Support group ‘Friends of Monkton Wyld’ was set up at the end of July
Updates: https://www.monktonwyldcourtcase.co.uk
Whilst all charities must change with new blood, in a failed economy one of the last ways to make money seems to be to find new and more imaginative ways to get hold of land, buildings and other assets that aren’t yours.
Trust is the word. If you can get yourself appointed s part of a voting majority on the board of a UK charity you can leverage the trust to your will. In time and in theory, you can alter the deed, commandeer trust assets and even, with luck, cash them in.
This isn’t how trusts are supposed to operate but the UK charity commission is so risk-averse, underfunded and unprincipled that when dubious activities, akin to theft, take place, they tend to insist on looking the other way.
Leveraged buyout: The Countryside Restoration Trust
In 2019 recent appointee David Mills, husband of actress Dame Judy Dench, became active on the board of renowned Cambridgeshire author and broadcaster Robin Page’s Countryside Restoration Trust charity. Over decades Robin had been donated and bequeathed over 2,000 acres, tens of millions of pounds worth of farmland and buildings.
This new board faction turned on Robin in 2021 and voted him off the charity he’d founded, [see full details below] leaving him not just heartbroken, but quite rightly feeling robbed of the substantial fruits of his life’s conservation work. To rub salt in the wounds the new clique changed the charity’s name to the Countryside Regeneration Trust, bringing in more commercially-minded new managers for the farms entrusted to them.
A wonderful old man who should have been enjoying his retirement was turned into a nervous wreck, seeing enemies everywhere, not knowing who he could trust. He thought the people who’d turned on him to take over his thousands of acres of farms, were his friends.
In fact, Robin told me late in 2022, they had indeed pretended to be friends and supporters, while secretly establishing a majority on the board to vote him out. Everything Robin ploughed into his trust was usurped, he said, by the sort of business managers he’d set it up to oppose. Robin died in the spring of 2023.
Hostile takeover: Monkton Wyld Court
The latest of these attempts to usurp the founders of a successful charity, incubating arts, the very best of tradition, social justice and not buying in to the ‘Net Zero’ dogma, is at the editorial HQ of The Land Magazine at Monkton Wyld, near Lyme Regis in Dorset. Here, bullied editors Gill Barron and one of The Land Is Ours founders Simon Fairlie are now facing eviction.
https://www.change.org/p/fighting-against-the-coup-d-%C3%A9tat-at-monkton-wyld-court
There is a decidedly neo-con political twist to the new trustees’ gang. One of the faction trying to take over has links to Price Waterhouse Coopers, and, as a team, they stand to acquire a property worth millions to manage this purpose-built Victorian rural school the way they please.
https://www.thelandmagazine.org.uk/
Please consider subscribing to The Land and/or joining the Friends of Monkton Wyld campaign, to help restore this community to its pre-2023 values and to terminate any hint of hijacking the magazine’s HQ along with Gill and Simon’s retirement.
Monkton Wyld: Timeline of Treachery – or – How Four New Trustees Destroyed our Community:
27 March 2023 A volunteer who we shall call “SW” applies to the Monkton Wyld Community for permanent residency after a six month trial period in the maintenance/ handyman role. To be accepted as a full member, an applicant has to win full consensus agreement of the whole community (otherwise pre-existing discord can be cemented into the community). Several people feel unsure of his suitability (because of a quick temper, and a tendency to be pushy) so his trial period is extended for another three months.
28 March The community receives an email from the trustees saying only that “issues have been raised and must be investigated by the trustees”. A long email correspondence follows over the next ten days in which the trustees drip feed us information: that the matter involves “contracts and behaviour” (29 March); that it is a workplace complaint (5 April); that the complaints are of bullying and harassment against Simon and Gill (12 April). Eventually, after pretending otherwise for two weeks, SW acknowledges what many suspect, that he is the source of the complaints.
12 April Kelly Marsden launches an investigation into these complaints without revealing to us what they consist of despite repeated requests from us to see them. Marsden claims that they are “whistleblowing complaints” (even though grievances over matters such as bullying are not normally regarded as whistleblowing) and we therefore have no right to see what we are charged with. Gill and I can therefore cannot respond to any of the evidence.
14 April Gill and I ask another member of the community to ask SW to inform us through a third party what his complaints are, as indeed he should have done under our normal community procedures and the terms of his volunteer contract. SW refuses and when Gill and I bump into him and ask him directly, the conversation rapidly becomes heated. We accuse him of disregarding the terms of his agreement, and he claims we are “Lord and Lady of the Manor”.
16 April As a result of this altercation, SW enters another complaint against Gill and me, claiming that he fears for his safety (he is in his forties, Gill and I are in our seventies). We receive an emailed warning from the trustees that if we ask him again we will be “asked to leave”.
20 April Kelly Marsden sends us an email accusing Gill and I of “blackmail” and stating, without citing a shred of evidence, “you both seem to have developed considerable influence over the community whereby others are brought around to agreeing with what you want through pressure and intimidation”.
26 April The trustees finally allow us to see a copy of SW’s letter of complaint. In the same email they send Kelly Marsden’s completed report, which entirely endorses SW’s complaints; and a summons to attend a disciplinary hearing on 2 May. The report provides no concrete evidence in support of SW’s allegations. The charge of bullying relies substantially on the events of 14 April, which occurred after SW submitted his letter of complaint; and also on the fact that Gill and I objected to the kangaroo court procedure, which we have every right to do. She also repeats the charges that our “overbearing influence” serves to “maintain control over community decision-making” without citing a single community decision that could be said to have been forced through in this manner; or mentioning the fact that Gill never attends meetings. The evidence also relies on non-specific, undocumented allegations from four witnesses (out of a total of eleven). Since we do not know who these witnesses are, or what they said, we have no way of challenging their evidence, nor of assessing whether their evidence has been, twisted, cherry-picked or influenced by leading questions. None of this anonymous evidence would stand up in a court of law.
28 April Gill and I make a formal complaint against SW: that he failed to follow the complaints procedure laid down in his contract; and that he had applied for permanent membership of the community on false pretences, since he concealed from the community the fact that he had a week earlier submitted to the trustees a raft of complaints against community members, one of the trustees and the community as a whole. Our complaint is summarily dismissed by the trustees.
2 May Gill and I face a disciplinary committee. I provide a 12 page rebuttal of SW’s complaints and Kelly Marsden’s report, along with a comprehensive rebuttal of her report by community member Jared Hills. I also provided testimonies from all eight of the people who have assisted me on the farm over the last eight years. These are the people whom I have spent most time working with, yet none of them were invited to give evidence by Kelly Marsden, who has never visited Monkton nor met with any of the people concerned face-to-face.
3 May XXX XXX MBE, who has been a trustee for 15 years is subjected to a grilling on Zoom by all the other trustees, five out of six of whom have been trustees for only 4 months. In her words she is “coerced into resigning”.
8 May Jasmine Hills, a community member who runs the garden makes a formal complaint, first to the community and then to the trustees against SW’s aggressive behaviour towards her. The complaint is ignored by the trustees.
9 May Gill and I are informed of the outcome of the disciplinary inquiry: we are told we have to leave Monkton Wyld Court as soon as possible, and in any case within six months. No mention is made of the evidence I and Gill submitted, nor of the substantial testimony that we submitted in our favour from other people we have worked and lived with here.
10 May Asked in person why the trustees are pursuing this approach, one of the new trustees states “it is time for a change”.
11 May Student cinematographers, currently filming at Monkton Wyld as part of its educational remit, are forbidden by the trustees to film on site and ordered to destroy all footage. The trustees also phone the student’s college saying that they will call the police if filming continues. The college tells the students not to film. Oh dear, what sort of advice is that for budding investigative journalists?
16 May Jasmine Hills makes a further complaint against SW’s aggressive behaviour towards her. This is again ignored by the trustees.
18 May We are informed that two members of the Board of Trustees have resigned, leaving only four out of the original seven.
20 May Jasmine Hills is informed that she has to leave Monkton Wyld Court “with immediate effect”. This is because she “instigated” a meeting to review SW’s position in the community. The meeting (which has not been held yet) has to happen in June anyway , and most members of the community wish to bring it forward since there is no conceivable prospect of SW will be accepted into the community.
21 May Simon is told by the trustees that he is barred from his kitchen, dining room, toilets, bathroom and all other shared areas of the community household. He is also banned from attending community meetings. “Formal action will be taken” if he does not abide by these restrictions.
23 May Five community members and three long-term volunteers (eight out of eleven people altogether) sign a motion of no-confidence in the trustees.
30 May Simon and Gill are “invited” to an appeal on 5 July. Even though it involves eviction from our home of 13 years, it is just 45 minutes long, and on Zoom (which neither of us do). We have no right to bring a lawyer, call witnesses, or question those who have given evidence against us. The adjudicating panel consists of an HR expert and LG, the trustee who has been spearheading the campaign against us, in other words the prosecutor is judge and jury. Simon and Gill refuse to attend on the grounds that it is a stitch-up
5 June The “Appeal Outcome” is delivered. Gill and Simon are given notice “that you are no longer a community member of Monkton Wyld Court with immediate effect. This means that you are asked not to . . .(among other things) participate in any community activity, including attending meetings and work activities . . . communicate verbally or in writing with community members, visitors, service users, service providers, students, clients or associates on any matter connected with Monkton Wyld Court. . . etc”
11 June Fantastic response from members of the public at this years Scythe Fair in Somerset. 284 people signed our petition, with 41 pages of comments from just a few hours in the afternoon. Thank you to everyone who signed for your support – it means a great deal.
14 June The trustees order Jasmine to stop working in the garden, saying that there should be a “lapse” in activity there until further notice.
15 June Our solicitor, who has 26 years experience in employment law drafts a letter on behalf of Simon to the trustees informing them that “All legal cases involving PIDA and the government and ACAS guidance on PIDA are clear that internal complaints of the nature raised by SW, are not ‘disclosures’ and should be dealt with using internal grievance procedures.. The non-justified use of PIDA has been relied upon by the Trustees as an excuse to override and ignore the clear process that is set out in the Community Staff Handbook for dealing with internal grievances and conflict resolution and disciplinary matters.” There has so far been no response to this letter from the trustees.
19-23 June Since the main housekeeper is on strike, and both office workers are threatening resignation, the trustees bring in a certain fellow to work in the house and the office This person has worked here before, but was found to be a heavy drinker and liar who was witnessed stealing from our pub, and who made unwanted advances to women. The community is unanimous in not wanting him back, and three people informed the trustees of this fact. The trustees ignored these pleas, and drafted him in as blackleg labour. When the community presented documentary evidence of his unreliability, the trustees responded: “We have concluded that there is no substance to your claims. You are not in full possession of the facts.” The trustees have never even met the fellow, while we all lived with him for several months.
21 June SW embarks on a programme of trying to harass the members and residents of the community. He confiscates the communal car key, turns off the water in the garden, and brings in a lawnmower to replace the scythes which we have used for over 12 years to mow the lawns. Our groundsman hides the lawnmower, and the SW calls the police to report that it is stolen.
27 June As SW has completed his extended probationary period of 3 months, full members of the Community review his performance. They decide that he is not a suitable person to be living here and give him four weeks notice to leave. Five members wish him to leave, and one abstains. Three other long term volunteers support this decision. SW is informed by letter.
28 June The trustees demand £25,900 in outstanding rent from Simon, even though the value of the milk, cheese and yoghurt he has supplied’ plus improvements to the infrastructure well exceeds the value of the rent. They threaten court action if it is not paid immediately. Simon responds “sue and be damned”.
28 June The trustees charge Simon with £25,920 rent arrears (including statutory interest of 8 per cent) without bothering to ask to see his accounts, later still not having viewed his accounts – “.. if you do not make immediate payment of the arrears. Our next step will be to apply to the court and pursue the claim for rent arrears, which will inevitably incur additional costs for you..”. In fact Monkton Wyld Court owes Simon over £10,000 for improvements in the event that he leaves the premises, and there is abundant documented evidence to support this.
4 July With the resignation of two office workers, and the main housekeeper on strike, LG the London based trustee who is the architect of the coup comes down to help fill these roles for a few days. She also brings down her daughter as a “ volunteer” and immediately gives her the freedom to enter our office from which we ourselves are now barred. Entry to the office would never normally be granted to a volunteer who had only worked here one day. There would appear to be a conflict of interest here.
5 July An ad hoc group of community members, long term volunteers and three former trustees decide to call a public meeting. Its main purpose would be to form an association of “Friends of Monkton Wyld Court” whose objective would be to advise the trustees and help safeguard the welfare of the charity.
11 July On returning home from holiday, office worker JL is told by the trustees to leave the premises forthwith, and without pay. Meanwhile the office sits unstaffed.
Former BBC presenter Robin Page is sacked from the CRT charity he founded
09 June 2021 by Stephen Delahunty
https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/former-bbc-presenter-sacked-charity-founded/governance/article/1718518
The Countryside Restoration Trust said it had removed the One Man and His Dog star with immediate effect
A former BBC presenter has been sacked from the charity he founded after trustees accused him of failing to observe standards of governance and damaging the charitys reputation.
In March, a war of words broke out between Robin Page, founder of the Countryside Restoration Trust and a former presenter of the BBC sheepdog trials programme One Man and His Dog, and the charity’s trustees.
Page claimed he was being “bullied out” of the charity, which he started with one farm in 1993, by a group of greedy elderly men who wanted to take the charity away from its members.
The charity, which has since grown to manage 18 properties around the UK, denied this was the case.
It said Page’s role as executive chair was being concluded on legal advice, but he had been invited to continue as a trustee.
In a statement on its website yesterday, the charity said it had passed a resolution to remove Page as a company member with immediate effect.
This follows repeated public criticism of strategic decisions taken by the charity, including those he had supported as a trustee, and his failure to observe standards of governance required of a CRT trustee,” it said.
By doing so, he has damaged the charitys reputation and, despite extensive efforts to work constructively with Robin, the trustees have reluctantly concluded that the relationship has broken down irretrievably.
The charity said it was in the process of reforming its organisational structure to help manage growth under a strengthened senior management team, and thanked Page for his many years of dedication.
We are confident that the plans we have for its future growth will be in keeping with his vision to create a working countryside, where sensitive farming practices encourage and protect wildlife but also produce high-quality produce, the charity said.
Page did not respond to a request for comment, but appeared to acknowledge the news on social media.
In a tweet he said: The CRT website about me in my view lie, after lie after lie.
They are thick too they threw me out three weeks after I had left.
“About normal for that band of nodding donkeys.
CRT Trustee board’s Statement 8 June 2021 – a ‘hostile takeover’
The Trustees of the Countryside Restoration Trust have today passed a resolution to remove Robin Page as a company member with immediate effect. This follows repeated public criticism of strategic decisions taken by the charity, including those he had supported as a Trustee, and his failure to observe standards of governance required of a CRT Trustee. By doing so, he has damaged the charity’s reputation and, despite extensive efforts to work constructively with Robin, the Trustees have reluctantly concluded that the relationship has broken down irretrievably.
The Countryside Restoration Trust has grown significantly in recent years, with 18 farms now under management, and the charity’s finances are robust, allowing us to plan the next phase in its development. We are in the process of reforming the charity’s organisational structure to manage the charity’s growth under a strengthened senior management team. We have several exciting new projects under way, which will raise greater awareness of our work to conserve the natural world, and which are in the best traditions of the charity.
We would like to thank Robin for his many years of dedication to the Countryside Restoration Trust as its co-founder and driving force. We are confident that the plans we have for its future growth will be in keeping with his vision to create a working countryside, where sensitive farming practices encourage and protect wildlife but also produce high-quality produce.
Former BBC presenter claims ‘dreadful’ trustees are trying to sack him from charity he founded
18 March 2021 by Stephen Delahunty
The Countryside Restoration Trust rejects Robin Page’s claims and says he has been offered a new role
The founder of a countryside charity has claimed he is being ousted by a group of what he called dreadful trustees in a bitter dispute over the running of the charity.
Robin Page, founder of the Countryside Restoration Trust and a former presenter of BBC sheepdog trials programme One Man and His Dog, said on Twitter that he was being sacked from the charity he established in 1993 with one farm.
The charity, which has since grown to manage 18 properties around the UK, denied this was the case.
It said Page’s role as executive chair was being concluded on legal advice, but he had been invited to continue as a trustee.
Page claimed he was being “bullied out” of the charity by a group of greedy elderly men who wanted to take the charity away from its members.
He said: Can you believe it. After 27 years of giving most of my life to the Countryside Restoration Trust I am being sacked by the CRT in April a group of three or four dreadful trustees who have lost the plot and have let their expanded egos take over.
The charity rejected the claims.
Page said he had also removed the legacy in his will he was going to leave the charity.
He alleged his dismissal letter came from vice-chair of the CRT, Nicholas Watts.
But in a statement on the charitys website, Watts said: Id like to address the misunderstandings on social media about Robin Pages position at the charity.
Theres no question of him being sacked or there being a trustees takeover. His role as executive chair has been concluded, on legal advice, to comply with Charity Commission rules and best practice governance.
He not only remains a trustee but has been offered an exciting new role recognising his immense service to the charity and enabling him to continue building our membership networks and portfolio of 18 properties around the UK.
We hope that this clarifies matters and emphatically puts the record straight.
In a separate statement, the CRTs trustees said they planned to meet Page today to discuss his future role, which they hoped will be conciliatory and collaborative in context.
One thought on “Monkton Wyld community, new trustees at another UK countryside charity attempt ‘hostile takeover’”