Waverley – acting unlawfully! Never?

Breaking the law, bending the rules,  riding roughshod over the wishes of Farnham people – including the elderly users of the Gostrey Centre, now young footballers, it is all in a day’s work for “Your Waverley.”

Will this dumb outfit take any notice of anyone who disagrees with them -no – of course they won’t – not The Farnham Society, The Farnham Residents Group, The Farnham Interest Group, many  residents , or anyone else for that matter.

They have a cunning plan/s and God help anyone who gets in their way – unless of course enough Farnham residents’ get together and fight them in the Courts.

Here’s the Solicitors’ letter that was sent to councillors recently.

pdf corrected 09-mar lett sent 160311

Here’s the letter that accompanied it from the Farnham Interest Group 

Dear Councillor

In all probability the proposed removal of the Gostrey Centre from the East Street development agreement will be in conflict with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015.   We urge you to carefully read the attached letter from our solicitor.   You, as a Waverley Borough Councillor have a manifest responsibility to ensure that Waverley Borough Council (WBC) does not act unlawfully.

Should planning application WA/2016/be approved and subsequently Crest Nicholson relieved of the financial burden of providing the Gostrey Centre within the East Street development WBC will have removed yet another required community asset from the East Street scheme to the financial advantage of Crest Nicholson.   That financial advantage was demonstrated when WCC officers and Crest Nicholson accepted in 2013 that obtaining funding for the East Street project is dependent on relocation of the Gostrey Centre outside the development.   Without funding there is no viability.

You will also be aware of the very close parallels between East Street and the Silver Hill redevelopment scheme promoted by Winchester City Council (see independent report, link below, for details). Following a Judicial Review, which has gone to Appeal, the Council was deemed to have breached the Public Contracts Regulations and this has led to the resignation of the Council Leader, the Deputy Leader and the Head of Overview and Security. Subsequently, the remaining Councillors voted to terminate the development agreement

You should be aware that under the provisions of the Public Contracts Regulations, there is a clear duty upon WBC to retender the contract when such financial advantage arises.  The granting of this application, and a subsequent variation of the development agreement requires expert external legal advice if WBC is to avoid exposure to legal challenge.

Do not be fobbed off by the expected response of “Do not be concerned, it is the usual objectors from Farnham and we have fully consulted our own lawyers”. Much the same was said to the Winchester City Councillors.

Farnham Interest Group

Well there we are then – and, Surrey County Council has agreed to fund this poisoned chalice! Didn’t even tell all its own county councillors it was stumping up the cash – another council treating some of its members like mushrooms?