Sun. May 19th, 2024

Ferret is again intrigued by the words that continue to erupt from Mr. Kenyon’s mouth.

It seems obvious to Ferret that Mr Kenyon is at best, intellectually challenged and at worse, well the least said the better. Just like any con man, he can make his mouth say anything.

Unfortunately for Mr Kenyon liars need to have a very good memory and it seems as though he doesn’t have this either and explains why he doesn’t want his words recording.

Ferret has been provided with a letter (one of a number of documents leaked from Hemsworth Town Council) from Blacks Solicitors acting for Saul Construction Limited with regards to the ongoing litigation surrounding the former Sports Complex site on Kirkby Road in Hemsworth. In order to be fully “open and transparent” the letter is below.

Following receipt of the letter and having listened to Mr Kenyon rambling on in the Hemsworth Town Council meeting held on 14 October 2021, Ferret feels it is time once again to have a look at the contract between Hemsworth Town Council and Saul Construction Limited.

Ferret can confirm that Saul Construction Limited has tried to pay Hemsworth Town Council the outstanding amount of £1,336,466 on more than one occasion. Ferret can confirm that although this money is to be paid to Hemsworth Town Council’s solicitor, it must then be sent directly to Wakefield Council. None of this money is owed to Hemsworth Town Council, once received by Wakefield Council they are to distribute it to the other members of the residuary body who were co-owners of the site.

Firstly yes, it is £1,336,466 and not £1.7 million as claimed by Mr Kenyon in the meeting or even the £2,022,136.99 he demanded on 13 December 2019.

Ferret believes he should have accepted the amount agreed in the contract and completed the deal and if unhappy, he should have sought redress of any extra he thought was due via the Court process that he is no stranger to.


If you read the letter you will see there is mention of established “case law” as to when and what the procedures are that have to be followed before contracts can be rescinded but Mr Kenyon being “Kenyon the expert” decided as usual that he knows best and chose not to follow the procedures required in law and continued on to rescinded the contract regardless and probably acting recklessly with our money once again.

Saul Construction Limited have been left with no alternative and are taking action in the High Court for the contract to be completed.

So, if Saul Construction Limited wins as is expected, Hemsworth Town Council will then have no choice but to accept the outstanding amount, which will then be passed to Wakefield Council and distributed to the other partners as per contract.

Ferret would also like to make it clear that Wakefield Council and the residual body partners have received nothing as yet from the sale of this jointly owned land.

If Hemsworth Town Council wins, then they will have to pay Saul Construction Limited for all the works he has already completed for Hemsworth Town Council, including the Community Centre and Sandygate football facility. These are estimated at being worth in the region of £2.5 million.

Here is the punch Line Mr. Kenyon:

If Hemsworth Town Council do win and are able to rescind the original contract, the outstanding amount that you claim to be £1.7 million pounds or whatever figure you re-invent, DOES NOT become payable as there has been no sale of the former Sports Complex on Kirkby Road in Hemsworth.

Also, the outstanding section 106 money for sports replacements of £300,000 pounds does not become payable as no development will take place

and

the £50,000 advance payment from the section 106 already utilised for the cemetery Road sports fields improvements WILL HAVE TO BE REPAID.

So once again Mr Kenyon, what are your real motives?

Why are you lying about negotiating with Wakefield Council for this money saying you want it all, do you genuinely not realise that only a small amount of it is actually Wakefield’s to give away?

Or

Have you privately admitted defeat in this case and are just playing for time, to save face,  once again, with the community picking up huge legal bills and because you haven’t followed lawful procedures to rescind will be likely to pay Saul’s costs as well, win or lose?.

More probably it’s the make-believe land of Mr Jim Kenyon spilling over into the real world where it will cost us, probably everything we’ve got as a community and more by leaving us in debt just to continue an unjustified vendetta against a company who you were proven in law to owe money to.

So, two things Mr Kenyon:

1. Stop this ongoing litigation with Saul Construction Limited, that even your own legal advisors have given you a poor chance of winning and cut the loses to our community.

2. Resign.

By Ferret

21 thought on “Is it £1.7 Million or £1.4 Million or £2 Million, Mr Kenyon?”
  1. The man’s an idiot, acting like a spoilt brat that doesn’t realise he’s in the real adult world. So Mr Draper, as your were in instructed by the council at the proposal of Jean Eccles, post a correction to this. As your words are being exposed as worthless, you will need to post the supporting legal advice that supports anything that you do post. I know I’m talking daft here as you won’t post anything that can correct anything being posted by Ferret, not even something as simple as Kenyon’s Teaching registration. Lol

  2. So if I’m understanding this right if they ‘win’ this case they need to pay back circa 2.5m to Saul Construction, then he wants to spend 6-8 million on building a new sports complex plus land HTC with ongoing operational costs for said complex?
    Someone asked in the meeting the other week where the 6-8m was coming from, apparently grants. Lottery, Sports England etc, I just can’t see it. Surely by the time they’ve paid back the 2.5 million the coffers are depleted and they are bankrupt?

  3. I’d really love if Ferret or Ferret sources could reach out to Saul and see if they are willing to make a comment
    – A comment they can make whilst a legal matter is ongoing to get a bit of Saul’s side.

    Because no matter how flat you make a pancake it still has 2 sides
    Saul’s & that sh!thead

    It could be very interesting indeed for Saul to comment as much as Saul can in the circumstances to a far reaching and widely read page

  4. And no doubt a large slice of money that the residents of Fitzwilliam will provide with the sale of their land to fund even more football pitches in Hemsworth. Not for much longer.

  5. As I understand what has been posted, the letter is from Saul’s solicitors who represent them in this case.
    It doesn’t get any better than that, it’s in black and white from the horses mouth. So Kenyon let us see your legal case to counter this argument put forward by Saul’s legal team.

  6. You know what they say when you’ve dug yourselves into a deep hole, stop digging, someone for heaven’s sake give them a ladder or we’ll all end up in hell

  7. A good business person usually knows when to walk away from a bad deal, They also have to answer to the shareholders,
    So that would say that Saul’s got the full backing of many astute individuals with a lot of qualifications behind them.
    Saul will be answering questions to the board of directors and they will vote on each decision made on this case.
    Where we have no say what’s so ever.

  8. Case law and precedent basically what has gone before and is used to substantiate your case and make a mockery of the other sides. Judges more often than not use It to help them arrive at a decision in cases of complexity. There are four inns of courts in this country all judges and barristers belong to one of them commenly known as temples. We now have a fifth inn and temple it’s known as the Sam Smith’s temple and it sits and gives advice on all complex legal matters at the top hat club sadly up to now it’s never won a case yes you read it correctly never won a case.

  9. Saul Construction only has a couple of directors, I don’t think there’s a board as such – it appears to be a family business, albeit one that turns over £9.5m+ a year – ie a very well run one!

  10. we have let the lunatics take over the asylum what’s more they are driving the bus heading for the cliff were all doomed

  11. Interesting reading indeed

    If a town or parish council make an illegal decision which is implemented . . .
     It is the council and councillors who are liable not the clerk who was implementing the
    decision
     This is particularly true for the financial decisions of the council
     The Financial Regulations require councils to carry out an annual review of the effectiveness
    of their system of internal audit
     This review is an integral part of continually improving governance and accountability
     If a council fails to do this and subsequently a fraud comes to light it is the council and
    councillors who may be liable
     As with other decisions made by the council, all of which have a legal implication, councillors
    have a duty to make themselves familiar with the requirements contained in the statutes and
    financial regulations as they are jointly and severally legally responsible
    What does “jointly and severally” legally responsible mean?
     Well the councillors are responsible both as individuals and collectively for the decisions and
    the actions of their council
     This means that in some circumstances that all the councillors and individual councillors can
    be pursued in the courts for recompense
    Each year the Annual Return is signed by the Chairman on behalf of ALL councillor

  12. Don’t forget the impact on people who have purchased properties on Meadow Croft, or people waiting for housing on Kirbygate, who are still delayed awaiting this fiasco to be cleared up.
    Not only have house prices gone up, but stamp duty holiday missed and possibly more impact on existing residents to get planning sorted.

    All on a case that cannot be won.

    There must be something that can be done to get our representatives to back down.

  13. This is really interesting, so in theory all councillors could end up liable for the loss of money?

  14. Yes, and Ferret has already posted about that but they have continued to make decisions that impact on us all.

  15. Does anyone know when and where the court case will happen?

  16. And of course voting hasn’t been recorded so there’s no proof that anyone voted against this action meaning even those who are against it would be left in the sh*t! That’s really worrying

  17. can you please keep us updated re hearing place and date. it will be interesting to attend.

  18. Wakefield Council needs to step up in this case and institute a governance review of Hemsworth Town Council before the existing cabal totally destroys local democracy in Hemsworth and ruins the authority! Jon Trickett needs to earn his corn and step up as well, before it is too late. These idiots needs removing now and the ringleaders investigating.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *