UPDATE: MOTION APPROVED -Full Council tomorrow includes a debate on a 'visitor levy' on Brent hotels

 

UPDATE: The Labour motion on a visitor tax was passed with Liberal Democrat support. The Conservatives voted against. There was some discussion with Cllr Kelcher wanting a lower overnight rate of £1-2 so as not to discourage visitors.

 

There are some people who say Brent Council can't tell the difference between its bottom and the knobbly bit on the bend of its arm. I couldn't possibly comment, but the notice on its 'landing' webpage https://www.brent.gov.uk/ could be cited as evidence and  the mistake is repeated on the 'Council meetings and decision making' page,

Tomorrow's meeting is in fact Full Council and there are a number of important  items that members of the public may miss if they are misled by the notice.

The items include questions from the public and Brent Youth Parliament members to Cabinet members  on debt collection practices when residents are facing the cost of living crisis, and council seeking the voices of young peope on crime and safety.

There are petitions on the exorbitant rent increase faced by the East Lane Theatre, against modification or discharge of the restrictive covenant on Barham Park, and against the Nablus Twinning arrangement. The latter does not mention that the lead petitioner, Iain Collier, is the Reform candidate for Brent West.

 There are the usual party group motions. The Tories line up with Reform on Nablus,  Lib Dems twist Brent Counci's current 'Don't Mess with Brent' environment campaign with a motion entitled 'Stop Messing Up Brent' and Labour move one on encouraging schools to restrict use of smart phones and another on protecting the rights of delivery riders and the safety of pedestrians.

 The penultimate item is the non-cabinet members debate with a motion moved by Cllr Mary Mitchell. I declare an interest as I have previously advocated a Brent Visitor Tax to raise funds to mitigate the impact of Wembley Stadium and Arena visitors on local residents:

 Motion for Non-Cabinet Member debate

Empowering Brent with Visitor Levy Powers to Support Our
Communities

This Council notes:

 The growing number of successful events taking place in Wembley, which are a vital part of Brent’s local economy, attracting visitors from across the country and around the world, supporting jobs (1,800 Brent jobs from the Stadium),
businesses and hospitality across our borough.

 Each additional non-sporting event at Wembley Stadium generates an estimated £4.35 million through direct local expenditure. With Oasis, Coldplay and other acts arriving this summer, Wembley Park will be in the spotlight as a world-class cultural destination.

 Hotel occupancy is high across Wembley during events at the Stadium or the
Arena and capacity is estimated at nearly 1,800 rooms.

 Aside from the significant economic benefits, major events in Wembley
understandably bring additional pressures on residents, including disruption,
waste, congestion, noise and increased demand on council services.

 Brent Council is working proactively to mitigate these challenges, partnering with Wembley Stadium to ensure tickets are shared in the local community, giving residents access to events happening on their doorstep.

 Glasgow City Council has been granted powers to introduce a modest Visitor
Levy (on average £4.83 per night), which could generate £16m in additional
income from overnight stays, with the funds ringfenced for services such as street
sweeping, parks, infrastructure, and environmental enforcement.

This Council also notes:

 The recommendation made by the London Assembly, that the Mayor of London should ‘advocate for London’s live music industry to introduce a voluntary levy on arena and stadium tickets to support grassroots music venues in London.’

This Council believes:

 Brent should be empowered by government with powers to introduce a visitor
levy on hotel and short-stay accommodation within the borough.

 The revenue generated should be invested into transforming Brent’s public realm making Brent greener through investment in street trees and green infrastructure, enhanced street cleaning, and additional waste enforcement officers.

 A visitor levy would ensure those who benefit from Brent’s world-class facilities also contribute a small amount towards maintaining high-quality services and a cleaner, greener borough.

 This is a progressive, and practical measure utilised across European cities and
could supplement council funding at a time when local authorities like Brent face
sustained financial pressures.

This Council therefore resolves to:

(1) Write to the Secretary of State, calling for London boroughs, including Brent to be granted the powers to introduce a discretionary visitor levy on overnight stays.

(2) Write to the Mayor of London to support the London Assembly call for a voluntary levy on stadium and arena tickets to fund grassroots cultural opportunities.

(3) Continue to work with partners including Quintain, the FA, event organisers,
businesses and residents to ensure that the benefits of Wembley’s success are
shared fairly, and that residents' voices shape our work to establish a Visitors
Levy here in Brent.

(4) Work with London Councils, the GLA, and the LGA to build cross-party support for an amendment to the English Devolution Bill to grant the powers necessary to all local authorities to introduce Visitors Levies where supported.

Cllr Mary Mitchell
Welsh Harp ward

 

The full agenda for the meeting can be found HERE (fingers crossed!)

WEBCAST 6PM 

Barham Park Trustees' deal with George Irvin to enable building in Barham Park at Scrutiny Committee on Thursday

 

The pair of park workers' cottages purchased by George Irvin in 2011

 The four 3 storey houses given planning permission by Brent Council on the site
 

The decision by Barham Park Trustees Committee, consisting wholly of Brent Cabinet members, to apply to the Charity Commission for removal of the restrictive covenants on development in Barham Park goes to Brent's Resource and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee on Thursday April 3rd. Some operational matters will also be under consideration.

The development is of two park workers'  cottages purchased by fair ground owner and developer George Irvin for £310,000 in 2011. The property included restrictive covenants designed to protect the park left by Titus Barham for the benefit of the people of Wembley.

Subsequently Irvin put forward several schemes for the redevelopment of the site and the above was approved by Brent Planning Committee - but subject to the covenants.

Barham Park Trustees then negotiated with Irvin on the modification or discharge of the covenants to enable the development to go ahead and agreed a sum of £200,000 to go to Trust funds.

That agreement is subject to approval by the Charity Commissioners.

Opposition parties have called in the issues for further consideration by the Scrutiny Committee which is able to approve one of three possible outcomes:

1. The Committee does not wish to refer the matters back to the decision maker or to the Barham Park Trust Committee, at which point the decision is deemed to be confirmed and takes effect immediately following the call-in meeting; or

2. The Committee decides to ask the Barham Park Trust Committee to reconsider the decisions made, in light of any observations of the Committee; or

3. Having had regard to the advice of the Director of Law or Corporate Director of Finance & Resources, the Committee considers the decision is contrary to the Council’s Budget or Policy Framework, at which point it refers the matter to the next practicable meeting of the Council, subject to the provisions of Standing Orders.

 

Members of the public at Barham Park Trustees meeting in September 2023 where Chair of Trustees, and Brent Council Leader, Muhammed Butt refused to hear speakers on the development and covenant issues.

 

Concerns have been expressed that other Brent parks could come under threat of development if this scheme goes  ahead so proceedings will be watched closely. The Barham family have supported the campaign against development and 481 people had signed the Support Barham Park petition below at time of publication:

We the undersigned petition the council to listen to local residents, users and supporters of Barham Park and for the Barham Park Trust and Brent Council to respect the wishes of Titus Barham who gifted his home and gardens for our recreation, by upholding the Covenant which prevents the building of extra houses on the site of 776/778 Harrow Road and to continue to refuse any attempts to modify or discharge the restrictive covenants to increase the numbers of homes on the site of 776/778 Harrow Road. 

The two cottages were built for the purpose of housing park keepers (gardeners and other staff) working in the Park and not to provide general housing. As the existing houses have not been used for that purpose for years we the undersigned feel there is a valid argument for their removal and for the park land to be reinstated with no valid justification to expand the number of houses from 2 to 4.

 

The 2011 Land Transfer to George Irvin that includes reference to the covenants:

 

The meeting will be in the Grand Hall, Brent Civic Centre at 6pm on Thursday April 3rd  and livestreamed HERE.

Petition to reclaim Barham Park from developers

 

The four houses proposed for Barham Park

 

A petition to safeguard Barham Park from development ends on April 15th 2025. The text below is self explanatory. If you wish to sign the petition got to the Brent Council website HERE.

We the undersigned petition the council to listen to local residents, users and supporters of Barham Park and for the Barham Park Trust and Brent Council to respect the wishes of Titus Barham who gifted his home and gardens for our recreation, by upholding the Covenant which prevents the building of extra houses on the site of 776/778 Harrow Road and to continue to refuse any attempts to modify or discharge the restrictive covenants to increase the numbers of homes on the site of 776/778 Harrow Road. The two cottages were built for the purpose of housing park keepers (gardeners and other staff) working in the Park and not to provide general housing. As the existing houses have not been used for that purpose for years we the undersigned feel there is a valid argument for their removal and for the park land to be reinstated with no valid justification to expand the number of houses from 2 to 4. 

 

The original Covenant was put in place by the Barham Park Trust Committee in 2011 (when the two cottages were being sold with the aim of generating match funding for a National Lottery Heritage Grant) with the clear intention of protecting Barham by NOT allowing the building of more houses or extensions on the existing site. The buyer of the two houses was fully aware of this and willingly signed and entered into the Restrictive Covenant. Any attempts by the appointed Trustees to modify or discharge the restrictive covenant will go against the original aim in seeking to protect the site for the benefit of local people as opposed to the enrichment of a selected individual/family.

Cllr Butt 'not minded' once again to allow democracy and scrutiny over Barham Park Trustees' action - this time removing covenant protecting the park from development for a payment of £200,000 by developer George Irvin

 

George Irvin's plans for houses in Barham Park

Readers of this blog will know that many questions have been raised about Cllr Muhammed Butt's refusal to allow any scrutiny of Trustees' actions over Barham Park.

Barham Park was gifted to the people of Wembley by Titus Barham (HISTORY HERE) but Butt gained control of the Trustees by making himself their Chair and other members of his Cabinet fellow Trustees. They claim that they represent the people of Wembley and refuse any other representation.

In his role as the all-powerful Chair, Cllr Butt has refused to let people speak at meetings of the Trustees to raise issues over the accounts, plans to redevelop and privately market park buildings, his relationship with the developer and fairground entrepeneur George Irvin, the sale of two workers' cottages in the park to Irvin, and Irvin's gifts of free fairground ride tickers to councillors (see links below).

There is a Trustees' meeting on Monday morning where a payment bu Irvin  to the Trustees of £200,000 will allow a restrictive covenant protecting Barham Park to be removed, enabling Irvin to build four three storey houses inside the park on the site of the cottages. (CGI above). Irvin has already received planning permission for them from the Council pending settlement of the covenant issue.  Observers reckon given the sale value of the proposed private houses, situated in a beautiful park with vehicle access and nearby rail connections,  the payment is quite a bargain.

Unsurprisingly, local councillor Paul Lorber has asked to speak to the Trustees about the issues raised. Equally unsurprisingly Chair of Trustees and Leader of the Council, Cllr Muhammed Butt has refused:

The Brent Officer concerned responded:

As is usual practice I’ve consulted with the Chair and, as a result, can advise he is not currently minded to allow any requests to speak at Monday’s meeting.  Whilst it will not, therefore, be possible for you to address the meeting in person you’ll obviously still be more than welcome to attend to observe proceedings.  We’ll also be webcasting the meeting live, which you’ll be able to follow, as an alternative, via the following link:

Home - Brent Council Webcasting

In other words you are at liberty to silently watch us sell out the people of Wembley...

 

BREAKING: Barham Park Trustees' £200,000 deal with George Irvin to enable him to build four 3 storey houses in Barham Park

Trustees set to rubber stamp process to remove covenant restriction on building in Barham Park

Brent Council on Barham Park Covenant: 'Move along, nothing to see here.'

Barham Park Trustees approve original accounts in 7-1/2 minute meeting after refusing representations

Butt again refuses representations on Barham Park. Time for the CharityCommission to intervene?

Be Fair on the Fun – An open Letter to Brent on councillors’ free rides 

 

BREAKING: Barham Park Trustees' £200,000 deal with George Irvin to enable him to build four 3 storey houses in Barham Park

 

The houses proposed for Barham Park

 

The long-running campaign by local residents in Sudbury to resist the building of houses  in Barham Park will come to a head at the Barham Park Trust Committee on February 24th 2025.

 A deal with funfair and property developer George Irvin will see him pay the Trust £200,000 for removal of the covenant that prevented building of four 3 storey houses on the site presently occupied by two modest 2 storey cottages at 776-778 Harrow Road.

The deal also involves vehicular access into the park and eretion of other facilities. Details are below:

 Recommendations:

The Barham Park Trust Committee RESOLVES to

2.1 Approve the modification of the restrictive covenants at 776 and 778 Harrow Road, as detailed in paragraphs 3.8-3.11 and delegate authority to the Director of Property and Assets to execute a deed with Zenaster Properties Ltd for the agreed sum of £200,000, subject to 2.2 below.

2.2 If required, approve seeking Charity Commission consideration of the Qualified Surveyor’s Report (Appendix 1) and authorisation under Section 105 of the Charities Act to modify or discharge the covenants.

 

Existing Covenants (extract from single plot):

 

*Not to use the Property otherwise than as a single private dwelling house and the garage for any purpose other than as an ancillary private garage.

*Not to divide the Property into two or more dwellings or residential units.

*Not to erect or cause to be erected on the Property any building or structure whatsoever except a greenhouse or shed of not greater length than 4 meters (sic) and of not greater height than 3 meters (sic) or permit or suffer any person under the Transferor’s control to do so.

*Not to stand or support any vehicle, commercial vehicle trailer, mobile home, caravan, trailer, cart or boat on any part of the Property.

*Not to carry out any development within the meaning of Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in or upon the Property.

* Not to park any motor vehicle on or otherwise obstruct any part of the accessway hatched yellow and hatched green or any part of the Retained Land at any time.

 

Proposed Modification (combined plots):

 

3.9 The deed (to be prepared in accordance with the planning committee report dated 12 June 2023 and decision notice dated 13 June 2023—see Appendices 3 and 4) will amend these covenants to permit the development of four houses.

3.10 A revised version of the restrictive covenants that would enable the proposed redevelopment in accordance with the granted planning permission is set out below and may be subject to further refinement.

 

Permitted Use:

 

*The Property may be used for residential purposes, permitting the construction and occupation of up to four residential dwellings, together with any ancillary buildings, structures, and facilities required for their use in accordance with the planning permission granted under reference 22/4128.

 

 From Application 22/4128

 

Subdivision of the Property:

 

*The restriction on dividing the Property into multiple dwellings is removed, approved under planning permission 22/4128.

 

Construction of Buildings and Structures:

 

*The restriction on erecting buildings or structures is modified to permit the construction of four residential dwellings and any associated infrastructure, including garages, outbuildings, and landscaping, in accordance with planning permission 22/4128.

 

Vehicle and Storage Restrictions:

 

* The restriction on standing or supporting vehicles, commercial vehicle trailers, mobile homes, caravans, trailers, carts, or boats on the Property is modified to permit reasonable residential use, including the parking of vehicles by residents and visitors in designated parking areas as approved under planning permission 22/4128.

 

Permitted Development:

 

*The restriction on carrying out development within the meaning of Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is removed to allow the construction and occupation of four residential dwellings in accordance with planning permission 22/4128.

 

Accessway and Parking Restrictions:

 

*The restriction on parking and obstruction of the accessway hatched yellow and hatched green or any part of the Retained Land is modified to allow vehicular and pedestrian access as required for the lawful residential use of the Property, ensuring that any access arrangements comply with planning permission 22/4128 and any subsequent highway or planning authority requirements.

 

3.11 These modifications preserve reasonable protections while enabling the approved redevelopment. The precise wording of the changes may be further refined or amended during the legal conveyancing process.

 

Timeline

 

3.12 The overall timeline for these steps is expected to span several months. Suppose the Trust Committee approves the restrictive covenants’ modification and/or discharge. In that case, completion may be subject to obtaining Charity Commission approval, if required, and the conclusion of legal formalities by the parties. This includes Zenaster applying to the Land Registry to register the Deed and effect the necessary changes.

 

3.13 The modification or discharge of the restrictive covenants is subject to the satisfactory reinstatement of the boundary in respect of 776 and 778 Harrow Road and return of the Barham Park Trust land to open space as agreed by way of surveyor’s aerial plan signed by George Irvin on behalf of Zenaster on 28th August 2024.

 

Zenastar Properties Ltd (previously Aventor) business is listed as

•      Buying and selling of own real estate
• Other letting and operating of own or leased real estate
• Management of real estate on a fee or contract basis  
  

Retained profits at January 2024: £3,781,976

Current officers

Campaigners will be looking for grounds on which to challenge to covenant deal. The report to Trustees discusses the role of the Charity Commission:

Compliance with the Charities Act 2011

 

3.4 The two key legal requirements under the Charities Act for land disposal have also been met:

 

*Independent advice: A report has been obtained from a qualified Designated Adviser acting solely in the interests of the Trust.

*Best terms achieved: The proposed transaction represents the best

financial terms reasonably obtainable by the Trust.

 

Requirement for Charity Commission Approval

 

3.5 Under the Charities Act 2011, charities do not typically require prior Charity Commission approval for land disposals where the two legal requirements above are satisfied. However, approval may be required in specific circumstances, including:

 

*Disposals to a "connected person" (as defined in the Charities Act).

*Disposals involving designated land in most cases

 The last two points regarding 'specific circumstances' may be considered grounds for challenge given previous allegations of a close relationship between Muhammed Butt, Chair of the Trustees and  George Irvin, Director of Zenastar, and argumets over designated land.

Why Barham Park Matters - paper ahead of tonight's Scrutiny Meeting

 

Ahead of tonight's Call-in at Scrutiny Committee, Cllr Paul Lorber has provided a background paper for members of the Committee. The meeting can be attended in person or on-line HERE:

Where is the pond and viewing platform in Barham Park?

 

I ask this question for a good reason.

 

Over the past 12 years or so various Trustees (Brent Councillors) have taken officer advice and spent large sums of money – in each case well over £10,000 – on Consultants “Visions” and condition surveys into Barham Park.

 

Over 10 years ago officers proudly presented one of these visions with a Pond and a viewing platform in one of these expensive documents. The drawing showing this were quite appealing, and the Trustees approved this plan.

 

THERE IS NO POND AND NO VIEWING PLATFORM!

 

Subsequent reports highlighted the condition of the Barham Buildings and stressed the need to carry out works. These works were all costed, and a program timeline was produced. Much was to be done over the next 3 year. In reality very little was actually done to protect and preserve the exterior of the buildings. The outside has not been painted for at least 15 years.

 

Why – there is no Champion for Barham Park within the Trustees or the Officer Team. Barham Park is not a priority – it is a nuisance to be brushed under the carpet.

 

This LINK link takes you to pictures highlighting current disrepair and neglect in Barham Park.

 

Those of us who care for Barham Park want the time wasting and the neglect to stop.

 

BACKGROUND – WHY DOES IT MATTER

 

Once upon a time the whole of Sudbury was part of the Sudbury Common which stretched from long way down in Wembley all the way to Harrow on the Hill. 

 

An Archbishop Canterbury was the Lord of the Manor of much of the land here a few hundreds of years ago.

 

The oldest part of the buildings in Barham Park dates back to between 1760 and 1780 (say 250 years ago).

 

In 1801 John Copland – a Purser (Accountant/Officer Manager) – on Royal Navy Ships who once served on one of Lord Horacio Nelson’s vessels at the 1805 battle of the Nile bough Crabs House in what is now Barham Park.

 

He prospered over the years and acquired more land so that by the time of his death in 1843 he owned over 350 acres of land which stretched from The Triangle in Wembley all the way to bottom of Harrow on the Hill. He built a new house on his land called Sudbury Lodge. John Copland bought a crypt in the newly opened Kensal Green Cemetery where he is buried.

 

His only son also joined the Royal Navy too but died very young. John Copland was survived by two daughters. They never married and became great local benefactors paying for the building of St John’s Church, a cottage hospital. School rooms and much more – even a small reference library.

 

On their death in early 1870s General Robert Fitzgerald Crawford took over on condition he changed his name to Crawford-Copland. His two sons played football for Scotland in the very first official game against England.

 

On his passing in 1895 the land was acquired by George Barham the owner of Express Dairies. Most of the land in Sudbury was still farmland, with the area opposite (Chaplin Road/Farm Avenue) a large farm. Sir George as he became later is famous for building up the Express Dairy Company and also for cleaning up the milk industry.

 

On his death n 1913 his two sons took over, but it was the older one also George – but always known as Titus – who lived here and developed his home and gardens. He too was a major benefactor and was involved in almost everything that went on locally. He donated part of his farmland for the site of Wembley Hospital (subject to new plans shortly), he contributed to the local Tennis Club, Barham Primary Scholl stands on his land and much more.

 

In 1937 when Wembley received its Charter to become a Borough he was due to become Wembley’s Charter Mayor. Sadly, he died on the very day this was due to be celebrated.

 

Anticipating death, he had the good vision to enter into agreement with the new Wembley Council to accept the gift of his home and gardens for the “enjoyment of the public”. He was a modest man and did not want any fuss. There is no statue of him and until recently he is remembered by the existence of Barham Park, Barham Primary School, Barham Close and Barham Court.

 

His portrait hands in the Brent Museum which was in fact created in 1965 with many of his gifted possessions as the initial core of the collection – including a coat of armour.

 

A few months ago, volunteers from Friends of Barham Park organised a public collection and erected a Blue Plaque in his memory.

 

DOES HISTORY MATTER?

 

For some the Barham buildings are just an old pile of bricks and even a nuisance. For the lovers of Barham Park, they are however much more. They tell a story of local people who made a contribution to our community.

 

This is why some of us despair at the neglect, and the waste of money and opportunities to improve things.

 

WHAT ARE THE BARHAM PARK BUILDINGS FOR?

 

One part is occupied by Barham Veterans Club formed in 1947 by Wembley and Middlesex County Council to provide a place for elderly men to socialise as part of tackling loneliness. In the early days the Club paid no rent and received a generous grant from the Council. The grant was stopped many years ago and the Club is charged rent and service charges.

 

Officer let the lease lapse and now recommend a new lease on market value terms for a short period of time until 2031. The Bronze drawings do not show the Barham Veterans Club so presumably the idea or expectations is that it will not exist beyond 2031.

 

The wooden building (former Card Room) is occupied by Tamu Samaj UK and ex Gurkha Nepalese Group. They run a wide range of activities for their members of all ages and also hire out the space to other small groups.

 

Their Lease has just expired, and they also face a short lease at market rent.

 

The Public Library was closed by the Labour Administration in 2011. Friends of Barham Library opened a Community Library in another part. The library acts as a hub for many community activities, knitting, art, book club groups. Yoga and Pilates and many others and most importantly is the home of the Memory Lounge – a growing group providing activities, support and advice for people with dementia and their carers.

 

The Bronze option drawing approved by the Trustees have wiped the library from existence. The children library would be a shop and the rest of the space is a bit unclear.

 

The former Children Centre closed many years ago. The Lease is between the Barham Park Trust and the Council, and the Council is desperate to keep up the pretence of ‘children centre’ use to avoid clawback of Sure Start Grant.

 

The rest of the building is leased to ACAVA – an out of Brent organisation who converted their space into 29 smaller units which they let to artists – most of whom are also outside of Brent.

 

When this decision was made in 2013 Officers and Councillors were convinced that this would benefit the local area. Current Councillors can judge this for themselves. The artists contribute very little to Brent art, they are not local and most if not all of the rent owed (over £60,000 according to recent reports) is owed by ACAVA.

 

HERE WE ARE TODAY

 

After tens of thousands of pounds spent on surveys and consultants most of whose reports collect dust in some forgotten draw and the pictures tell their own story.

Opportunities to extract large sums of money from the heritage Lottery Fund and others have been missed.

The buildings are neglected.

Community Groups who provide local services to local people face the threat of being kicked out as consultants think and Brent Officers and Trustees concur with this – that shops or hotel rooms that no one asked for and the area does not need are more important than a Community Library, a Club for elderly residents and a base for a group of loyal and hard working ex Gurkhas – without whom the annual Remembrance March would be rather short of any marchers!

2^nd CHANCE TO SET A BETTER DIRECTION

Decisions by Barham Park Trustees were called in last year. They have been called in again this time.

The Barham Park Trust 2022/23 Accounts were challenged and had to be withdrawn for corrections. Officers persuaded you that nothing was wrong. A year later the 2023/24 Accounts were withdrawn right at the beginning of the Barham Park Trust Meeting.

To get it wrong once is unfortunate. To get it wrong the 2^nd time should set the ALARM bells ringing.

The accounts are wrong and misleading. The way the Barham Trust is managed is wrong and very damaging. Wrong Accounts and misleading information lead to wrong and bad decisions.

If there is any point to Scrutiny than the Members of Scrutiny need to take their responsibilities seriously and grab an opportunity to challenge the poor decisions and poor actions for the sake of ensuring a future for the Barham Park Charity and Barham Park and its buildings.

WHAT YOU SHOULD DO?

Ask your self a few simple questions:

If Barham Park was YOUR home and gardens and you depended on it being well managed, would you:

1.     Waste tens of thousands of pounds on surveys and consultants reports which collect dust and cannot and will not ever be implemented?

2.     Ignore legal agreements (Leases) and not bother to revise rents when due?

3.     Allow the building up of rental debt of over £60,000?

4.     Fail to charge interest on the rent debt in line with the Lease terms?

5.     Spend over £20,000 on consultants’ fees on proposals which you could not start working on for 8 years and which are at major risk of economic and other factors?

6.     Allow your subordinates not to recharge costs that you have incurred without being informed and without your agreement?

7.     Spend large sums of money on valuations and legal fees without knowing what you might get in return?

If your answer to any of these questions is NO than you agree that something is badly wrong, and change is needed.

As a starting point you will then agree with the grounds for the Call-in and agree to refer the decisions back to the Barham Park Trust with clear instructions  that all the issues raised are fully investigated and honest and full answers provided to enable the Trustees to make decisions based on facts, that meet their fiduciary duties to the Barham Park Charity and which meet the expectations of and wishes of Titus Barham who gifted his Home and Gardens for everyone’s enjoyment.