I can see that there are arguments in favour of clubs becoming limited companies, and the limitation of liability is probably the strongest.
But why, then, is there such reticence to engage in such things as drive outs, exchange of technical information and all the other things that car clubs seem to do but which MSCC doesn't seem to want to engage in? It's not like the directors would be vulnerable, as their liability is limited?
As Colin points out, the case referred to was thrown out on appeal, and there seems a bit of a dearth of evidence of successful prosecutions?
