claims. I think the one thing I would like to see if nothing else, is that the Congress Company and/or the SCCA do Ben Ogunshola the service of thanking him for resolving the problem. And your final line makes perfect sense Ian. If the SCCA ever decide to work with us again on a congress, I think it is fair to say that we would be doing that! :)

User avatar
David Brock
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:12 am
Contact:

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by David Brock » Fri May 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Ha Ha like the bit about buying the clocks from a dodgy Nigerian -who disappeared the day after. Did you pay by credit card and are you sure he has not cloned it. Who knows you may find them on the Nigerian black market?
Think,check and then Move !!

John Upham
Posts: 4358
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by John Upham » Fri May 13, 2011 6:55 pm

David Brock wrote:Ha Ha like the bit about buying the clocks from a dodgy Nigerian -who disappeared the day after.
See http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2327
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Scott Freeman
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Scott Freeman » Fri May 13, 2011 7:34 pm

Scott Freeman wrote:Paul Dupre wrote:
"Though, Ray Ryan said they were the old clocks no longer being used by CCF, so why then would you not accept £300 that was offered?"

Paul, this could be quite a key piece of information in the mystery. I would like to ask Ray if he said that because if he did, he would know that it was not true. Can I ask when he said it?

Still hoping for a reply on this rather important claim. It seems a curious thing for Ray to have said; he would have known from his time here that we would not stop using something until it stops working - and it is a sure fact that nobody from CCF would have told him that we were no longer using them, as it simply wasn't the case. I think it is important that Ray gets the chance to respond on this which is why I have emailed him, but information from Paul Dupre as to when it was said would be extremely helpful.

In this regard, I have emailed (using the normal email system) Ray to ask him what, if anything, he said. I have copied the email I have sent to David Sedgwick (Ray's colleague at the Open Control desk) and to Paul Dupre himself (assuming I have the right email address for him).

Paul Dupré
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Cove, Hampshire

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Paul Dupré » Fri May 13, 2011 7:37 pm

Paul Dupré wrote:Sorry, been away from my PC to check some facts on the grapevine. Apparently, Daniel Gliddon delivered the clocks, and apparently, we used three of them. Though, Ray Ryan said they were the old clocks no longer being used by CCF, so why then would you not accept £300 that was offered?
OK, now following up on my recent discovery above. Apparently, my source tells me that the good clocks were with John & Chris at another event. Not much of an offer then, to supply us with 21 dodgy clocks. Maybe, the batteries weren't new then. That reduces the actual value again.

So, Ben Ogunshola provided you with 21 new clocks from his Nigerian friend who was leaving in the next day, as replacement for 21 old & knackered clocks. Good deal, me thinks! so, why have you been banging on about this for the last 5 years?

The more I hear the worse it gets. It's a pity he is not here to be questioned.

Scott, Are you sure you didn't plan this deception in advance?
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

Paul Dupré
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Cove, Hampshire

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Paul Dupré » Fri May 13, 2011 7:45 pm

Scott Freeman wrote:In this regard, I have emailed (using the normal email system) Ray to ask him what, if anything, he said. I have copied the email I have sent to David Sedgwick (Ray's colleague at the Open Control desk) and to Paul Dupre himself (assuming I have the right email address for him).
No emails yet.

Oh, sorry you must have sent it to the email address you've been spamming for the last 8 years since I last played in one of your events. I admit I do look at those emails from time to time, when I'm bored. Some of them are quite funny. Mike said this, Susan said that and Pauline said...blah blah blah blah blah blah :lol: :lol: you're a comedian, you should be on the stage.
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

Scott Freeman
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Scott Freeman » Fri May 13, 2011 7:50 pm

John reminded me this afternoon that he and Chris Constable were away at another event, probably in the west of England somewhere - and had their usual congress equipment with them. So the equipment that we lent to the Surrey event all belonged to the CCF Chess Club (if it is important to you to make the difference). Ben Ogunshola made a point of asking us if we could provide digital clocks. I think he asked for 20 but we sent 21 to play safe in case any of them decided to go wrong. In asking to use them, Ben (I believe) knew their age and condition (I think we showed them to him) but he wanted them. Some of them were old, some of them not so old. But it was the majority of the stock of clocks we had at the time.

Paul Dupre quote:
So, Ben Ogunshola provided you with 21 new clocks from his Nigerian friend who was leaving in the next day, as replacement for 21 old & knackered clocks. Good deal, me thinks! so, why have you been banging on about this for the last 5 years?


What Nigerian friend? Do you know something about this that I don't? I have already said today that I don't know where he got the clocks from. I think you need to be careful making such comments about "Nigerians" unless you have specific evidence, as such comments could be taken the wrong way. And talking about evidence, please tell me when you and Ray Ryan spoke about these clocks "not being used by CCF any more." This is quite a big issue here Paul - nobody has ever told me that before and you have just given a possible lead. Let's work together - who knows we might uncover something.

And the reason I have been "banging on about it" is because it is one issue in a line of issues that we have had with the Basman and/or the SCCA (or Congress Company!) which has just been swept under the carpet.

So I need to hear from you concerning:
1 Ray's alleged comment about CCF no longer using the clocks
2 Your claim that I have told lies
3 Your claim that I have been deciptful
4 Your claim that ex-members of CCF are unhappy with us
5 Your claim that ex-employees of CCF are unhappy with us.

I think it's time for some hard facts here Paul. You have made a lot of allegations and not offered a shred of evidence to back you up.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3522
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by David Sedgwick » Fri May 13, 2011 7:52 pm

Paul Dupré wrote:The clocks were looked after (apparently) by CCF employees (David Sedgwick & Ray Ryan) by the Open arbiter's desk; unbeknownst to the rest of the Congress Committee (not including Ben Ogunshola, a friend of CCF).
Scott Freeman wrote:Next point is that David Sedgwick and Ray Ryan were certainly NOT employees of CCF - not at the time of the congress anyway. David Sedgwick had worked with us for a very short time on our Bridge activities but that was a while before that (David - can you remind me when?). Ray had worked with us for a while but left us by the Summer of 2005 when he and Pauline decided to do their own thing. (You are welcome to ask me questions, Paul!).
It is only with considerable reluctance that I am posting anything further on this thread. However, I need to set the record straight on a couple of matters.

I have never been an employee of CCF. I was hired on a self-employed basis to do some work far CCF Card Fellowship from March 2003 until January 2004.

As to the contention that no-one on the Congress Committee other than Ben Ogunshola even knew there were CCF DGTs at the Congress, this is the first time that I have heard that alleged. Congress Director Richard Jones made no such suggestion when I first discussed the matter with him about three days after the Congress. He expressed surprise that Howard Curtis and the CCF team should have left without checking that they had their most valuable items, a feeling with which I concurred.

User avatar
Ben Purton
Posts: 1620
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
Location: Berks

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Ben Purton » Fri May 13, 2011 7:53 pm

Theres more facts in my statement than you have posted this entire thread..
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.

Scott Freeman
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Scott Freeman » Fri May 13, 2011 7:54 pm

Paul Dupré wrote: Oh, sorry you must have sent it to the email address you've been spamming for the last 8 years since I last played in one of your events.
I am sure you will be pleased to hear that I have removed you from all mailshots, as I assume that is what you wanted. :)

I am interested that you are mentioning some of the names I expected you to mention. Feel free to elaborate. But be careful!

Scott Freeman
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Scott Freeman » Fri May 13, 2011 8:00 pm

Can I thank David for posting above - I do appreciate the reluctance he had in doing so. But it does at least clarify that he was not employed by CCF and certainly was not working with us at the time of the August 2006 Congress, which Paul Dupre appears to have claimed was the case.

He also raises a good point which supports what I have said that nobody apart from Paul Dupre seems to be denying that the clocks were there.

However with David watching, it does give me the chance to ask him whether he heard Ray say anything about the clocks "no longer being used by CCF." Sorry to put you on the spot David, but I am sure that you can see how important this piece of information might be if it is true. I am assuming at this stage that Ray did not say it, but it obviously is a point worth persuing.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3522
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by David Sedgwick » Fri May 13, 2011 8:02 pm

Paul Dupré wrote:Scott, Are you sure you didn't plan this deception in advance?
It's no secret that I've not seen eye to eye with CCF on a number of matters for several years. However, this is getting ridiculous.

The CCF team originally turned up without the DGTs on the Friday evening when we were setting up. They brought them later that evening (or it might have been the following morning). By then we'd arranged the back-up arrangement with Mike Adams and mostly used his clocks instead. Hence only 3 of CCF's 21 were ever actually used.

I wasn't very please about the initial absence of the CCF clocks, as it didn't accord with what I understood had been agreed with Ben Ogunshola.

However, if you were planning a scam involving faking the disappearance of 21 DGTs at an event, it would be very strange to start by not bringing them along.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3522
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by David Sedgwick » Fri May 13, 2011 8:08 pm

Scott Freeman wrote:However with David watching, it does give me the chance to ask him whether he heard Ray say anything about the clocks "no longer being used by CCF." Sorry to put you on the spot David, but I am sure that you can see how important this piece of information might be if it is true. I am assuming at this stage that Ray did not say it, but it obviously is a point worth persuing.
I replied to your email about half an hour ago.

If Ray Ryan-Foster ever made any such statement, he did not make it in my hearing.

Susan Lalic
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 8:54 am

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by Susan Lalic » Fri May 13, 2011 8:19 pm

I agree the clocks were there. I think they were thrown away. There were suggestions that Ben was persuaded by CCF to say he'd bought some replacements, with the logic that the Committee was more likely to refund Ben more quickly than CCF. In order to dispel any such rumours, I hope that Ben is able to produce some evidence of his purchase one day. He is an incredibly generous man if he did get them for £600 and accepted no recompense.

Paul seems angry with CCF and it may partly be a delayed reaction from the time he stood in as Surrey's first team captain when Scott suddenly resigned. Paul had the unenviable task of getting a team together with no contacts (as he'd recently come back from Wales) in less than two weeks. Scott refused to pass on any contact details or to tell Paul who had already agreed to play in the forthcoming match.
Last edited by Susan Lalic on Fri May 13, 2011 9:30 pm, edited 3 times in total.

John Constable
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 10:34 pm

Re: CCF v Surrey

Post by John Constable » Fri May 13, 2011 8:21 pm

Paul Dupré wrote:
Paul Dupré wrote: Apparently, my source tells me that the good clocks were with John & Chris at another event.
Sorry Paul, but your source is completely wrong. CCF Mindgames have never had any digital clocks to loan out to congresses. Our 100 clocks are (and always have been) analogue. Check here http://www.ccfworld.com/MindGames/Terms.html Also noting items 6,7 & 8 which every organiser has accepted before borrowing our equipment.

Locked