Dear Trustees,

It is with great sadness that I have to inform you that I am standing down as Chair and Trustee, with immediate effect, as both roles had become untenable due to the Treasurer's obstinate insistence that he has the mandate to decide all policy and actions about the finances of the Trust and, therefore, is not required to implement policies that had been previously agreed at formal meetings of the Trustees nor take any notice of my, the Chair's, advice and requirements over banking access.

For over three years, in order to both develop the Trust as well as my copyright entry and judging software for the awards and help with organising the actual awards night, I have had to use my personal account, interest bearing, as the Trust's current account.

This has been unsatisfactory not only because of the loss of interest but also as, even with the very small (under 15) number of yearly transactions, keeping records of recurring payments and other expenditure and then having to claim back at a later stage, was an unnecessary addition to the extensive time that I had to commit to maintaining, writing, updating and helping Universities enter for the awards by using my software.

In order to avoid this unnecessary added stress, it as agreed that, at the Trustee meeting in June 2015, we should move to an internet account when possible.

"Xxxxxx XxXxxxx proposed a Santander Treasurer’s current account be opened, which had an on-line banking facility.  It was agreed this should be done, once the account with Nationwide had been closed.  The signatories would be Xxxxxx XxXxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx and Xxxxx Xxxxxx.  It was agreed payments up to £150 could be made by any one of the signatories on their own authority, but any payments over this amount must have prior authorisation by at least one other signatory."

This policy decision was in the minutes that were circulated to all Trustees, new and old, prior to the meeting and agreed by everyone at our meeting at the end of June this year. At that meeting, it was agreed that

"It was agreed the new Treasurer would be given authority to open a new bank account should he deem this appropriate, possibly an internet account. If an account was opened there should be four signatories, with two required to sign; the signatories would be Xxxxxx XxXxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxx,Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx and Xxxxx Xxxxxx"

The Treasurer has made several claims why he can ignore the June 2015 policy which include the outrageous statement “This did not happen. It is therefore superceded by the minute from the meeting one year later.”

That is a convenient opinion not a fact.

These two resolutions are not mutually exclusive and the second resolution just gives the new Treasurer some leeway on opening a new account.

However, if a new account is opened, then the Treasurer was mandated that there should be four signatories.

The Treasurer has decided unilaterally that there should be two accounts, a current and a deposit but that he should be a signatory on both and I should not be allowed to be a signatory on either account.

Two creative justifications have been put forward, firstly muddled arguments about a Chair not being a signatory and too many payments to a single trustee. The rules for payments to trustees are clearly laid out in the Charity Commission's CC11 publication and any payments we have already made are fully in line with those rules. And the published advice from Banks having charity accounts is that the signatories should be the Treasurer, the Chair and the Secretary.

Secondly, that I would be put in the position of agreeing my own expenses. This eventuality was covered in the original policy from June 2015 and it is grossly offensive as it clearly suggests that I cannot be trusted to follow the agreed rules.

The greater danger is that the Treasurer who is tasked with supervising that the Trust's finances will be required to police himself as he will have easy access to both accounts.

I put forward the compromise that I would be a signatory on the current account holding the limited funds. This was rejected.

The Treasurer keeps on repeating that his biased financial policy is legal, this is not disputed, but it is only legal as the Trust Deeds allow and expect the Trustees to make their own arrangements about Banking. There are NO specific external requirements about signatories and bank accounts. The Internal financial controls for charities CC8 publication by the Charity Commission makes this quite clear.

Therefore, not including the Chair, me, as a signatory is a decision solely for the Trustees and as such a matter of confidence.

I understand that the Treasurer has been phoning around and intimates that he has the required support to exclude the Chair.

I have made it perfectly clear in my August emails that his “do it only my way” view was unacceptable and, as I have now completed all my 2016 Award tasks, it is now obvious that I will be unable to work alongside the Treasurer and the time has come to step down as Chair and Trustee.

It is just five years since I put the original concept to the GTC Council and I think the Awards have become a success doing it mainly “my way”.

I regret that the Trust seems now to be only concerned with the Bill Vinten award and has made no progress in tackling, and seems to wish to restrict, the other camera craft initiatives that I discussed with Bill and Dick and which I outlined at the first Trustee meeting.

My departure as Chair and Trustee means that my copyright (displayed on all the generated php pages) software will not be available for the 2017 awards unless a proper commercial maintenance grant can be negotiated between myself and the Trust. This needs to be agreed by January 12th 2017 as that is the date that the Nominet registration expires.

Yours faithfully,

Xxxxxx XxXxxxx