They made a very simple error ....when you bar a 'full member' you are supposed to inform them by letter the reason for barring them.
They didn't, the letter just said barred for the foreseeable future.
They fought a case they simply could not win, it would have been far easier and cheaper just to let me back in.
The did have material in there possession to take action for libel (a series of questions I asked at the AGM) They didn't take that route for fear of someone routing through their dodgy business.
The brother in law was also barred but was let back in, that also cost them a packet but as it wasn't their money they didn't care.