| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| C&O 2700 in recent thread https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=28576 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Rob Sundberg [ Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | C&O 2700 in recent thread |
I have revieved an email letter which I am posting a pdf link to, from the "owners" in West Virginia. I have no dog in this fight, and my name is mentioned in this letter, but that was when I was involved in past doings with this situation. I left the group in 1987 IIRC. The email came in document form with photos attached, in a newer version of Word that I do not have so I have deleted all photos and just have the bulk of the letter in pdf. It has errors in the spacing of some of the words, and I attempted to fix this but had no success. If you would like the entire letter I can send via email, contact me off list. http://www.alliancelink.com/robstrains/Letter%20From%20Muncy%20on%20C&O%202700.pdf Rob Sundberg |
|
| Author: | wilkinsd [ Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: C&O 2700 in recent thread |
While not a major sticking point, for those of you playing at home, NKP 765 appeared as "765" in the movie Matewan. The idea to convert 765 into C&O 2765 came much later and I believe it was how 765 appeared at its last New River trips in the 1990s. Not horribly important, but interesting nonetheless. |
|
| Author: | Rob Sundberg [ Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: C&O 2700 in recent thread |
Yes you are correct. I told Mr. Muncy that his dates were off by a few years. IIRC were we still prepping 2700 for movement to Ohio when they filmed this movie. The movie studio used the wood C&O caboose that was located on the same property and did a Hollywood weathering job on it. They said it would come off easily, and of course it did not. Rob Sundberg |
|
| Author: | dinwitty [ Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: C&O 2700 in recent thread |
probably the many valuable artifacts and appliances were removed for its own safety and protection, easy prey for souvenir hunters, etc etc, if the engine is out in the open your not going to leave those on. Whatever the situation be sure you procure a safe location to store the engine then maybe the distributed items will find their way back.... But note you can re-create the missing items and that by itself is valuable mainly for the skills and abilities of the restoration people. Good luck and hope all minds can come together and work it out. |
|
| Author: | Rob Gardner [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: C&O 2700 in recent thread |
Rob, It sure is a surprise to see that the "Owners" from WV are still interested and contesting this deal. The bottom line is, no one really has the resources to do anything with the engine at this time. Jerry doesn't yet have a facility of his own, IRM has been making very slow progress on the restoration of a couple of their own steam engines, and Ft.Wayne is still efforting to maximize the efforts of the recent restoration of 765. If the Muncy and Dean have been so concerned about the 2700, where the heck have they been all these years? 2700 is secure for now and probably in the best place it could be. Whether or not Wendy wishes to restore 2700 to operating condition remains to be seen. I wouldn't exclude that possibility down the road as they are working on restoring six passenger cars at the moment. Rob Gardner |
|
| Author: | Rob Sundberg [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: C&O 2700 in recent thread |
Rob G., They have no problem that the engine is stored at the current location. That does not mitigate or offset the fact that the the 2/3 interest owners are in West Virginia. Simple Fact. They would support any reasonable offer to restore the engine. The time to restore is not now because of lack of funds and interest. The engine was stored at the location. Plain and simple. That does not change the title interest. It doesn't make any difference that the West Virginia owners or Nick for that matter did not come by and pet the engine on the head, feed or water it during the time that it was stored there. The challenge comes from the fact that the Depot is trying to pull a good ole boy fast one and obtain title by hook or crook! Perhaps the pdf file does not make it clear to you. David Bailey sold only his 1/3 interest to Nick Kallas, after the lawsuit with STEAM in the 90's. Dean and Muncy still have their 1/3 interest shares each. When Kallas sued Dennison for ownership, [perhaps he thought that he bought the entire engine from Bailey] and Dennison won in the courts, this is were the problem begins. Kallas only has 1/3 as does Dean & Muncy. Dean and Muncy have not done anything with the engine as they had an agreement with Dennison to store the engine. Now that Dennison has won round one in the courts and Kallas is appealling, Dean and Muncy what it to be known that neither Kallas or the Dennison Depot group has full ownership of the 2700. If anything either Kallas or the Depot has only the original 1/3 that was sold by Bailey to Kallas, and the Depot group paid nothing for their share, the courts awarded it to them in the last lawsuit with Kallas. Dean & Muncy had no idea any of this was going on until the past court ruling, and why would they? They thought that the agreement with Dennison to store it was still in place, and had no idea that the ownership of the engine was being called into question, again. The Depot group needed title to get the funds to do the restoration hence the past lawsuit. Dean and Muncy are very much willing to work with whomever has the other 1/3 share in getting her restored back to the way she looked in St. Albans, before STEAM tore her apart. They simply don't want the Dennison group to think that they own the engine, because they don't. It's a big fat mess, but pretty simple to sort out when you have been involved with this for as long as I have. Rob Sundberg |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|