Can I suggest that you two take this private. While you both have issues airing them publicly is not in the best interest of the Payback program which should be paramount.
Laura, come on now…quit acting like these questions came up after your last visit. You know full well they started being asked the day after YOU started the thread and you managed to post over a dozen messages on that thread during the time those questions were being asked.
Again, it was both Peggy and I that selected our BOD. It was not something I did on my own in a vacuum. WE selected the BOD and then WE drafted the bylaws.
We did not have people wanting the other officer positions, and you do not combine treasurer and secretary due to your favorite term, COI.
According to your bylaws, not only were you to have 4 officers, any two or more of those offices could be held by the same person. The bylaws say “shall” have, not “may” have. Let’s face it, being VP isn’t terribly difficult and why on earth wouldn’t you have a treasurer - given money is a big part of this - when a treasurer is stipulated in the supposed bylaws? This is an interesting time for you to start acknowleding COI. FWIW, I haven’t yet mentioned COI, so it isn’t my favorite term. But, I still have a hard time believing the bylaws you are referencing were really for the MD entity.
Beth
Holy Smokes! Talk about airing your dirty laundry in public! I was ABOUT to buy a payback stallion service for my Oldenburg mare, wanted to try getting into the 1/2 arab sporthorse stuff, but now…
Wow, the level of denial here is remarkable. It is becoming very clear why things have fallen apart and I can’t blame Peggy in the least for how she tried to handle things - if this is a sample what Laura was like to try to deal with.
It is a real shame this wasn’t handled better…I hope the program can get this worked out.
This is just becoming a pointless circle.
Beth
A stupid question…perhaps
I’m really surprised that this “program” doesn’t fall under the jurisdiction of the Arab Registry, since all the classes where the monies will be awarded are at Arab sancitioned shows.
Since when do ANY private individuals start & run payback programs like this?
Wouldn’t it be easier just to turn the whole shebang over to the Registry? They already have a BOD.
[QUOTE=Kyzteke;4724989]
I’m really surprised that this “program” doesn’t fall under the jurisdiction of the Arab Registry, since all the classes where the monies will be awarded are at Arab sancitioned shows.
Since when do ANY private individuals start & run payback programs like this?
Wouldn’t it be easier just to turn the whole shebang over to the Registry? They already have a BOD.[/QUOTE]
:lol: I’m sorry, I know you’re not a Arabian person, or you would have never asked this question. The Arabian Registry is dealing with their own money problems - one would be that the Registry “borrowed” $750,000 from our Sweepstakes program to run the registry and they got caught this past Aug. It’s really hard to trust AHA.
Anyway, this was to be for prize money for just SHN. Great idea and it was going gang busters until Laura started this whole mess.
When it’s easier to do it yourself than to persuade your own registry to do it, that’s when. (In addition to what Tamara said. :D)
In the pecking order of the AHA world, sport horses are considerably below the “main ring” (breed competition) horses, and maybe a nose above endurance horses. The beauty of the Payback setup was that it was by sport horse breeder/exhibitors and for sport horse breeder/exhibitors.
[QUOTE=pegasus44;4724921]
Why did you not pay for the breeding you purchased in 2008? Why did you not pay your co-op ad fees from 2008?That’s almost $800 Laura.[/QUOTE]
You know very well that I did pay for both! If it wasn’t for my money, we would not have been able to start up Payback.
Ya know, any resonable person would have to ask themselves, why…
… did the charter list only Peggy as a director, when she knew there were three, because that is what she wrote in the Seventh Article, and because she had already welcomed Patience to the board. She also knew I was a director. Hell, the whole program was my idea. But she didn’t put my name down, either. Again, how is it that Patience is assumed to not be on the BOD and I am, when neither of us are on the Charter? There was no meeting after the charter was submitted to vote in a BOD because they already existed.
Um, maybe because I couldn’t sign for you?
It doesn’t ask for a signature. And so by your own admission, you didn’t list Patience and I because you thought we had to sign, not because we weren’t on the BOD.
…why did Peggy put just her name on the check writing bank, but tell us otherwise?You asked me to set up the account in 2008. You never asked to be added. Til Nov 09.
I most certainly did. You said I was on it. Even when I said I would write the checks in Sept '08, you insisted that you wanted to. You conveniently omitted the fact that I wasn’t even authorized to write the checks.
…why was all the income deposited in the wrong bank account, and into the one with only her name on it?Income was deposited to both the Money Market and checking, depending on what it was for. Ad income had to go right out to pay for ads.
It was not even possible for the PayPal income to go into our main joint account. They did not have that account on record. There were only a few coop ads approved by the BOD. The SHN program and the USN program, plus a one time MAH ad. That certainly does not account for the steady stream of deposits into an account that does not earn Interest income and allows for free useage, and only by you.
…why was PayPal access refused us. Only Peggy had access, yet a multiple user account could easily have been set up.Explained earlier in this thread.
Not even close. A multiple users account gives unique user log-on access. They put in their “user ID” in the email section of the log-on, whereas the primary person uses their email address. There is NO sharing of information or revealing of SSNs. We told you that.
…why was the domain put in her name instead of the organization?Because I PAID FOR IT and it was under my account.
No you did not pay for it. It was paid by Payback and the tax return shows that. There was no reason to have it under your name, just like it isn’t now.
…why were financial records sent to an IRS tax preparer but not sent to the BOD for review first?Tax day is May 15 - taxes went to CPA 4 months later. You knew that. If you were concerned about it, why didn’t you ASK??
I have been asking for TWO YEARS for the accounting. I had no way to access it. No email access, no PayPal access, no bank access. I had trusted you, but then you hid the accounting from us and instead sent directly to outside agencies, and continue to hide it from us to this day.
…why were the financial records sent to a CPA without first going to the BOD for review and verification?See above…
It doesn’t matter when you send to a CPA, why are you hiding them from us?
…why was a CPA selected by Peggy without BOD input, and to this day his/her identity kept a secret from the BOD?The CPA for financial review was to confirm everything was as it should be, due to your accusations.
You mean, you want them to do the records according to how YOU want them. You are still hiding the identity of this CPA and hiding the records this CPA is using. We have a CPA, and she is approved by the BOD and she is not a secret. We don’t have anything to hide.
…why was a bonding agency also selected by Peggy without BOD input, and also its identity kept a secret?The bonding company was thru a local State Farm agent, to protet the $$ from your erratic behavior.
Again, why are you hiding the identity of the bonding agency? The behavior you claim to be erratic is my getting access to my own organization’s accounts. I guess if you have something to hide, yes, that would make you worried about my behavior.
…why did she think it could possibly be OK to take $18,700 out of our account and deposit who knows where, with no BOD approval?Again, it was in the Payback account, protecting from your actions. You knew where it was.
You mean protected from my learning anything you didn’t want me to know. It was not in the Payback account. You had removed it, which cost us lost Interest, and there was no reason to do so. You have yet to return it all.
…why did she out of the blue self appoint herself the Treasurer? Where are the minutes for that?This one alwYs cracks me up…who else was doing that job??
Doing some Treasurer duties does NOT make you the Treasurer, especially when these duties you are performing are because of your refusal to let anyone else have access to them.
…why did she “sell” stallion services to her friends without receiving payment, which is in violation of our own rules?One person agreed to buy a breeding and then didn’t pay. Let’s ask how you never paid for one you bought Laura.
It was not ONE person, and even if it was, it is still not acceptable! Especially when we had NO IDEA you had done this. And again, for the millionth time, you know full well I did pay for that breeding. How else did this Payback program get launched, but with MY MONEY.
…why did she use Payback funds to finance advertising for her Pegasus Productions customers, and without BOD knowledge?All co-op advertising was billed, collected and paid thru Payback of course.
I am not referring to coop advertising.
…why did she forge my signature on a legal document filed in MD, then claim I was out of the country when I was not?The amendment to the Articles was necessary for our 501c5. Laura landed in Kuwait around June 13th. Amendment was filed July 9th. With your permission I signed it.
I didn’t even KNOW you forged my signature until last month. I most certainly did not authorize it.
…why did she not share the Internet access to our bank accounts, then “demand an explanation” when I did get access to our own account, erasing any doubt I had that she had just simply forgotten to share the information?You always had access, since 2008.
If I had access, then why did I not have access? If I had access, why did you demand an explanation when I did get access?
… Why does she continue to refuse to turn over financial information after 31 Dec 08?At the CPA’s, sorry
How convenient. You sent our only copy of our records out to a firm and didn’t keep one, and to a firm with an unknown identity?
…why did she make stories as to why the other BOD members could not have access to the Payback email address?Crappy idea to have everyone answering OR having a yahoo account as you wanted.
So, you chose to instead make up stories as to why we could not get access? You decided to make the decision on your own as to what is a good idea and what isn’t, without discussion? It was just better to lie to us? And if you remember, I had been asking for over two years for a way to open up the access to the email. I even asked you for YOUR IDEAS and got none. I threw out the yahoo idea just to stimulate thought and ideas, but wanted YOUR INPUT and got none. Now I know it’s because you just plain didn’t want to share. For what its worth, my job here thrives on group accounts, as does my job at home.
Why.
All of these items have been asked and answered privately, SEVERAL TIMES, as well as publicly. My responses have not changed. What good will come from rehashing this here?
The facts are the facts, they do not change. None of the above matters, it is water under the bridge.
What is it you want from me or the public now? You can’t expect people to not have questions when things appear sketchy.
Interesting that you are still trying to distract vs answering the questions.
Hasn’t Peggy answered all those questions? In the thread you started on ABN? Why bring it here.
I’m thinking the only way this is going to move forward is if a “real” BOD with no COI is in place and By Laws are followed. Then complete transparency so that this will never happen again.
[QUOTE=gortmore;4724948]
Can I suggest that you two take this private. While you both have issues airing them publicly is not in the best interest of the Payback program which should be paramount.[/QUOTE]
I completely agree, which is why I had not posted on any forums before.
I will now stop posting.
If anyone wants to reach me, go to info@shnpayback.org
[QUOTE=allanglos;4725076]
I completely agree, which is why I had not posted on any forums before.
I will now stop posting.
If anyone wants to reach me, go to info@shnpayback.org[/QUOTE]
There must be an alter ego involved here, but you certainly WERE posting on the ABN forum about this and while you couldn’t find time to answer the basic questions being asked about bylaws and BOD minutes, you had no problem launching a lot of accusations against Peggy and answering the questions you felt like.
This is what I find so frustrating, you aren’t even willing to acknowledge your own behavior.
On that note, don’t worry folks, I’m done. I got the information I needed from Laura and it has done nothing to change my mind about this whole thing.
Beth
:yes::yes::yes:
Too bad. I was about to break out the popcorn & chocolate. :rolleyes:
I have been following this thread and feel a need to make a comment on this unfortunate situation. I am a stallion owner, currently not associated with this program. I found this thread and the other thread on ABN when I was researching whether to enter my stallion in this program. I have decided NOT to enroll him at this point, which is a shame as it looked like it was a good program. I have read both threads in their entirety. I am posting with an alter for the obvious reason – I do not wish my name or my stallion’s name involved in this “mess”. I know none of the parties involved and I have never personally spoken to any of the parties involved.
I DO NOT believe that either party, Ms Woods or Ms Ingles, originally intentionally did anything purposely inappropriate. I DO believe that both parties made mistakes due to their naivety and being novices at setting up corporations and programs. As part of the mistakes made, I DO NOT believe that the correct documents were correctly drawn up. I DO NOT believe that the original Bylaws, Minutes, or BOD appointment exist. It appears that the only “legal” BOD of this corporation is Ms Ingles without the existence of the correctly drawn up documentation. (BTW Emails and press releases are not the correct or appropriate legal documents). I do not think that the lack of this documentation was done maliciously or deviously.
The SHNpayback program is in serious trouble !!! This problem is not going to go away on its own !! And regardless who “wins” the “battle” the program loses !! Ms Woods needs to stop being so stubborn and understand that THIS program is on the verge of doom. I believe that if the current course continues, a SECOND (I guess really third if you count the FL corporation) will develop (and most likely will be managed by Ms Ingles) and will be in competition with the original program. Based on the support I have seen for Ms Ingles here and on the other thread, it WILL BE the original program who WILL BE LOSER in this competition.
This is a beginning of what I see should happen for the original program to go forth and rebuild trust:
1)Public admission by both parties that mistakes have been made in the past and both parties are willing, for the good of the program, to work together to fix the mistakes. No public details need to be made by either party on what the “mistakes” are/were (keep this part private) We really don’t need to know – just FIX the problem.
2)BOD developed with 5 members. A 3 BOD member system DOES NOT work in a program like this (as evidenced by this mess). BOD should consist of at least one BOD member voted on by the MARE OWNERS and one BOD member voted on by the STALLION OWNERS and three other individuals.
3)An administrator (ie. Secretary) appointed who will perform the daily business. This person should not have to check with the BOD with every little thing that they do but should have a job description so that they know their responsibility Whatever falls outside this responsibility needs to be addressed with the BOD. It is a little ridiculous to expect that every little detail needs to be “run through” the BOD. This person NEEDS to be in the US – I don’t think someone in Kuwait can appropriately run the day-to-day business.
4)A treasurer appointed (different person than the Secretary) to have a “check and balance” system in place.
Just my 2 cents on how to start to “fix” the program.
[QUOTE=allanglos;4724355]
That is NOT A PAYBACK CLASS! Which is just my point. If I wanted to have this program just to benefit me, it would been as that was my ONLY in-hand class, and it was only about the third time he has ever even shown in the class.[/QUOTE]
You said you didn’t show in in-hand classes. Not that you didn’t show in PAYBACK classes. There is a HUGE difference.
Great plan! Simple solution for all.
I have suggested arbitration/mediation way before now. It fell on deaf ears.
[QUOTE=pegasus44;4725449]
Great plan! Simple solution for all.
I have suggested arbitration/moderation way before now. It fell on deaf ears.[/QUOTE]
Peggy -----------
In essence, arbitration involves a 3rd party who decides what
the solution will be - it’s binding… Laura would never agree to allow a
3rd party to make a judgement call.
Mediation involves a 3rd party as a facilitator who helps both parites find a
satisfactory resolution to their dispute - but again, both parties must be
willing to mediate and so far - that doesn’t look like a possibility.
I think it’s time to take this back to ABN where it started – TTYL 
So sad. I really loved the idea of the SHN Payback, and I loved the discounted stud fees! It had seemed like an excellent program, but with this much drama, I doubt anyone would want to be involved with it. Talk about negative publicity!
I know one of the nominating stud owners, and I’m going to have to ensure I direct her to this thread so she can be educated about future nominations.
[QUOTE=Switzerland;4725243]
I have been following this thread and feel a need to make a comment on this unfortunate situation. I am a stallion owner, currently not associated with this program. I found this thread and the other thread on ABN when I was researching whether to enter my stallion in this program. I have decided NOT to enroll him at this point, which is a shame as it looked like it was a good program. I have read both threads in their entirety. I am posting with an alter for the obvious reason – I do not wish my name or my stallion’s name involved in this “mess”. I know none of the parties involved and I have never personally spoken to any of the parties involved.
I DO NOT believe that either party, Ms Woods or Ms Ingles, originally intentionally did anything purposely inappropriate. I DO believe that both parties made mistakes due to their naivety and being novices at setting up corporations and programs. As part of the mistakes made, I DO NOT believe that the correct documents were correctly drawn up. I DO NOT believe that the original Bylaws, Minutes, or BOD appointment exist. It appears that the only “legal” BOD of this corporation is Ms Ingles without the existence of the correctly drawn up documentation. (BTW Emails and press releases are not the correct or appropriate legal documents). I do not think that the lack of this documentation was done maliciously or deviously.
The SHNpayback program is in serious trouble !!! This problem is not going to go away on its own !! And regardless who “wins” the “battle” the program loses !! Ms Woods needs to stop being so stubborn and understand that THIS program is on the verge of doom. I believe that if the current course continues, a SECOND (I guess really third if you count the FL corporation) will develop (and most likely will be managed by Ms Ingles) and will be in competition with the original program. Based on the support I have seen for Ms Ingles here and on the other thread, it WILL BE the original program who WILL BE LOSER in this competition.
This is a beginning of what I see should happen for the original program to go forth and rebuild trust:
1)Public admission by both parties that mistakes have been made in the past and both parties are willing, for the good of the program, to work together to fix the mistakes. No public details need to be made by either party on what the “mistakes” are/were (keep this part private) We really don’t need to know – just FIX the problem.
2)BOD developed with 5 members. A 3 BOD member system DOES NOT work in a program like this (as evidenced by this mess). BOD should consist of at least one BOD member voted on by the MARE OWNERS and one BOD member voted on by the STALLION OWNERS and three other individuals.
3)An administrator (ie. Secretary) appointed who will perform the daily business. This person should not have to check with the BOD with every little thing that they do but should have a job description so that they know their responsibility Whatever falls outside this responsibility needs to be addressed with the BOD. It is a little ridiculous to expect that every little detail needs to be “run through” the BOD. This person NEEDS to be in the US – I don’t think someone in Kuwait can appropriately run the day-to-day business.
4)A treasurer appointed (different person than the Secretary) to have a “check and balance” system in place.
Just my 2 cents on how to start to “fix” the program.[/QUOTE]
WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN OH WISE ONE???
