Government. Local Authorities. Quangoes.

OBEY THE LAW ON RIGHTS OF OWNERSHIP

Compensate local residents for being denied their legal rights.

 

FACT

Many local Councils do not own their own local commons. They think they do. They act as if they do. But they don’t. Because what is legally known as pre-registration of title is needed before anyone can register ownership of common land. And many local Councils have not pre-registered title to their local Commons.

Ask any local Council to prove they own their own local commons. By law, they must do so. If they can’t, they don’t. Simple as that.

Example: West Berkshire Council

West Berkshire Council does not have any pre-Registration of Title Deeds or any other documents to show they own Padworth Common. Instead they claim they own the Common under the terms of Section 9 of the Commons Registration Act 1965.

Example: Worcestershire County Council

Worcestershire County Council does not own Hartlebury Common. It does not hold the deeds. Instead it is only empowered to protect the Common under Section 9 Commons Registration Act 1965. Officially, it has no other management control.

Says Steve McCarron, Chairman of the Worcestershire Commons Association, “Hartlebury Common is a Rural common which is NOT owned by Worcestershire County Council. They are not on their own in claiming as such. In fact, there is not a local authority in the land that is not illegally claiming some bit of land or common as their own. Odd then, that THE common factor in all of this is none of them can show ownership. When I say ownership, I mean the sort of provenance that would stand up to scrutiny by an unbiased judge.”

Example: Hampshire County Council

Hampshire County Council has gone a stage further by actually stealing registered common land, which is a criminal offence In 1978 they made an out of court settlement with the landowner of Broxhead Common on Appeal that they would turn a blind eye to his unauthorised fencing of 80 acres of the common if he would rent them the other 100 acres as an SSSI, and for incidental use by the public for 'air and exercise'.

It has taken all of 34-years for local resident, Maureen Comber, to circumnavigate the misleading and false statements by HCC to eventually find that the 80 acres is actually registered common land which has willfully and illegally been extracted from the Register by the Registration Authority, the said HCC. Removing registered common land from the register is a Criminal Act. In addition they have been renting the remaining 100 acres from the landowner since 1978 without so much as a 'by your leave' from the commoners who have a legal interest in the soil, and against the wishes of the local parish councils and the public at that time.

Says Maureen Comber, “This is a fine illustration of the public not only being unaware but actually kept in ignorance of the actions being taken by their local Council, since the Broxhead Commoners themselves were deliberately kept in ignorance. They were confused and bewildered as to why all their hard fought and won battles to the High Court seemed to have failed. One of them even wrote to the Prime Minister of the day. They nor anybody else could have possibly imagined the treachery by their Local Government who had to all intents and purposes been supporting them.”

Example: Shropshire County Council

The most extreme example of a local authority’s abuse of common lands is, perhaps, Whitchurch Heath Common, Shropshire, which has been the scene of an intense ten-year battle between a local resident, Tony Barnett, and the Butterfly Conservation Trust, whose President is David Attenborough and Vice-President, Alan Titchmarsh.

Tony Barnett maintains the local Council has no legal evidence to prove they own the Common. Instead, he maintains he does. His is the only signed and dated registration held by the Council.

“There is no registration held on the Common Owners Register than the one made by me,” he says.

In one Court case after another, Tony Barnett has maintained that if his is the only name on the Common Owners Register, how come Butterfly Conservation Trust were able to purchase, with the aid of funding supplied by Brussels via Natural England, Whitchurch Heath Common not from the Council but from a company called Prees Heath Ltd even though their name nor the name of the Butterfly Conservation Trust is registered at the Council Offices?

FACT: If Councils can’t prove they own their own local commons...

If Councils can’t prove they own their own local commons, it follows that whatever they do on their local commons is illegal. Because it does not belong to them. This applies to everything from road and path building, fencing, installing car parks, collecting revenue from car parks, putting up signs, providing litter bins etc.

Councils should, therefore, be forced to re-pay to local residents any funds they have obtained by pretending they were the owners of the common and to restore to its original condition the common land as it was before they assumed ownership.

FACT: If Councils have illegally claimed ownership of their local commons ..

If Councils have illegally claimed ownership of their local commons, it follows that they have been denying their local residents their human rights to have unrestricted access to their own common lands for walking, recreation and exercise.

Again, if this is true, Councils should compensate local residents for being denied their legal rights.

FACT: The public are excluded from land they are legally entitled to access …

The public are excluded from land they are legally entitled to access.
Common Land is put to uses that are not enshrined in Common Law.
Scheduled monuments are put at risk.
The disabled are not catered for.
Equality is abandoned.
Public monies are invested but results not enforced and are thus fraudulently used.
Policies are based on deception and fraud practiced under previous grant aided schemes(ESA).
Policies do not guarantee public 'payback' despite demanding public monies.
Policies are not achieving that which they are designed to achieve.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Legal Non Compliance;

CROW Act.
Disability Discrimination Act.
Equality Act 2010.
Ancient Monument Act.
Fraud Act.
Highways Act.
Commons Act.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(The specific example of Common Land being fraudulently 'owned' and that 'ownership' being the basis of fraudulent applications for public monies is detailed by Tony Barnett(Common Heritage).)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statement;

The above concerns are known to Mr Cameron and were the subject of a letter from No 10 within which a commitment was made to initiate inquiries within two 'Cabinet' departments.These inquiries HAVE NEVER BEEN undertaken.

The allegations have regularly been drawn to the attention of ministers with the response "ministers cannot become involved in local issues" despite this leaving their own departments immune from legal consequences(ministers condoning unlawfulness) and despite laws being national,not local.

Richard Benyon,on one occassion,did promise to visit Cornwall to meet us but then recanted!

The fraternal relationship between public bodies(inc police/judges/Ombudsman) is one within which the relationship assumes rectitude and denies the public rights established in law.That relationship encourages manipulation.

We,Save Penwith Moors,look to OUR Prime Minister to fulfill the promises of transparency,honesty,equality and lawfulness that are demanded by citizenship of one of the oldest democracies in the World.

Steve Yandall.Ian McNeil Cooke,Craig Weatherhill(on behalf of 'Save Penwith Moors').

FACT: If Councils seek and receive funds from Brussels for activities on local commons , which they do not own, this again is fraud or corporate theft.

To date, it is estimated, that Councils have received over £1 billion from Brussels under the terms of what is called the Higher Level Stewardship.

To obtain Higher Level Stewardship funding from Brussels, Natural England has to prove they are conserving and identifying more and more areas containing rare flowers and/or species such as butterflies and naming them Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

To obtain more and more of this Higher Level Stewardship funding, Natural England are diverting their attention from environmental activities to conservation and identifying more and more areas as Sites of Special Scientific Interest, which in turn, is forcing more and more local Councils to declare areas as SSSI and to claim funding from Brussels in order to protect them.

It is because of this Higher Level Stewardship funding that during the present period of Government austerity, Natural England has been able to increase its core funding by over 30-per-cent.

If it is found that Councils have been illegally obtaining Higher Level Stewardship funding from Brussels for land they do not own, they will be forced to repay it.

And where will the money come from?

• From surcharging the local councillors, who authorised such corporate fraud
• From increased Council tax on local residents who were not involved in or even aware of the illegal actions being taken by their local Council.