tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post6794623050464876919..comments2024-03-28T19:20:52.408+00:00Comments on WEMBLEY MATTERS: Kensal Rise Library development decision deferred pending legal advice on fraudUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-60215667302991404922014-06-20T13:27:21.656+01:002014-06-20T13:27:21.656+01:00Highly relevant to Kensal Rise Library New Draft d...Highly relevant to Kensal Rise Library New Draft development plan and loss of social infrastructure p86 of new draft report. It would seem to be if this adopted Gillick should be providing "Affordable Housing" whatever "affordable means.<br /><br />"Loss of Social Infrastructure<br />Loss of social infrastructure, including redundant premises and land, will only be acceptable in exceptional<br />circumstances where:<br />a. a replacement facility of at least equivalent quality and quantity is provided on the site or at a suitable<br />alternative location; or<br />b. it can be demonstrated there is no longer a need for the social infrastructure facility. Where this is the<br />case, evidence will be required to show that the loss would not create, or add to, a shortfall in provision for<br />the specific community use and demonstrate that there is no demand for any other suitable social infrastructure<br />on the site.<br />Where the loss of social infrastructure is acceptable, the council’s preferred new use will be affordable<br />housing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-24212931753802210002014-06-20T09:37:54.411+01:002014-06-20T09:37:54.411+01:00I posted the comment above, 12.36, after emailing ...I posted the comment above, 12.36, after emailing the editor of the newspaper.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-16979166675505557262014-06-19T23:13:42.853+01:002014-06-19T23:13:42.853+01:00Sorry, 22.47, others may also have tweeted Barnet ...Sorry, 22.47, others may also have tweeted Barnet Times about this story. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-27041605140114497732014-06-19T23:09:41.026+01:002014-06-19T23:09:41.026+01:00I've just checked Meg's tweet - it was sen...I've just checked Meg's tweet - it was sent 9 hrs ago, that's to say at around 14.00 hrs. The comment above was posted at 12.36. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-7530362165639176842014-06-19T22:47:46.213+01:002014-06-19T22:47:46.213+01:00Meg has been tweeting the editor of the Barnet Tim...Meg has been tweeting the editor of the Barnet Times to ask why the story was withdrawnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-33290512796213147372014-06-19T22:21:22.622+01:002014-06-19T22:21:22.622+01:00Are you certain it's Meg who posted the commen...Are you certain it's Meg who posted the comment to which you refer? <br /><br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-58321117533238766402014-06-19T20:29:07.444+01:002014-06-19T20:29:07.444+01:00You don't always post under your name do you M...You don't always post under your name do you Meg?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-83623890655432819362014-06-19T16:26:33.385+01:002014-06-19T16:26:33.385+01:00More on Platinum Revolver/Platinum Land - a modifi...More on Platinum Revolver/Platinum Land - a modified post from WM latest blog<br />'Now email fraud revealed in Barnet planning application'<br /><br />http://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2014/06/now-email-fraud-revealed-in-barnet.html?spref=tw<br /><br />* all trace of Andrew Gillick's previous firm Platinum Revolver Ltd - in whose name his original application for Kensal Rise Library was lodged - appears to have disappeared from the official Companies House website <br /><br />http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo<br /><br />** Platinum Revolver was renamed Platinum Land Ltd - according to this non-Companies House link - on 24 Sep 2013 <br /><br />http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/platinum-revolver <br /><br />but<br /><br />*** a search of previous company names for Platinum Land Ltd brings up not Platinum Revolver but another company, Platinum Land & Property Ltd, which had a name-change - but from what is unclear - on 28/07/2010. Platinum Land Ltd wasn't incorporated until February 2011;<br /><br />then, hey presto<br /><br />**** check for 'Dissolved' names of Platinum Land Ltd (still on search for Platinum Revolver) and what appears is once again not Platinum Revolver but Platinum Land & Planning Ltd which was itself dissolved on 27 May 2014... <br /><br />Perhaps Mr Gillick would like to enlighten Wembley Matters' readers as to what's going on. For my part, I now need a drink...<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-26798359824930846762014-06-19T12:36:04.778+01:002014-06-19T12:36:04.778+01:00It appears that the link to the Barnet and Whetsto...It appears that the link to the Barnet and Whetstone Press, above 18 June 22.33, has been removed from the paper's website. Awaiting the editor's response as to why.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-81860724542072368222014-06-18T23:32:37.568+01:002014-06-18T23:32:37.568+01:00Wow.
Vital, now, that Brent police be allowed to...Wow.<br /> <br />Vital, now, that Brent police be allowed to complete their investigation before the developer's latest planning application is heard, as it seems the practice is spreading. Was the Barnet case influenced by that of KRL? <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-16672100024345138312014-06-18T23:21:44.427+01:002014-06-18T23:21:44.427+01:00I bet this is the tip of a huge fraud.
This has t...I bet this is the tip of a huge fraud.<br /><br />This has to be fully investigated and given Sarah Marquis previous post with Serious Fraud Office she needs to take the initiative and get police action.<br /><br />This type of fraud has gone undetected, but now it is out in the open the community need answers and not a cover up.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-64606846714809953052014-06-18T22:33:23.320+01:002014-06-18T22:33:23.320+01:00STOP PRESS
From today's Barnet and Whetstone...STOP PRESS <br /><br />From today's Barnet and Whetstone Press: 'Fake planning responses being investigated'<br /><br />http://www.barnet-today.co.uk/news.cfm?id=20542&headline=Fake planning responses being investigatedAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-85949327913586552112014-06-18T22:31:32.934+01:002014-06-18T22:31:32.934+01:00To bring clarity to the community a statement FKRL...To bring clarity to the community a statement FKRL would be helpful.<br /><br />FKRL have always opposed waiting until Police investigation is completed, despite them instigating the investigation in the first place.<br /><br />Concluding the Police investigation should be No 1 priority, so that the end result does not continue to divide the community ?<br /><br />A statement would be helpful from FKRL.<br /><br />In recent months the community has been divided into those that want to accept HilloAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-29253215812137543542014-06-18T22:15:40.757+01:002014-06-18T22:15:40.757+01:00One thing that is troubling is how Ledden seems to...One thing that is troubling is how Ledden seems to be always focus on risk that a developer might appeal and seek damages. <br /><br />Therefore she seems to take the developers view that it would be better to accept the developers demands rather than potential for developer seek damages.<br /><br />Are there any statistics showing the number of developers who actually appeal and seek damages for loss of time etc.<br /><br />Surely this is part of the risk of being a developer and the public purse should not have to pick up the tab unless in very extreme circumstances there is a very good reason such as clear political bias ?<br /><br />Developers can't have it both ways. development should be high risk high returns or low risk low returns or share those returns with the community for example if planning permission is to be granted.<br /><br />The current offer where developed gets 80 % of building is skewed in favour of developer<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-46609692572584739912014-06-18T21:57:24.860+01:002014-06-18T21:57:24.860+01:00This has to be tested in a Court of Law.
Brent co...This has to be tested in a Court of Law.<br /><br />Brent could do themselves proud if they put the onus back on the developer to seek such a ruling.<br /><br />If for example Brent concluded the contract is subject to Localism Act it would be up to the developer to prove otherwise via seeking Secretary of State ruling.<br /><br />Gillicks financiers might also start to get cold feet if they realise the Secretary of State will have to rule on validity of the contract.<br /><br />This could force a new sale if financier start backing out with new sale community able to fully participate and return the build to the community where it belongs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-34392319120223733932014-06-18T19:07:05.290+01:002014-06-18T19:07:05.290+01:00Chance's assertion is based on Brent's cou...Chance's assertion is based on Brent's counsel's opinion (reached after All Souls' (AS) own counsel decided the Optional Agreement between Gillick and AS exempted AS from having to adhere to the guidelines of the sale of the Kensal Rise Library building - an Asset of Community Value - as enacted in the Localism Act). So, it seems you're right: Chance isn't citing an independent legal opinion; a judge hasn't arrived at that conclusion in a court of law. Chance - for clarity - ought to be stating that Brent's lawyers have concluded that AS is exempt. But, the above report also indicates that Chance cites Ledden as the basis for his belief about AS's exemption.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-47098484792597925482014-06-18T16:47:15.771+01:002014-06-18T16:47:15.771+01:00This simply does not sit right if Chance claims th...This simply does not sit right if Chance claims the first application and fraud investigation is immaterial and is claiming that because the applicant in the second application is different company.<br /><br />This shows the whole planning system can be manipulated by the developer in their favour.<br /><br />Brent Council has to get to the bottom of this and not just the issue with alleged fraud, but the way these applications have been moved from 1 company to another. In planning terms should they be treated as one and the same rather than separate applications ?<br /><br />If as you suggest, Gillick holds the library asset personally, perhaps this can be used as the deciding factor in terms of planning application being 1 and the same, rather than 2 different applications.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-90873649569513692272014-06-18T16:35:50.208+01:002014-06-18T16:35:50.208+01:00This really needs to be thoroughly checked particu...This really needs to be thoroughly checked particularly the legality of contracts including the claim by Chance that the leaglly binding agreement has no relevancy to Asset of Community Value and Localism Act.<br /><br />As it would seem Gillick is trying to by-pass Localism Act, the way agreements have been structured, this needs looking into and not simply the say so of Chance.<br /><br />A judge could easily conclude the Contract is null and void and the building should be re-tendered as it would seem the contract, the way it is structured is trying to circumvent the Localims Act.<br /><br />Many other unscrupulous developers could do the same with such sharades.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-13651963696386801482014-06-18T16:09:14.103+01:002014-06-18T16:09:14.103+01:00Perhaps hubris on Fiona Ledden's part - never ...Perhaps hubris on Fiona Ledden's part - never thinking that the independent planning committee would dare question her ruling - is the answer to Margaret Smith's question. Poor Horatio Chance seemed helpless, citing the name of Brent's head of law as if that were enough to resolve a serious legal question. Thank goodness Sarah Marquis can think for herself. Her independence of mind is an excellent wake-up call to the new council, and its executive, and a reassuring boost for local residents: stop trying to rail-road matters through planning. <br /><br />Meantime it's worth looking at two other WM blogs from this week - and it's only Wednesday! (bow to Martin)<br /><br />- Brent Council to lease out two floors of Civic Centre... http://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2014/06/brent-council-to-lease-out-two-floors.html?spref=tw <br /><br />and <br /><br />- Brent Council spends £15m on temporary staff & £5m on interims and consultants ('the average daily rate was £414')<br /><br />http://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2014/06/brent-council-spends-15m-on-temporary.html?spref=tw<br /><br />Is it for this that Kensal Rise library (and five others) were closed? With pupils apparently unable to find room to work in the new Civic Centre library, surely it's time to re-consider branch closures?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-80012411609952268492014-06-18T15:28:00.935+01:002014-06-18T15:28:00.935+01:00Any time I have attended planning committee I have...Any time I have attended planning committee I have wondered how some of the cllrs managed to function in real life when they couldn't understand the simplest of issues - it made a mockery of the council. <br />At last someone with a bit of sense.<br />But does that mean another leadership challenge at some point? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-38682619218179837502014-06-18T14:33:10.997+01:002014-06-18T14:33:10.997+01:00Fully agree.
Apart from national election next t...Fully agree.<br /><br />Apart from national election next there is now no hurry now.<br /><br />So lets get the police investigation underway and find out what the investigation might dig up.<br /><br />It would now seem rather pointless to consider this planning application until the fraud investigation has concluded !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-72624697843954083672014-06-18T13:35:14.210+01:002014-06-18T13:35:14.210+01:00Well-said, commentators above, 10.23/10.39, re Gil...Well-said, commentators above, 10.23/10.39, re Gillick's companies/ name-changes. A little more info re same:<br /><br /> - Platinum Revolver Ltd, the company used for the developer's first, unsuccessful planning application, was dissolved on 24 Sep 2013 within days of the application being refused planning permission <br />(http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/platinum-revolver). It was subsequently relaunched as Platinum Land Ltd which, disconcertingly, is listed as having been incorporated as a company in February 2011 when it didn't yet exist. It is now, apparently Mr Gillick's oldest firm -<br /><br />http://companycheck.co.uk/director/915796204<br /><br />- Kensal Properties Ltd, the company under whose name the current planning application is lodged, is listed as being founded only on 16 January 2013, some two months AFTER the Option Agreement (OA) between Andrew Gillick and All Souls College for the purchase of KRL was signed, and seemingly days prior to the exchange of contracts under the OA (the 'binding agreement'). It can reasonably deduced that the OA is in Andrew Gillick's name, and not one of his companies.<br /><br />Seconding a commentator above for Martin Francis speedy posting of this blog - after a busy evening tweeting live from the Civic Centre. This is the kind of scrutiny that's needed.<br /><br />And to Sarah Marquis - bravo for a much-needed show of independent thinking in her refusal to take as gospel Fiona Ledden's legal diktat! A warm welcome to the new councillor. <br /><br />But let's not get carried away. As the blog says, deferral was 'not a vote to await the outcome of the police investigation but to decide if the investigation was something that the Committee should take into account'. The worst possible scenario would be the granting of planning permission before the police have completed their investigation, leading to the subsequent dropping of the fraudulent email inquiry. That must not be allowed to happen.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-2460578085574214082014-06-18T13:15:17.455+01:002014-06-18T13:15:17.455+01:00It would be interesting for Horatio Chance to give...It would be interesting for Horatio Chance to give more explanation as to why he assets the legally binding agreement is exempt from Localism Act ?<br /><br />This is an issue that needs to be challenged and perhaps some form of legal ruling is required and not just the say so from a legal person, as another legal person might disagree with the assertion made by Chance.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-53642882560278195782014-06-18T12:48:04.964+01:002014-06-18T12:48:04.964+01:00In any case, why waste everybody's time by put...In any case, why waste everybody's time by putting it on the Agenda in the first instance; without clarification of the legal issue beforehand? Do the homework and prepare surely. Could any of the officers 'run' an egg and spoon race? All the rhetoric about money being tight, and everything seems to be done in the least efficient, cost-effective way possible.claremountieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11392927701817762687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2129943063330427887.post-70913190828643921092014-06-18T12:46:29.269+01:002014-06-18T12:46:29.269+01:00This might be a wake up call to Brent officers.
N...This might be a wake up call to Brent officers.<br /><br />No more slap dash and think Councillors will not question the big issues !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com