I did not intend to cause offence by characterising the MSCC as supine but I wished to make it clear that there does appear to be and have been inaction in relation to obtaining and providing information as to what is happening and how the present difficulties have arisen. The recall notice must have been precipitated by an action by Morgan or the subcontractor who supplied the master cylinder or an engineer’s report in relation to the component. Whether or not this happened after a sudden “accident” or “loss of control” may not be important in the long run but it is obviously important to owners of CX cars I knew that the MSCC had submitted a questionnaire to members and had reported the results to MMC but this does not appear to have precipitated any specific reaction apart from a proposal (three month extension of the warranty period the terms of which are not specified) which has been and is being criticised on substantial grounds as appears from previous posts The memorandum of association of the MSCC sets out the objects of the MSCC as a company limited by guarantee. I am unable to copy the same into this post but they may be read by obtaining a search in the Companies registry using google. As one might expect they include furthering the interests of members of MSCC and Morgan enthusiasts. This must include obtaining specific useful information relating to CX problems.
There are of course numerous ancillary powers set out in the Memorandum.
Meetings with the management and passing on concerns/complaints of members are not with respect sufficient practical furtherance of these objects – the objects require more than this in the present situation such as obtaining precise details of what is proposed and what arrangements are to be made in relation to the removal of the recall notice and also target dates so that (for example) CX owner members may consider arrangements as to SORN and insurance and make decisions as to travel and other events (including events organised by MSCC). . Those attending any meeting with the management of MMC do not appear to have taken along a schedule of specific material items of concern based on the information provided by members and recorded what the MMC were saying in relation to such specifics so the factual scenario may be put before members. Further the CEO should have been told that the company was heading for a public relations disaster and he must seek to nurture and maintain reputation and goodwill (including the goodwill of those who deals face to face with customers) rather than giving the appearance of ignoring them (thus avoiding damage to the Marque).
Others may have different views but I do not hesitate to say that use of the word “supine” may seem harsh but it is not entirely inappropriate.
