Is the ‘Silly Season’ just about to get a whole lot sillier – at ‘Your Waverley.’ UPDATED.

This is the development on former recreation land sold by Cranleigh Parish Council in a land swap with CVHT for £1 –  for a HOSPITAL The ‘charity’ now wants to build a £14million development to include an 80 -bed Private Care Home, with 20 community beds and  26 bed-hostel for health workers from anywhere.



STAND BY YOUR BEDS! ALL HOLIDAY LEAVE IS CANCELLED in Cranleigh-upon-Sea, in light of an imminent invasion by the BED SNATCHERS & LAND GRABBERS!

Now listen up everyone! We have some very important news that (Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust – (CVHT) would rather you, the hoi polloi, didn’t know.

Whilst the rest of us schmucks are wriggling into our itsy-bitsy bikinis, schlepping around in our flippers and snorkels and dusting off our buckets and spades, in an effort to enjoy a bit of down-time, the ‘movers and shakers’, as they like to be known – more like ‘on-the-makers’! – behind the misnamed Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust – henceforth to be known as the Cranleigh Village Hospital *uck-up are gearing up for a coup!

Yep, that’s right. All aboard the CVHT Gravy Train! Not content with shafting local residents out of millions of pounds which they fund-raised for their dream – for a local village hospital – which has turned into a nightmare – a privately owned but publically funded care home – the money-rustling-grabbers are now gearing-up to seek planning consent by stealth … whilst all the objectors and those likely to ask awkward questions are up to their elbows in saltwater, thus enabling the CVHT *uck-up to avoid getting into any more hot water!

CVHT HAS fobbed off the infamous Andy Webb of the Cranleigh Community Facebook Group – nothing to do with the Waverley Web we hasten to add! – with a dumper-truck full of platitudes about consulting with the village, after it receives planning permission in August.   An 80 bed Care Home with fees normally charged by HC1 of circa £1,200 – £1, 300 per week, and a measly 20 community beds for Surrey County Council – instead of a new Cottage HOSPITAL to replace the old cottage hospital, the trustees of Cranleigh Village Hospital *uck-up, clearly think they’re home and dry!

Screen Shot 2019-07-06 at 08.39.00.png

Community beds, we might add, that will now serve the ENTIRE population of Surrey – and not just the admittedly huge CCG (Commissioning Care Group area (Waverley & Guildford)) first predicted by the WW.

Why not go the whole hog and take the entire county into Cranleigh? After all, we now understand that the proposed affordable housing elsewhere has, and will, take residents from around the county too.

Needless to say, in true County Council style, it, will only undertake to pay a miserly £600 + for a bed, so the worried-well-to-do, who can actually afford an HC1 bed will be subsidising beds for the cash-strapped County Council which is desperately back-filling its gold plated pension black hole with dumper trucks full of poor old council taxpayers cash as fast as it can shovel!

These Local Authority wallers are the very same wallers who have closed 65 beds at  Longfields Homes in Cranleigh and more at Cobgates Nursing Home here in Farnham, replacing them with CARE home beds, at a knock-down price, in Cranleigh, so they can then flog off their own site – trousering a couple of million along the way – and build another shed-load of “affordable homes” or top up their gold-plated pension pots whilst LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK!

We have heard from a former CVHT volunteer that many of them believe that they, too, have been shafted – having given many thousands of hours of their time AND MONEY – for what is now considered a lost cause.

They are now calling for one million pounds of the LEASE money and the money they fundraised to go to the REAL & ONLY CRANLEIGH VILLAGE HOSPITAL to improve its growing number of essential diagnostic services. 

Cranleigh League of Friends has just opened a half-a-million pound X-ray facility, with money raised from the same villages,  and the Royal Surrey is committed to bringing in more facilities.

So instead of donning their swimmers, might we suggest the New Guard at ‘Your Waverley‘ ensure the hearing of this highly controversial scheme is postponed until September– after all, that’s only another month. We understand villagers have been waiting for a NEW HOSPITAL – with all the trimmings, including a promised Minor Injuries Unitfor two decades?! During which time two of the Trustees have been busy gaining permission for hundreds of new homes elsewhere in Cranleigh?

Rumour has it that one of Waverley’s new head planning honcho’s – who has his own developer-led consultancy – has more than a passing interest in ensuring this one gets done and dusted as quickly as possible. If that is the case, all the more reason to delay until September to ensure that a very bright light is shone on this very shabby, shoddy and distinctly shady deal!Grab the public’s money – Grab parish land – make promises you cannot keep and run?






27 thoughts on “Is the ‘Silly Season’ just about to get a whole lot sillier – at ‘Your Waverley.’ UPDATED.”

  1. I hope that Paul Follows and his new cohort will be shining very bright torches into this tawdry affair though I doubt there is very much they can do now. Will John Ward show up and try to lead on this?

    1. In answer to the first part of your comment we would be very, surprised if Paul Follows didn’t shine a very bright torch into the dark and dingy corners of this particular scheme and its very unfortunate timing.

      But then we heard over here in Farnham that the people of Cranleigh and all the eastern villages are punch-drunk with what is going on over there – and moving out if they can.

      Some developers are even putting up the STOP signs on building sites.

      As for John Ward – anyone seen him yet?

  2. Cllr Cole of Cranleigh Chairs the JPC and so its good to have a Cranleigh man in the Chair. Great news yesterday that Cranleigh recycling centre may be saved from closure. The review committee into recycling centre closure is chaired by Cranleigh’s County Councillor Andrew Povey, so when Cranleigh people are in charge positive things seems to happen for us. Come on Paul Follows (and the other chap from the Farnham Residents) – put a Cranleigh representative on the Executive committee at Waverley, its about time we had representation after all these years!

  3. Just in case you hadn’t noticed now that Cllr Cole is in the Chair he will vote for Christmas at Easter if the planning officers tell him too.

    As for being in the Chair for the ‘Cranleigh Hospital it is not’ – he has already publicly pre-determined the application – so cannot and should not chair any meeting on that subject. It is against borough council rules.

    Anyway- wasn’t it the CVHT outfit that told him at the polls they were putting him there? Why do you suppose Cllr Angela Richardson lost by 30 votes?

    1. Because her name wasn’t well enough established in Cranleigh and the Conservatives did very little canvassing and ran a poor campaign. Certainly no one knocked on my door. The three Conservatives elected are well known names albeit they don’t seem to do a lot anymore for Cranleigh (appreciate the Mayor I’d hand-tied for a year do she can’t). We are stuck with two Lib Dem’s Cllr Follows doesn’t seem to want on the Executive for some reason, hence Cranleigh has no executive representation. The Lib Dem’s could have given us a voice but they couldn’t be bothered. What do you think about the good news about the recycling centre? Isn’t that something to celebrate?

      1. We believe an invitation was extended to the Conservatives to put someone forward for the Executive, but the offer was refused by the Group leader.

        The WW could put forward an ideal person to represent the views of the eastern villages. Elizabeth Townsend – we have watched with interest as she takes up the cudgels for the area she represents, and fights the good fight for the rest of the borough too.

        But sadly Bunty- nobody listens to us. We are just a talking shop.

  4. Good evening everyone, I just thought I would try to give an answer to some of the points expressed in one go (hopefully).

    – JPC chair Cllr Richard Cole (as WW indicated having been on the record at the parish on this subject) I do not believe he will be chairing this one. As such the vice-chair of the JPC, Cllr David Beaman (FR, Farnham Castle) will almost certainly be chairing it.

    – I am happy to confirm I have vocally expressed my concerns to planning and to democratic services in regards to the idea of these being brought to committee in August. When we know in advance there is likely to be public interest it is my view it should be held at a time when people are less likely to be on holiday. I of course have zero power to just move anything btw but I am trying!

    – The matter of exec representation. The Lib Dem group meet frequently, talk continuously (many of our cllrs will likely be annoyed by our large iMessage/whatsapp groups and email chains I am sure). As you know, the progressive alliance ‘half’ of the exec is 5 seats of the 9. 3 of those were Lib Dems and I nominated specific people for specific tasks – as you will see in the fullness of times – for VERY specific reasons. I can’t in good conscience nominate on the basis of geography over professional qualifications being brought to the roles. The other 2 seats went to Green and Labour as per our working agreement – so they are free to nominate.

    Another thing I will also share is that Cranleigh get something no other town gets (certainly with the Lib Dems). I hear regularly from my friend and colleague, the Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Guildford, Zoe Franklin (which of course from that side includes Cranleigh) – if I were EVER neglecting Cranleigh business trust me I would get an earful! Her level of involvement in Cranleigh is such that I get regular updates from her about local matters and I will quite often be addressing matters with Cranleigh residents at her request.

    I am meeting Cranleigh parish for a meeting soon – in large part about this subject. The majority of meetings I have had 1:1 with councillors so far as deputy leader has been with Cranleigh councillors too (of all parties).

  5. and a small PS. Had the Conservatives accepted the offer of exec roles – I know I certainly requested a Cranleigh councillor to be one of them.

    Something btw that was a serious error on my part and for which I have apologised to that individual for the position I probably put them in without thinking It through.

    1. Thanks Paul, that’s mostly very clear. Looking forward to hearing about the specific reasons you nominated those you did when you can reveal them, although I don’t 100% agree on your rationale as I thought the paid officers have the expertise- those elected are so to represent geographies, there to evaluate the work of the officers, so the reasoning you put forward sounds a bit contrived. Last question why did you have to apologise to Cllr Townsend? I would have thought she would have been flattered by your favour? Or did I misunderstand and you had to apologise to Lib Dem Cllr Reed for preferring Cllr Townsend? I’ve not heard of Zoe Franklin as yet though.

  6. We hesitate to comment here, but the explanation Cllr Pau Follows is accurate and in the matter of appointments to the Executive, partiularly in Rainbow coalition- all the parties have to be taken into account, Those are the rues.

    But let us be quite clear here, any Tory that may, have been invited to join th Executive would have been prevented from doing so by the Tory Group Leader.

    It is quite clear that the former administration want the present administration to flounder and fail, miserably if possible. Though we are already getting the impression that some of the newly elected councillors are beginning to flex their own muscles, and want to work together to provide us all with a different and better WaverleyBorough Coucil.

    Isn’t that what we all hope for – and isn’t that exactly what Cllr Follows is attempting to do?

    So let’s give the new administration a chance – shall we?

    1. Cranleigh has been excluded from representation on the Executive for years. We are in this situation with the Greenfield’s being trashed because former Cranleigh councillors were too close to developers, some even declaring an interest at the opening of the KPI JPC. It was refreshing that we had an opportunity to get a Cranleigh Cllr on the Executive as amongst the handful of Lib Dem’s there were two from Cranleigh, but again we were denied representation on the Executive. Cllr Follows’s reasoning for this is flimsy. I have asked this one question several times and received a weak answer. Farnham is well represented but you at WW who are from Farnham put your independent Cllrs down repeatedly. There seems to be a thread developing in your answers that serves a political agenda. I suspect you will ban me now, but this a heartfelt observation. So maybe you won’t censor someone who is frustrated that the new administration of LD’s and Independents doesn’t seem better than the previous lot of Conservatives when it comes to the East of the Borough.

      1. We would NEVER ban anyone from expressing their heartfelt views. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

        However, it has long been the case that the eastern villages have been under-represented on the Executive. It is also disgraceful that Cllr Kevin Deanus is not on the Joint Planning Committee, particularly as his area, which inlcudes Dunsfold, will shortly come before the committee when the MASTERPLAN is considered.

        But it was up to the Tories to put him forward, and the group did not. So we are where we are.

        We have no political Agenda on the WW and we fully understand that for a very long time the Tory-lead administration numbers favoured Farnham. Although we are Farnham based it gives us no satisfaction to see any sort of bias or unfairness dealt out. Believe us when we tell you Farnham has been shafted too!

        Whilst we fully respect your views about being swamped with development. Ask your former Cranleigh councillors. The Stennett duo (one of whom gave the casting vote for the Crest Nicholson site in Horsham Road – the other who worked with all the developers to bring about the state of play you mention. Sadly you are unable to ask the late Cllr Brian Ellis? However, you have just voted back in his wife, who supported developers – even allowing one of them to a private meetings in their home.

        The deveopers in Cranleigh are Cranleigh-based residents and a more devious bunch you could not find.

        Sadly, Cranleigh people have been found wanting when it comes to standing up for their area.

        Write to the Leader of the Conservative Group – Cllr Julia Potts. Ask her why she has refused to allow an eastern villages’ councillor to join the Executive? Her contact details are on the council website. Under Councillors.

      2. Cllr Townsend could have defied the whip and joined the Exec if Paul Follows’s had approached her( like he says he did/ that’s why I assume he had to apologise? ) . It was within her gift to join the Executive and defend Cranleigh.

  7. The complete vail of silence lies and non communication with Cranleigh people regarding this so called nursing home on land given to them by the parish of Cranleigh plus the money used by them raised by the people of Cranleigh STINKS. CVHT move in a vail of silence and protest to much when asked to explain and will not talk to the people of Cranleigh why why why……… WHAT ARE THEY HIDING ????

    One fact it will be easier to win the lottery then get a bed in this nursing home as a Cranleigh resident since it covers the whole of Surrey .





    It appears to me Paul Fellows is the only person who bothers to look at this amazing site who bothers to stand up and ask questions.

    Paul give then HELL !!!!!


    1. Anyone know what happened with the rumoured move by Cranleigh’s independent Parish Council to take the land back?

      1. Sadly, we have heard nothing. However, we will investigate and look up for any mention on the council minutes. But we doubt there is very little hope of villagers ever getting that land back. CVHT will no doubt do anything and everything in its power to stop it.

        Sadly you will see a private nursing home, 20 SCC beds and a hostel covering that site with concrete, before too long.

  8. Well said concerned of Cranleigh, what I do not understand is that more people in Cranleigh are not asking more questions of CVHT, where the money is or what it was used for, why the people in charge of the CVHT have not been democratically placed on the committee by Cranleigh people, that instead of just being a friend of a friend. The trouble I suppose is when a meeting is called to answer questions no one that is in charge of CVHT or HC-one can be bothered to attend and even worse if you are not a Cranleigh resident you are not allowed to ask questions, does that mean that people from other surrounding villages are not recognised as giving donations to a new VILLAGE HOSPITAL, I suspect that if people had thought it would be for a new private nursing home, they would have thought twice and please let us not forget the generous so called community beds are for Surrey social services, all the health centres Waverley area and step down beds, NOT JUST FOR CRANLEIGH. So it is about time some truthful answers were given to all the people, associations, Dunsfold Park and Cranleigh Lions who donated so generously to what started out as a great cause. I remember sitting in Cranleigh Village Hall listening to a speech that Dr Lynch gave on Cranleigh Village Hospital, that was nearly twenty years ago and we are still waiting while some people are going to make a lot of money out of this situation and I am sorry to say but that is what it boils down to.

    1. Although we are not fully up-to-date with all matters concerning Cranleigh. Wasn’t someone threatening to hold a public meeting? A public meeting for all the villages who donated cash for this venture?

      A public meeting to be held by villagers for villagers – not a public meeting called by a handful of residents and hosted by the parish council?

      Perhaps it should be held early in September and the CVHT should be asked to turn up and explain how and why the present situation has come about.

      If they are so sure they have acted properly, then say so. Ask the ‘charity’ to be up front about who will use those ‘community beds?’ Explain their trustees conflict of interest- come clean, be open and transparent once and for all.

  9. So – let the debate begin? Who is going to call that public meeting? And when? The ball is in villagers’ court – but wait until after Wimbledon please.

  10. Where can we find out details and history regarding how much was raised and the CVHT accounts?

    1. Go to charities commission look up Cranleigh hospital trust and you should be able to pull up the accounts and print them off. I will check now if any different I will send another message

    2. I just looked on the charities commission and they are showing the last 5 years of accounts and apparently they are not required to put in accounts for the last year so no one will know what is going on there

      1. Why exactly aren’t they showing the accounts for the last year? Is it because they are not due until the 31 August?

    3. Sorry you will be fed up with me but I have just looked at companies house and they are going showing accounts from when they started

      1. Are the accounts showing a list of all the individual donations from the public fundraising campaign? Because it is all smoke and mirrors. The figure of 2plus million is simply what CVHT put on the value of the land, with planning permission. Which it doesn’t have.

        As it stands the land is the value of a piece of recreation land. Land that the District Valuer put a value on. The parish council will probably have this information. Perhaps someone should ask the clerk?

  11. You can try the CVHT website for last year’s accounts. However, there is a sum of over £2million which is the value put on the land with planning permission. However, that permission lapsed some eight or nine years years ago we understand, but presumably the charity is so confident it will get another planning permission that it includes this amount every year in its annual accounts.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.