Cycling UK Forum

Graham wrote:I changed the title to give some reasonable indication of the content.

This helps users to decide whether to go further.

The first attempt focused on your second question. I corrected it to focus on the first.

Well thanks but I dont need help creating titles and I'd be obliged if you'd rename it the way it was.

ukdodger wrote:How many of us didnt renew membership because of the change from club to charity?

Me,the CTC/CUK isn't a charity in the true sense and so I didn't renew.
The way the "club" went after the diabolical conversion proved to me I'd made the right decision.

I intended to join for the first time but after the conversion and name change I didn't like the sound of it anymore.

I considered finishing, but carried on. I don't like the new name or the conversion.

Main issue for me, is the crappy membership card. The writing on mine rubbed away in my wallet, and the replacement even easier. I emailed the membership department, but they haven't sent me a new card .......... so I don't have one.

Crappy membership card = crappy organisation?

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=111295

As a life member this does not apply.

Mick F wrote:Main issue for me, is the crappy membership card. The writing on mine rubbed away in my wallet, and the replacement even easier. I emailed the membership department, but they haven't sent me a new card .......... so I don't have one.

Take out life membership. The card is like a credit card and you do not get a new one each year.

Life membership ..............


For me:

Age 65 next birthday = 6 years at £10.75 = £64.50
£5.38 x (2004 to 2017) = 13 = £69.94

Therefore it's £1075.00 minus £64.50 minus £69.94 = £940.56

However, if I remain a member until (say) 80 years old
I'll have paid the OAP rate of £28.50 per year = £427.50

Sounds like life membership is a bit of a swiz.

................ unless you're young and/or been a member since you were young.
It's not for us older late-comers.

It's 1% off for each year of age, not for each year you have left before you're 71, so you, Mick F, like Mr Allen in the example would get £698.75 off once you're 65, plus the £69.94 for your 13 years membership, leaving £306.31 to pay for life membership.

If you were 75 with 50 years of membership, it would be free. If you were 80, with 55 years of membership, they would have to pay you money to become a life member.

My life membership has already paid for itself so everything is free from here on. If i was disillusioned enough i could cancel it as i have free membership with bc so have insurance cover.

I did have strong reservations about the charity conversion but so far my fears havent been that justified. I was on the fence with the name change......possible loss of a proud heritage vs a name that can deter the public.....

Cuk still does some stuff that i dont think is great, but its doing new stuff that i think is wonderful....stuff that unfortunatly the average member isnt directly exposed to. For instance the Community Cycle Clubs in inner city deprived areas. So im still bearing with it.

Si wrote: its doing new stuff that i think is wonderful....stuff that unfortunatly the average member isnt directly exposed to. For instance the Community Cycle Clubs in inner city deprived areas. So im still bearing with it.

That's part of the problem for traditional CTC members, Cycling UK is doing stuff with their money which is completely irrelevant to them and yet it's their subscriptions that are paying. Do people have to pay the membership fee in order to participate in Community Cycle Clubs?

pete75 wrote:

Si wrote: its doing new stuff that i think is wonderful....stuff that unfortunatly the average member isnt directly exposed to. For instance the Community Cycle Clubs in inner city deprived areas. So im still bearing with it.

That's part of the problem for traditional CTC members, Cycling UK is doing stuff with their money which is completely irrelevant to them and yet it's their subscriptions that are paying. Do people have to pay the membership fee in order to participate in Community Cycle Clubs?

But culturally this is the norm in this country. I pay tax that is used to fund government 'projects' that go against every grain in my body. In fact I spend more of my own money and time on demonstrating my opposition to some of them. Maybe I should just adopt a stiff upper lip and die at night with resentment.

Once CUK have the funds in their coffers, surely it's acceptable to use it where they see fit and it is ethical and legal. Nobody is forced into membership and if one disagrees with CUK's financial decisions, don't join. It is a free(ish) country. I deduced that I wouldn't be happy for a number of reasons and chose to put my money and time elsewhere.

Graham wrote:I changed the title to give some reasonable indication of the content.

This helps users to decide whether to go further.

The first attempt focused on your second question. I corrected it to focus on the first.

Ok so fairly obviously you arent going to change it back. That's exactly the sort of high handedness that posters hate (and incidentally shuts forums down). This isnt a schoolroom and you arent the headmaster. Next you'll be altering posters sentencing inside threads. If posters werent drawn into the thread with my title I'll live with it. It has nothing to do with you.


Thanks for all the replies chaps but if Graham wants the thread he can have it.

Heltor Chasca wrote:

pete75 wrote:

Si wrote: its doing new stuff that i think is wonderful....stuff that unfortunatly the average member isnt directly exposed to. For instance the Community Cycle Clubs in inner city deprived areas. So im still bearing with it.

That's part of the problem for traditional CTC members, Cycling UK is doing stuff with their money which is completely irrelevant to them and yet it's their subscriptions that are paying. Do people have to pay the membership fee in order to participate in Community Cycle Clubs?

But culturally this is the norm in this country. I pay tax that is used to fund government 'projects' that go against every grain in my body. In fact I spend more of my own money and time on demonstrating my opposition to some of them. Maybe I should just adopt a stiff upper lip and die at night with resentment.

Once CUK have the funds in their coffers, surely it's acceptable to use it where they see fit and it is ethical and legal. Nobody is forced into membership and if one disagrees with CUK's financial decisions, don't join. It is a free(ish) country. I deduced that I wouldn't be happy for a number of reasons and chose to put my money and time elsewhere.

Hmmm there's a difference between taxation which can obviously be spent as the government sees fit and a club with voluntary payment. In a club surely the members subscriptions should be spent to benefit the members. CTC rules say that someone must join to continue riding with a group after three or four rides. By the same token those participating in the Community Cycle Clubs ought to have to pay as well - though maybe they do - that's why I asked if they do.
It is causing many members not to renew their subscriptions though many do so merely to continue riding with their local group.
I wasn't talking about people making a decison to join but about long standing members not liking what's happening and in many cases leaving.

pete75 wrote:

Heltor Chasca wrote:

pete75 wrote:
That's part of the problem for traditional CTC members, Cycling UK is doing stuff with their money which is completely irrelevant to them and yet it's their subscriptions that are paying. Do people have to pay the membership fee in order to participate in Community Cycle Clubs?

But culturally this is the norm in this country. I pay tax that is used to fund government 'projects' that go against every grain in my body. In fact I spend more of my own money and time on demonstrating my opposition to some of them. Maybe I should just adopt a stiff upper lip and die at night with resentment.

Once CUK have the funds in their coffers, surely it's acceptable to use it where they see fit and it is ethical and legal. Nobody is forced into membership and if one disagrees with CUK's financial decisions, don't join. It is a free(ish) country. I deduced that I wouldn't be happy for a number of reasons and chose to put my money and time elsewhere.

Hmmm there's a difference between taxation which can obviously be spent as the government sees fit and a club with voluntary payment. In a club surely the members subscriptions should be spent to benefit the members. CTC rules say that someone must join to continue riding with a group after three or four rides. By the same token those participating in the Community Cycle Clubs ought to have to pay as well - though maybe they do - that's why I asked if they do.
It is causing many members not to renew their subscriptions though many do so merely to continue riding with their local group.
I wasn't talking about people making a decison to join but about long standing members not liking what's happening and in many cases leaving.

Sure. I put a different slant on it. Unintentionally. I am no great debater. With tax we don't have a choice. With membership we do. Yes.

From what you say: Your point is that your concern is about renewals. And that makes you a good stick because you care about your club. And it is a helava lot cheaper to retain business rather than rebuild it. If that's about the 80/20% rule then I agree.

I only discovered CTC shortly before the change to CUK, and if I had been a member, I imagine would feel the same heartbreak because I am a loyal person. I am also flexible and reasonably tolerant to change. For now CUK is not for me, but it would be interesting to know how the change has affected revenue, membership and ultimately whether cycling in the U.K. has improved because of the efforts of the charity.

It would be interesting to know the answer to the question as it now appears in the thread title:

Who ceased CTC membership after charity conversion etc. ? although "as a result of" is the issue, IMO, although I'm not bothered either way.

I suspect the various membership recording systems which have been the subject of a certain amount of irritation over the years mean that the leavers aren't well documented, even less their reasons for going.

All that's changed and there's now "seamless membership renewal" although whether "you can't see the join" extends to knowing who is a joiner or a rejoiner I don't know.

http://www.cyclinguk.org/about/national ... -mallinder

Either way, the die is cast. The conversion has been chosen and carried out. Water under the bridge. As for the other question about whether membership is a requirement of participation in Cycling UK activities, perhaps Mr Mallinder or one of his colleagues is the best source of info. Or is it still hard to get a reply to a phone call?

I did for a while but I rejoined so that I could ride with my local sections, attend the New Forest Cycling week and other events (with a clearer conscience even if it isnt compulsory) and save £2 a throw on Audaxes.
I would have also benefited from the insurance but I am getting that from Tandem Club membership too.