A reader has again shared with Ferret, to share with our community, the response She has received to a Freedom of Information Request recently sent in to Independent Hemsworth Town Council, relevant to the Club Terrace former allotment site and proposed development at Fitzwilliam.
The request was as Follows:
Dear Mr Draper
Club Terrace
Dates/discussions held with Gleeson’s and all other firms involved in any way.
Could you please supply all information you hold from any source including, but not limited to phone calls, emails, both staff and councillors Hemsworth town council accounts, letters, documents minutes and reports from meetings, outcomes as appropriate. Land Valuations and who by and their qualifications.
Was the potential “Ransom value” included in the land valuation?
The response received from Mr Draper.
Re: Club Terrace
Of the information you requested, some information has been provided, some is already freely available and some has been withheld.
Attached are some of the emails/correspondence in respect of Club Terrace (with appropriate redactions).
The valuation figure for the site can be provided, which is £1,300,000 to £1,400,000. Please note the valuation is an estimate based on the prevailing circumstances at the time along with assumptions made regarding development, so the valuation could change.
The valuation was conducted by Mr Andrew Ellis of Sanderson Weatherall Chartered Surveyors. He has a bachelor’s degree, he is a member of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, he is a Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors registered valuer and he is a corporate partner at Sanderson Weatherall Chartered Surveyors.
The council’s accounts and minutes are available on the council’s website: https://www.hemsworthcouncil.co.uk/budgets/ and https://www.hemsworthcouncil.co.uk/agendas-minutes/
The remaining information/documents you requested, such as correspondence and the valuation reports have been withheld using two exemptions:
- Section 42(1) of the Freedom of Information Act; disclosure of the information is in respect of a claim to legal professional privilege, i.e. the (confidential) professional/legal advice the council has received.
- Section 43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act; disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of the council, i.e. the disposal of the land at Club Terrace is still ongoing so disclosure of the remaining information would, or would be likely to, prejudice the sale of the land. Also, in due course when the matter has concluded, this exemption would no longer apply so you would be more than welcome to submit another request then.
You have the right to request a review by the council and/or to appeal to the Information Commissioner. If you wish to request a review, please put your request in writing. If you wish to appeal to the Information Commissioner, the contact details are Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF (tel: 0303 123 1113).
Only one valuation
Ferret is disturbed by this response, for example the revelation that only one land valuation has been sought and as usual, a none answer regarding any potential “Ransom Value” of the site with regards to development of adjacent sites.
Secret meeting with Gleeson
There has also been no disclosure of any meetings held with the proposed developers Gleeson, Ferret finds this unacceptable as Gleeson themselves have made this information public and a simple list of dates of meetings held and with whom does not undermine any confidentiality commercial or otherwise.
Independent Hemsworth Town Council: If you are selling a community asset, we the public have every right to know who our representatives are in discussions with.
So Mr Kenyon and Mr Draper:
- Why have you only had one valuation undertaken?
- Does that valuation recognise any “Ransom position” the site has over any adjacent developments as a whole?
- Are you going to release who you have been in discussions with, why and when?
Legal advice Section 42(1)
Ferret is unaware of any legal proceedings ever being mentioned anywhere or at any time so finds it strange that Hemsworth Town Council are using this to prevent disclosure.
- So Hemsworth Town Council just what is it you don’t want us to know?
Site Valuation
Ferret is not a valuation expert nor does Ferret pretend to be, unlike our expert on everything and nothing Jim Kenyon, who is probably certified to do it from the University of his loft, but it seems very strange that Mr Kenyon is happy and content with a valuation of £1.3 to £1.4 million pounds when he objected from the very start of the sale of the Old Sports complex on Kirkby Road, to the valuation of that site.
The Kirkby road site was valued at £4.5 million pounds and the valuation was undertaken by the District Valuer employed by the Government’s own Valuation Office.
Not the cheapest but recognised as the best especially for a Local Authority dealing with public Assets.
Well yes you may say, it is a bigger site, true says Ferret but to its detriment, the whole site could not be developed and of course it was a formerly a Brickworks and then used for waste disposal. More importantly, the valuation of £4.5million was undertaken in approximately 2008, fourteen years ago and the site was “landlocked” with no suitable highway access for housing development owned by Hemsworth Town Council and as such subject to a lower ransom valuation.
Jim Kenyon was incensed by this “undervalue of believe it or not £2 million pounds”, as ridiculously claimed by both himself and Ian Womersley, that he even started legal action to challenge the valuation. No surprise there and no surprise also when the legal action was thrown out by the Judge but as we now know, this did not stop Kenyon perpetuating this lie for the next 10 years or so, no surprise there also.
- Hemsworth Town Council why are you satisfied with this valuation?
- Wouldn’t it show due diligence and be prudent to have another independent valuation undertaken?
If not why not…
Judgement from 2008,
In the High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division
Administrative Court
In the matter of an application for Judicial Review The Queen on the application of JAMES KENYON versus HEMSWORTH TOWN COUNCIL
Application for permission to apply for Judicial Review NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (CPR Part 54.11, 54.12)
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Acknowledgement(s) of service filed by the Defendant
Order by Mr Antony Edwards-Stuart QC, deputy High Court Judge Permission to apply for Judicial Review is hereby refused.
Unless the Claimant makes a written application to the Administrative Court office by 12 noon on 23 December 2008, the Claimant shall by that date pay the Defendant’s costs assessed at £2,850 plus VAT. If the Claimant makes such application, the Defendant’s application for costs will be considered on paper by a judge (but this is not reserved to the deputy High Court Judge).
Reasons:
- The application is misconceived in that there is no evidence that there was a meeting of
the Defendant Council on 11 July 2008 or that it has entered into a binding agreement
to sell the subject land. Accordingly there is no relevant decision to be reviewed. - Further, there is no credible evidence that the sale price mentioned of £4,500,000 (not
£4,000,000 as alleged by the Claimant) represents and undervalue, still less at an
undervaluation of as much as £2,000,000. The “guidance” as to value given by Mr
Abson relied on by the Claimant appears to be based on certain misapprehensions. - Even if there was sufficient material to justify granting an injunction to prevent the sale,
in the absence of an appropriate undertaking as to damages and evidence of the
means to satisfy it such an injunction would not be appropriate. - The Claimant has not complied with the pre-action protocol and should pay the
Defendant’s costs. The sum claimed of £2,850 is very reasonable.
Case NOT suitable for hearing by a Deputy High Court Judge* Criminal case NOT suitable for hearing by a Single Judge** Case is considered to be totally without merit** Hearing to be expedited**
Directions as to expedition or other matters: “Tick if applicable
Signed
1 2 DEC 2008
Sent / Handed to the claimant, defendant and any interested party / the claimant’s, defendant’s, and any interested party’s solicitors on (date):
Solicitors:
Scheme after scheme after scam after scam the list is never ending.