What on earth.........

Steve (and others),

May I suggest, before commenting about perceived abuses of our freedom of speech, we should consider the position that our Chairman and Commitee find themselves in right now. Quite rightly, we are free to comment on here in a non-libellous way about thealleged shortcomings of Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd and Norton Motorcycle Holdings Ltd in respect of extended non-delivery of motorcycles that have been partly or fully paid for. But surely, that is a matter between the customer, Norton, and their respective agents.

From our Chairman's post, I infer that NMUK has suggested such comment on the Forum may damage their future funding, hinder their efforts to deliver product, and has requested a greater degree of moderation is applied to this subject. After all, I believe the members of our Commitee are individually responsible for content of both the Forum and of Roadholder.

If my inference is incorrect, perhaps a more informed and explicitreply might help understanding by all.

I find it strange that Tim Harrison thinks it is correct that messages from members/961 owners have no right to criticise Norton Motors (UK) ltd for poor quality control, failure to deliver on time and lack of communication, for example, and are removed from the message board in the interest of the members.

How, by ignoring these facts do you help existing or potential customers? I would be far happierif Norton Motors (UK) Ltdwere producing top quality products with no faults. Burying ones head in the sand and pretending everything is fine will not resolve matters.

It is the responsibility of Norton Motors (UK) Ltd to put its own house in order, and if its products and customer service are inadequate then the business will fail, but this will not be due to criticism from existing customers. The onus is on a business to produce a product that the customer is happy with, not for the customer to keep quiet when he/she is not.

It would seem Tim Harrison has taken this decision in the best interests of Norton Motors (UK) Ltd

Simon.

Dear Simon,

I hate to point it out yet again, but Norton Motors Ltd is one of my companies and has nothing whatsoever to do with Norton Motorcycles Ltd, Norton Motorcycle Holdings Ltd etc., etc.

Norton Motors Ltd is part of my group of companies together with Andover Norton International Ltd and Norton Motors (Deutschland) GmbH.

It is probably of interest negative comments of Andover Norton itself or its trade customers have never been removed from the NOC forum "in the interest of the NOC members".

Previously wrote:

What on earth is going on?

So now we have Chairman Tim Harrison tellingus what to write or not?

Surely Mr. Chairman, you belive in freedom of speech?

Respectfully

Steve Snoen

British Columbia, Canada

Previously wrote:

What on earth is going on?

So now we have Chairman Tim Harrison tellingus what to write or not?

Surely Mr. Chairman, you belive in freedom of speech?

Respectfully

Steve Snoen

British Columbia, Canada

Hi Steve (and Jo),

As chairman, from time to time I have to make decisions which are in the overall best interests of the club. Complete freedom of speech could allow the club's forum to be used for any purpose. The 961 technical forum has a particular purpose which is to provide existing and potential 961 owners the opportunityto exchange views on technical issues and their experience of the bike.

We have an increasing number of 961 owners in the club and they, like many of the rest of us, wish to see new Norton's being made and sold together witha factoryspares backup. It is not in the interests of the Club or owners of the 961 to for us to be inadvertantlydamaging the Companyeven if that is not the intention. Richard Negus encapsulates the point well, thank you Richard.

Jo makes the point that his Companies are unconnected with Norton Motorcycles Ltd. This clarification will be of assitance to anyone who was in doubt about the point. Andover Norton had done a great job over the years in ensuring that Norton's are kept on the road andI for one am pleased to see a keen Norton riderat the helm of this Company. I believe that the club should be, whever possible, supportive of the organisations flying the Norton flag. Indeed this was one of the first points thatI made in my piece in the Roadholder.

Tim Harrison

NOC Chairman

I hesitate to post this but ... the EC came to the decision to take the action they did after a long and, at times noisy, debate. There are reasons for this stance and Tim is quite correct that it was done for the best interests of the WHOLE of the NOC.

The NOC are not a consumer rights organisation and we are unable to exert any influence on Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd. If you have a problem with that organisation you really should take it up with them. That is not to say that individually andcorporately we are unaware of people's problems and are very sympathetic.

Steve comments on the desire for freedom ofspeech. None of us wish to damage this freedom but the comments made on this forum have the ability to damage the NOC and our capacity to help and support all our members. Please remember this when posting on any of our fora.

I shall not be discussing thispubliclyany more: if you wish to correspond with me about this subject I'll be happy to answer emails. Similarly, I shall bepresumptuous, and suggest that Tim will be happy to enter into personalcorrespondence via email with any members who have concerns. Our email addresses are on page 2 of every Roadholder.

Sorry Ian and Tim but you are both wrong. It is normally a constitutional right for members of any club to make criticisms of an organisation OR, indeed, of the club itself- provided those criticisms are not defamatory or libellous orare likelyput the club into a breach of the law. You cannot possibly justify removing postings about ONE organisation (as Joe says, it has never applied to Andover Norton). It is not simply about 'freedom of speech' - itis more likely tobeof positive benefit to members, even though negative toward the company involved. I agree with Simon's point on that.

There must have been numerous instances where members have been warned about the shortcomings of particular suppliers or companies and the quality of their goods- in fact I KNOW there have! (One well known Norton parts supplier immediately springs to mind!). Once a member is aware of these shortcomings they can make an informed decision or be prepared. E.g. with no prior knowledge of any possible additional delivery delays on a 961, a member might have a justifiablecomplaint against the NOC and its other members for not making him aware via the forum, if it occurs after he has placed his order. I submit that, if anyone wants to buy a new Commando 961, they will buy one - but they might be better prepared for a longer wait than they had hoped for.

I belong to many forums from Cars to Guitars and I expect to find out any potential problems via the other members, not to have such information censored - supposedly in my interest!

Of course, as members of a Norton club,we are all VERY pleased to see someone having a go at keeping the name going, but that doesn't mean to say anyone who tries is above criticism - it never has in the past. The company should take it on the chin and try to improve their customer relations. This applies to any business I can think of.

Cheers, Lionel

PS. Short of a lottery win, I would not consider buying one but club members' criticisms DEFINITELY would not put me off if I was in the market for one. It's not 'retro' enough for my tastes.

Previously wrote:

Sorry Ian and Tim but you are both wrong.

Quite. Apart from the caveats stated by Lionel, it cannot be in the interests of members to suppress information relating to Nortons.

Previously wrote:

Dear Simon,

I hate to point it out yet again, but Norton Motors Ltd is one of my companies and has nothing whatsoever to do with Norton Motorcycles Ltd, Norton Motorcycle Holdings Ltd etc., etc.

Norton Motors Ltd is part of my group of companies together with Andover Norton International Ltd and Norton Motors (Deutschland) GmbH.

It is probably of interest negative comments of Andover Norton itself or its trade customers have never been removed from the NOC forum "in the interest of the NOC members".

Sorry Joe, my mistake, I was of course refering to Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd.

May I take this opportunity to report on 'shrinking' pushrods supplied by Andover Norton International Ltd via TMS, Nottingham. Two steel caps, one top one bottom, on inlet and exhaust pushrods, loosening within 500 miles of being fitted. I sincerely hope you can overcome quality control problems for the benefit of everyone. I have spoken to one of your colleagues who was polite and helpful regarding the problem as was the person I spoke to at TMS.

Simon.

Dear Simon,

Sorry to hear about your shrinking pushrod phenomenon. I will ask my boys in Hungerford if there is a logical explanation for it, and if we have encountered that problem before or since. I should be surprised- at my level of sales here, in Germany, I should have had the same problem by now if it was one.

Regards

Joe

P.S. I know this does not refer to the 961, but knew no other way to answer Simon. Should the Club chiefs see a necessity to remove my comment they may do so in, say, 2-3 days, hoping Simon has read my reply by then.

Simon, Lionel & Alan,

I too fully agree withyour comments ! Surely, as chairman of the NOC, Tim Harrison should ensure the club serves it'sMEMBERS best interests, therefore, any members experiences with any company, good or bad, should be allowed free space on this forum & in Roadholder mag. Feedback from previous customers is invaluable when deciding where to spend ones money.Censoring posts relating to members experiences withNorton Motorcycles (uk) ltdgives the impresion that Stuart Garner is somehowinfluencing theEC's decision in this matter. Surely a fairer resolution in this case would be to forward all comments to Stuart Garner & allow him to respond to them on the message board (something I beleive he has already been offered the chance to do but so far declined?), this would give him the chance to defend any critisisims & better allay any worries that people may have. Removing posts & locking the topic sends out entirely the wrong message & can only be perceived as hiding the truth &, ultimately, will further damage the companys reputation whilst not enhancing that of the NOC !

Perhaps the EC could explain their decision in this matter more fully, in particular, why, when in the past members have been encouraged to share their experiences (mostly negative) with other parts/accessory suppliers (some of whom can boast NOC membership) are we being banned from leveling any critisism toward Mr Garner or his companies ? Then, maybe,this should be put to a vote soMembers can decide whether this censorship should remain in place or be removed.

In an earlier post (probably removed now)I challenged 961 customers who had received their bikes to tell us what they thought, the few that had commented seemed happy overall & more positive feedback would help keep a happy ballance, but things seem to have remained very quiet on that front. Does this mean that many ofthe new 961 owners are not NOC membersor are they just afraid to post for fear of retribution incase their comments are perceived as critical in any way ?

One final point, None of the comments about long delays for delivery etc had put me off the idea of 961 ownership at some point, as Lionel points out, I felt forwarned & therefore would have been prepared for a long wait. However, I now feel Norton motorcycles (uk) ltd are trying to hide something & therefore can not have any confidence them so, for me atleast, all this has had exactly the opposite effect to that desired by Tim & the EC.

Having Norton motorcycles back in production should be something we are all rejoicing, instead, it seems to be creating a rift in our club.

Previously wrote:

Dear Simon,

I hate to point it out yet again, but Norton Motors Ltd is one of my companies and has nothing whatsoever to do with Norton Motorcycles Ltd, Norton Motorcycle Holdings Ltd etc., etc.

Norton Motors Ltd is part of my group of companies together with Andover Norton International Ltd and Norton Motors (Deutschland) GmbH.

It is probably of interest negative comments of Andover Norton itself or its trade customers have never been removed from the NOC forum "in the interest of the NOC members".

Sorry Joe, my mistake, I was of course refering to Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd, and I agree with your last point. For some reason Tim Harrison and apparently the EC, have taken it on themselves to protect Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd from crticism from NOC members. Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd enjoyed plenty of free publicity via Roadholder and also Stuart Garner addressing the AGM 2 years ago. Now the craps hit the fan somebody wants every body to be quiet, they can't have it both ways.

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Dear Simon,

I hate to point it out yet again, but Norton Motors Ltd is one of my companies and has nothing whatsoever to do with Norton Motorcycles Ltd, Norton Motorcycle Holdings Ltd etc., etc.

Norton Motors Ltd is part of my group of companies together with Andover Norton International Ltd and Norton Motors (Deutschland) GmbH.

It is probably of interest negative comments of Andover Norton itself or its trade customers have never been removed from the NOC forum "in the interest of the NOC members".

Sorry Joe, my mistake, I was of course refering to Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd, and I agree with your last point. For some reason Tim Harrison and apparently the EC, have taken it on themselves to protect Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd from crticism from NOC members. Norton Motorcycles (UK) Ltd enjoyed plenty of free publicity via Roadholder and also Stuart Garner addressing the AGM 2 years ago. Now the craps hit the fan somebody wants every body to be quiet, they can't have it both ways.

I thought my previous message was not sent, hence a second message covering similar ground.

Simon.

Finally, Tim,

I agree that companies helping to keep our bikes on the road deserve our support, but just because a company 'flies the Norton flag' does not entitle it to unquestionable support from the NOC. You have praised companies in RH recently who havereceived criticism from members receiving unsatisfactory service from those very companies. And you say you are removing messages in the interests of members.

Siomon Ratcliff

NOC Member.

P.S I did not notice any support for the company producing the fabulous Norton 'pram, can't wait to see one of those on the road!

Simon,

The Norton pram company went into liquidation and the Norton prams are now becoming collectors items!

Joe

I have read your comments above and pose this question:

If the posts on the message board are damaging to the NOC what should the EC and its chairman do then?

Previously wrote:

I have read your comments above and pose this question:

If the posts on the message board are damaging to the NOC what should the EC and its chairman do then?

Ian,

If posts are damaging to the NOC then, of course,a degree of moderation could be acceptable, but that is not what we are talking about, the issue here is posts that could potentially be seen as critical of Norton motorcycles (uk) ltd. (Note I use the word critical, as I don't necessarily beleivethey have been damaging) As I see it,the only part of all this thatcould be construed asdamaging to the NOC,is the removal of posts & message boardlock down on this subject, semingly at the request of Stuart Garner. The two main criticism's of Norton motorcycles have been delays in delivery & bad comunication, (one of which could be easily rectified) if the EC knows of a reason thateither or both of these could damage the NOC, then perhaps a full explanation, either on this forum, or better still in the pages of Roadholder, would help in our understanding of their actions.

I dounderstand that difficult decisions have to be made from time to time, & not all will be popular with everyone but on this occasion, for those of us outside the EC, it doesseem thatStuart Garner has clapped his hands & the NOC EC have jumped to attention.

Previously wrote:

If my inference is incorrect, perhaps a more informed and explicitreply might help understanding by all.

I posted this almost a month ago and no relevant reply has yet been forthcoming. In my humble opinion, the speculation that is now starting to appear really is damaging to the Club. I believe that ordinary members of the Club, and I include myself in that number, really don't understand how the thread subject can possibly be damaging to the Club.

Perhaps someone who does understand might care to enlighten me, privately if not publicly.

I would suggest that members who have an interest in this go to their local library and take out a volume titled The Law of Torts, and have a read of the section on defamation. Then they will be able to make informed comment. A day in court costs £3,000 a min, everything upfront, lawyers dont trust anyone, average case £20,000, if you lose, you bear the other party's costs plus any damages awarded. Its not a criminal case, theres no innocent or guilty, just who has the best lawyer. American members would not be familiar with any of this, in the US you can say what you like,, its nearly impossible to defame anybody. Politicians use the law all the time to stop media from reporting on their foibles. See ya in court, John.

John,

this is now getting a bit melodramatic. Could not find anything on Law of Torts, but The New Penguin Guide To The Law, Fifth Edition, describes defamation as quote;

'a cause of action whereby a person can sue to protect his reputation in the face of a statement about him which is untrue and lowers his reputation in the eyes of a right thinking person' unquote.I can possibly see a problem regarding 'a right thinking person', but as far as I'm aware non of the messages on the forum are untrue and therefore are not libellous. We seemto be losing the point that a forum is an area for open public debate, in our case relevant to Nortons, which everything has been so far. Don't forget this was all started by certain members within the EC, who should really be spending their time more constructively rather thandictating to the NOC members what they can and cannot discuss on the members forum, and then to insult the members intelligence bysaying it is for our benefit is extremely disrespectful in my opinion.

Probably won't see you in court, Simon.

P.S definition of foibles; slight perculiarity or minor weakness.

Previously wrote:

I would suggest that members who have an interest in this go to their local library and take out a volume titled The Law of Torts, and have a read of the section on defamation. Then they will be able to make informed comment. A day in court costs £3,000 a min, everything upfront, lawyers dont trust anyone, average case £20,000, if you lose, you bear the other party's costs plus any damages awarded. Its not a criminal case, theres no innocent or guilty, just who has the best lawyer. American members would not be familiar with any of this, in the US you can say what you like,, its nearly impossible to defame anybody. Politicians use the law all the time to stop media from reporting on their foibles. See ya in court, John.

So, let's just get this straight, what you're saying is that if I offeed you a product, took your money for said product then failed to deliver that product I could sue you for defamation of character if you told anyone ? And, if that is the case, are you suggesting that Norton motorcycles (uk) ltd have threatened the NOC with court action if they allow dissatisfied customers toair their views on this forum ?

Mr Chairman, I do now feel that a full &proper explanation for your actions shouldbe given to the members of this club to put a stop to all this speculation !

Tim,

You probably hit the nail on the head. There is no other possible explanation for the different conduct of the NOC regarding comments on different parties. I have read pretty nasty remarks about suppliers- not my businesses, but some partly supplied by us- that the "Club Censors" saw no reason to erase even though these were bordering on- and sometimes beyond the border- of being libelous and insulting.

But then, they are "small business" people (retailers), have often been involved with the NOC for many years- Club members, many of them!-, and are not seen- or heard- as a legal threat.

Now don't take me wrong. I am not against justified critzism, be if of myself, my companies, or third parties. But I am all for the same treatment for everyone, and for information where information could be helpful for the NOC membership.

I remember some pretty critical assessments in "Roadholder" in the dying Le Roux era, which later turned out amazingly near the mark- I seem to remember they were written by Nigel Clark. In those days the NOC committee was not afraid to let critical/warning voices be heard.

Despite requests for clarification on certain points regarding censorship of the forum, Tim Harrison and other members of the E.C have been silent.

It would be interesting to hear from the other members of the E.C who are in agreement with Tim Harrison,Ian Wooleyand, I assume, Chris Grimmet, as in his role as web manager he is the one responsible for removal and locking of all messages. I am of course assuminga democratic vote was held and that a majority of the E.C were in favour of the biased censorship policy.

Iam aware thatone member is so angry regarding E.C policy that he is seriously considering notrenewing his membership. I wonder how many more feel the same way. As a matter of principle I will notconsider thisdiscussion finished until the E.C have deliveredsatisfactory answers to members questions.

Simon.

Not surprisingly, Joe's comments are sensible and reaffirm what most sensible contributors have been saying - make it a level playing field! Fierce criticism has been made in the past about some spares suppliers attitudes andquality of parts. God forbid - there has even been criticism of the NOC's own spare scheme, including quality of parts! No-one should be above criticism - hopefully it is best served CONSTRUCTIVELY!

This has truly been a "Pandora's Box" that refuses to close! (Or is it "a can of worms"? !!!)

Lionel