[Bell Historians] Comical Reporting

Thu Feb 22 16:01:28 GMT 2007

In a message dated 21/02/2007 20:24:54 GMT Standard Time,  
editor at oza49M3yHpue_XluPgXqo23M8RrPfwV-AedZN9lQ9VOcreCDhJrwVk3BXcAie3FnXOV4raxHRid16a37ILQF.yahoo.invalid writes:

I suppose it is inevitable that when stories about 'restorations'  are 
written-up for public consumption they tend to be "all sweetness and  light".

That may be because the people writing them have no interest in  drawing 
attention to failures in projects that they may have had a big  hand in 
managing on behalf of a parish (and its dedicated fund  raisers).

We rarely hear (in print) about the projects that have been  plagued with 
problems or, indeed, the projects where a really  unsatisfactory job by one 
bell contractor has had to be "put right" a  short time later by another.

RAL

I think that some bellhangers get away with poor workmanship because the  
recipents of their are either too polite or ignorant to say anything at the  time 
, and I have noticed a reluctance on the part of some ringers to get the  
hanger back and sort out the problems they have left . [ In a  project I was 
heavily involved in the bellhanger didn't want any of the  locals involved in the 
'try-out' , and the T/C at the time was happy with that  . However after 
politely pointing out that we were paying for the job I  insisted that the locals 
were present . After all if one is buying a car  would you let the owner test 
drive it him/herself ? As it turned out the  bellhanger did an excellent job ] 
. Word of mouth does get around and if I  were having a job done there are 
some firms that I wouldn't touch with a  bargepole . Not wishing of course to 
find myself sued for libel I decline to  name any firm .

Jim

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20070222/f32e24b1/attachment.html>