Stockport Council News

Email sent – 02 September 2009 06:50

Dear Mr Majothi

It was stated at last night’s Executive Committee how fair the proposed Vexatious with Knobs on policy was to be. In the light of that I wish to appeal, due to the fact that Khan, Weldon, Schulz, Webb, Scullion, Candler, Goddard and Sager failed to comply with the Council’s policy on fraud and financial irregularities for well over 18 months, putting me to considerable effort and leading me to be branded a liar, rude, offensive and vexatious, which is defamatory.

In the light of all the evidence I have sent you I expect and answer, which will be sent to the Standards Board and the Audit Commission. If I don’t get any repsonse within a reasonable time that will be pointed out too. We can’t wait a decade for a reply as has happened in the past.

I look forward to hearing from you

Mrs S J Oliver

Stockport’s Freedom of Information Campaigner

“That Stockport MBC be informed that the GMC are of the opinion that the proposals for housing development at Mill Lane, Reddish are contrary to the existing development plan for the area and note with concern that the formal adoption procedure has not been applied to the draft North Reddish Local Plan.” Dated 28th April 1982

This document can be more clearly read here – http://www.sheilaoliver.org/how-did-it-pass-planning-.html

Majothi, he of the Mr Parnell oppression, deemed it “vexatious” of me to have raised this matter. Should Mr Majothi be considered a fit person to hold public office? I often wonder.
Why is it “vexatious” to point out public open space is being taken illegally?

Email sent – 23 August 2009 20:
Dear Mr Majothi

In the early 1980s I believe the land at Mill Lane/Harcourt Street, Barlow Fold was in the town plan as public open space. Housing was built on the site following a meeting held behind closed doors involving one senior council officer and one senior councillor. Greater Manchester Council did not approve the use of this land for housing and I believe no consultation was held with local people concerning the change of designation as housing land. Greater Manchester Council was very annoyed at this.

I asked a FOIA question regarding this and the information was not disclosed to me. I mentioned the question of possible corruption, as I recall, and I wanted access to the documents myself to check. It would appear that in those circumstances the Council should have disclosed those documents under its Fraud policy.

Apparently the formal adoption procedure had not been applied to the local plan

I would be very grateful if you would also look into the above.

I attach a document regarding this – I have others.

More to follow…..

Yours

Mrs Sheila Oliver

“8 – Obvious concern over funding. DS to looking into other possible funding sources.”(Donna Sager)

“10 – Advice required on how much of this goes into the highlight report for May’s Project Board.”This document can be more easily read here – http://www.sheilaoliver.org/financial-irregularities.html

Email sent – 22 August 2009 18:48

Dear Mr Majothi

When I have finished sending this evidence I shall write an explanatory covering letter and send what I have sent you to the media, the Standards Board and the Audit Commission.

So, we see from the attached the “obvious concern over funding” expressed in March 2007 (when the cost was about £2.5 million cheaper than it is now) and “advice required on how much of this goes in the highlight report”

Yours

Mrs Sheila Oliver

Stockport’s Freedom of Information Campaigner

Why would Majothi lie and say it was “vexatious” of me to raise issues of lack of funding when he knew what I was saying was completely true? Defamation of character, and he needs to apologise and set the record straight.

Majothi is the dangerous man who failed to solve Mr Parnell’s simple problem year in, year out.

Email sent – 27 August 2009 20:49

Dear Mr Majothi

Another irregularity – Mr John Hill demanded a map from me to a certain scale for my village green application. So, I took a day’s holiday from my work in a busy cancer department and went to a specialist map shop in Manchester to get it. “What on earth do you want this for?” asked the lady in the shop incredulously – “it will cost over £300” (she gave me a written estimate to use as evidence). “Stockport Council demanded it for my village green claim”, I replied. There ensued much speculation as to whether Stockport Council was corrupt. A chap from a developers who has exensive experience of planning who also happened to be in the shop said Stockport Council was well known for asking people to jump through more and more ridiculous and expensive hoops until eventually they gave up. I have seen something of this kind with regards to planning.

I was furious and went to the very nice Council cartographers who said they could provide a map to the Council but not to me for £5.

Why was a asked to provide this ridiculously expensive one sheet of paper map?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours

Mrs S J Oliver

Email received Wednesday, September 30, 2009 3:37 PM

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I write as Clerk to the Registration Authority to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail below of the 21st September 2009 and to note in particular that as indicated, you do not wish to alter the description of the locality or of the neighbourhood within the locality that is described in your application as being –

“Administrative area. Political Ward – North Reddish neighbourhood – housing bounded by Gorton Road and the two railway lines that intersect at Thornley Lane South”.

Yours sincerely,
John Hill
Principal Conveyancer and Compulsory Purchase Officer
Clerk to Stockport Registration Authority
for Town Greens
Stockport Legal Services
Business Services Directorate

And my response sent – 30 September 2009 19:09

Dear Mr Hill

I note once again you have refused to address the issue of the hundreds of pounds map. Why was this demanded of me and presumably not of other applicants? I contend that you are not impartial in your dealings as is your legal duty.

Also, why didn’t you attempt to contact the owners of the CPO land?

Yours

Mrs Oliver

Email sent to John Hill, the Council’s Legal Officer, 15 September 2009 19:58

Dear Mr Hill

Within the next week or so I shall be dropping in further evidence. Please don’t ‘lose’ it. I have copies anyway. There may be more evidence submitted right up to the cut off date. We are submitting evidence from enough streets in the area surrounding the land.

I need to point out:-

1) I dispute the date of my village green claim.

2) Unless you are able to prove that every village green applicant has been requested by you to provide a map which would have cost hundreds of pounds and to a scale which astonished the staff in the specialist map shop, then I want you or anyone selected by you to hear the case to have nothing further to do with this application, as if this is the case that I was selected for specially harsh treatment, then your impartiality and integrity are compromised and that would leave the council open to judicial review.

3) I requested from the outset that a different inspector be chosen. I assume Mr. Price Lewis doesn’t have to receive work from SMBC, so that should have been agreed to.

4) The policital ward of North Reddish was accepted for the last village green claim on adjacent land. I would be very annoyed if the village green were to be refused on these grounds this time.

5) I note you failed to inform the likely owners of the CPO ransom strip, yet Mrs Penkethman had to inform all houses either side of the footpaths she claimed. One rule for SMBC and another for us, I see. I assume you have now contacted DCSF to inform them of the presumed owners of the ransom strip. I shall be doing so anyway.

Yours

Mrs S J Oliver

Stockport’s Freedom of Information Campaigner

Free Mr Parnell, victim of a corrupt council.

Email sent to John Hill, the Council’s Legal Officer – 30 September 2009 19:09

Dear Mr Hill

I note once again you have refused to address the issue of the hundreds of pounds map. Why was this demanded of me and presumably not of other applicants? I contend that you are not impartial in your dealings as is your legal duty.

Also, why didn’t you attempt to contact the owners of the CPO land?

Yours

Mrs Oliver

Email sent to John Hill, the Council’s Legal Officer on – 21 September 2009 14:43

Dear Mr Hill

Thank you for your email.

May I remind you that you have failed repeatedly to reply to my substantive points made earlier:-

1) that I object to Mr Price Lewis hearing this application and

2) that I dispute the date of my village green application.

Please note that although there may be 44 forms they are from more than 44 people.

I wish my neighbourhood and locality to remain as the original application, which you repeatedly refused to accept.

If the size of any map is a matter for me, why was I previously asked to provide one costing several hundred pounds? I look forward to the answer and to receiving evidence that other applicants were asked to provide the same expensive evidence.

Yours

Mrs S J Oliver

Stockport’s Freedom of Information Campaigner

Free Mr Parnell, victim of a corrupt council