I see that a recent post regarding a lawsuit in the steam preservation industry has been removed. I am curious why we can not talk about these? This seems like a great learning experience not just for contractors but for museums and tourist railroads.

Can RYPN be sued for members talking about a court case that has been completed. Please educate us on the law as it pertains for open forums online.

It seems much can be learned and whether we want to admit it or not, the law is something the Railway Preservation community needs to be fluent in to prevent mistakes from happening. Many members here can tell you exactly what welding rod to use to weld on a boiler, but can't tell you anything about contract law.

I hope this does not get pulled down and stays up so others (like me) can be educated.

I am fine with not revealing the specific case pulled down, I just don't understand why it can not be openly discussed?

-Ted

Because they end up resembling the most recent US presidential debate, which if you aren't aware has been described as a sh#tshow, or a hot mess inside a dumpster fire on board a train wreck. I am not a party to any such commercial disputes, but I am very much in favor of keeping them out of here, IMHO.

So... You're entirely in favor of unscrupulous individuals performing illegal (and frankly unsafe) work, getting paid lots of money for it, and screwing a nonprofit in the process... Rather than allowing these unscrupulous individuals to be revealed by the work that they perform so that others may avoid similar fates? Cool. No wonder nobody cares about RYPN any more.

Who is to arbitrate the difference between "unscrupulous individuals performing illegal (and frankly unsafe) work" and "an honest business dealing with the customer's unreasonable demands"? (I am not referring to any specific case). Not this board I hope. Frankly, this board is mostly populated with preservationists who do their own work and eschew for-profit contractors unless absolutely necessary.

Even more a reason for the facts to be posted for everyone to review. Charlatans in this industry masquerading as so called “experts” or unrealistic customers need to be highlighted especially surrounding safety. There is a lot that can be learned for those aspiring to run similar businesses and the inherent risks that come with them.

DC

What "facts" will be posted: contracts, invoices, inspection reports, etc? Or is it more likely to be a he said/ she said sort of thing? My guess is the latter, which won't shed any light on anything.

That was the responsibility of the arbitrator in the case between Big South Fork Scenic Railway and Wasatch Railroad Contractors, a Mr. Thomas R. Yocum. He did a nice job laying out his determination of the facts and his reasoning in his rendering of a final award to the Railway. My hope is that, with timely payment of the substantial monies awarded to the Railway, they can get the locomotive in steam as they had hoped.

Unless the Railway signed an NDA regarding the arbitration award, I also hope they post the .pdf to their website so those who missed its brief appearance here can read the arbitrator's clear and reasoned presentation which was very understandable to even someone with limited knowledge such as myself. I'm glad I downloaded it before it disappeared.

It may not be pleasant news for some, but it is news and it is worth a close read for anyone having an interest in the business of railroad preservation.

There ought to be a discussion to be had on some potential red flags a customer should be on the lookout for when engaging in contract estimates or contract work with any company or individual.

The deleted thread had no comment, libel, or slander against any one person or company. Simply a presentation of a legal document which outlined the evidence, facts, and testimonials that supported and led to the arbiter's final decision and award on a high-profile historic locomotive restoration.

Nobody (contractor or customer) wants to end up in a situation where there is dispute, whether over funds, quality of work, ect. The document presented was an example of what went wrong, and outlined some of the things that were wrong which led to the arbitration. There *are* things that can be done by either party ahead of time to avoid this.

Maybe there can't be a civil and non-libel/non-slanderous discussion on this board about said project, but in that case don't mute the very mention of it in fear of retaliation. Allow the document to be posted, lock the thread, and let people read this public document for themselves, and make up their own minds about it somewhere not on rypn.

There are vital things which people may learn from the mentioned document in order to protect themselves, contractor, customer, or otherwise.

Agree 100%. It should be posted in an objective manner as a way for everyone to learn.

If people start posting nasty replies that are personal attacks etc, those should be deleted.

However letting the raw facts, publically posted documents, etc serve as an educational tool for everyone is at least getting something positive out of a bad situation. Objective analysis and discussion should also be encouraged.

We shouldn't shy away from something just because it might be controversial, others will be in the same position at some point and if we can learn from previous mistakes we should. Censorship in that manner should not be encouraged.

Having been on both sides of this situation my experience is that the more definite and concretely the job specifications, schedules, compensation terms and disposition of responsibilities are spelled out the less likely the situation is to devolve into a court case. Complications arise when in the course of a project previously unknown conditions are discovered- having an agreed upon mechanism spelled out for working through these issues is also of value. Change of responsible parties in nonprofits cub based organizations happens frequently - so whatever verbal understanding you had with the past member of the BOD may no longer be in force partway through the job and then......... lookout. Government functionaries know how to manipulate through bureaucracies but don't have a clue about practical execution of jobs like these or even speak the same language about the artifact. What's reasonable to expect from one parties perspective may not be from another perspective, and many different perspectives may be party to the project, each with their own ideas about results, goals and priorities.

Be careful. Be specific.

Your guess would be wrong. The original post was a legal document which spelled out all of the details.

So how much was the judgement? I wasted an entire summer volunteering on that mess and would like too know if they got the money they dumped into it back out.

Arbiter awarded $730,284.60

Okay...I am baffled, a bit annoyed and somewhat amused. There have been NO (None, zero) deleted topics recently (within the last two months or so) that could have been vaguely construed (from their titles) to have anything to do with "Industry Lawsuits and Such". Except for one.

That topic was created by someone called BSFSRYFAN entitled "Arbitration Award Against Wasatch Railroad Contractors". It was created at 12:23 pm today by the individual named in the preceding sentence. And the topic was deleted by HIM, not by any moderator. I'm not saying that I wouldn't have killed the topic. I might have. But since I know nothing directly about it, I cannot actually say.

Oh interesting!

The entire post was a link to the document. Nothing more and nothing less.