Says Adrienne Yentis
A friend of mine recently was riding on the heath
and she came across a group of cattle strung out across the bridlepath with no way through – the only way off was to turn round. Fortunately her horse
remained calm throughout. But you can imagine how a nervous horse might react ........... read more
Tony Barnett writes to Coun. Ian Chapman.
" - As a member of the public, I wish to take up my democratic rights and apply, under the FOI for full disclosure of evidence
- I need the information so as to make my objections to the planning inspectorate to have the matters of your intended application for works and grazing rights to be referred to the Secretary of State for a full Public hearing.
- It is my intention to represent members of the public at the proposed public hearing on these matters, obviously with a view to applying to the county courts for a referral to the high courts in London "
Says Tony Barnett
Councillor Chapman, you and I had a long conversation over the issues on Yateley Common, obviously a waste of time, just as knocking when no ones in is, as I pointed out to you, there is no public support for proposals, and you have no documentary support.
By all accounts your mannerism was typical of councils "Condescending" and illiterate.
As a member of the public, I wish to take up my democratic rights and wish to apply, under the FOI for full disclosure of evidence that the authority-ies own Yateley Common as stated by Sarah Manchester, obviously supported by the CEO and legal Mr Austin.
The evidence, lawfully held will be pre registration of titles (here you must examine the law Ian) which must show ownership pre dates 1189, the conveyance/purchase documents to show how the authorities obtained the common.
Copies of the insurance certificate to show that the cattle and other existing impediments to include gates etc are covered to compensate members of the public in cases of accident.
As owners(allegedly) you would be in the position of having s 193 1925 LPA imposed on the common by making a deed of declaration and an order of limitations in order to regulate the common land as any owner may do., however, this does not allow enclosure of the land or any other activities to unsettle those that wish to access the common, in this case the cattle, which are illegally introduced.
I need the information so as to make my objections to the planning inspectorate to have the matters of your intended application for works and grazing rights to be referred to the Secretary of State for a full Public hearing.
I would advise you not to try to belittle me as you did to person's trying to put across their points of objections to prevent your agendas to further your ambitions to steal the common and to obtain, under false representations to Natural England(an equally corrupt quango) for funding and consent from pins.
It is my intention to represent members of the public at the proposed public hearing on these matters, obviously with a view to applying to the county courts for a referral to the high courts in London, in case a judicial review of a bias decision is reached to enclose and impede safe public access.
Ian, may I draw your attention to the following?;- In G & K Ladenbau Ltd-v- Crawley and de Reya (1978) 1WR266 it was held that a solicitor who negligently failed to search the commons registers of common land was liable to damages to a client who suffered finacial loss as a result, the public of Hampshire are your clients.
May I also apply for a copy of your proposed application in this instance and copies of the previous applications for funding from HLF and the applications for the works already in place.
Tony Barnett comments
The application, I understand from the paper put out by Sarah Manchester, will be as owners of the common land. This will be in the form of false representation (2006 Fraud act).
Says Tony Barnett
Councillor Chapman made it abundantly clear that an application will be made to pins for consent to carry out the preferred agenda by HCC on YATELEY COMMON.
The application, I understand from the paper put out by Sarah Manchester, will be as owners of the common land, this will be in the form of false representation (2006 Fraud act).
Alternatively and application claiming it to be supported by the inhabitants and public in general, this too will be false representation if the information gained is supported, (Sarah Palmer and colleagues are to collect signatures to gain a consensus of opinion) to oppose the application and retention of unlawful livestock and means of restricting access to the common.
Or, supported by an owner.
It is hoped that information under an FOI to the council will force abandonment should the application for full disclosure,as I suspect to denounce the applicants as fraudsters,as there being no evidence to support the claim of ownership and or lawful occupation and jurisdiction.
Should Pins decide to grant consent for the proposed agendas, there will be a supplementary issued, which is in fact an obligation to which the applicant council must observe.
1 Observation to re enactments of legislation under the 2006 commons act, that substantially re enacted the legislation of the 1965 Commons Registration Act, and acts that were repealed under the 2006 commons act must be observed, one of the repeals in the 2006 commons act was the "Abolition of polices of approvement and enclosure of common land, which is S 47 (1) of the 2006 commons act which repealed the commons act 219 of the 1285 ( 12 Edward 1 of England.c 46) (Powers of Approvement) shall cease to have effect.
47(2) of the 2006 commons act, any power of approvement of a common which subsists at common law is abolished.
The creation of new roadways or upgrading of existing footpath bridle ways in prohibited, the public have rights to enforce against any unlawful works, and to reinstate existing ancient recorded access points/
Just in case the applicants try another route once lawful, comes under S 48 of the 2006 commons act, section 147 of the enclosure act 1845 (c.1811) power to exchange for other land, shall cease to have effect.
The local council has locus stan-di in as much under the commons registration act of 1965, substantially re enacted by the 2006 commons act to ;-
(a) take steps to protect the land against unlawful interference, that could be taken as an owner in possession of the land; and (b) institute proceedings against any person for any offence committed in respect of the land, but without prejudice to any power exercisable apart from this section.
In the event the council are the offenders, the public have a relator action in the high court.
Please support Sarah Palmer by signing the proposal against the councils objectives.
Says Linda Wright
We moved to a Shropshire location a year ago having surveyed the local OS map and noted the significant number of bridleways around the property. Sadly the map appears a total fiction. Scarce any of the bridleways are usable ........... read more