Horseytalk.net/Hoofbeat EXCLUSIVE
RIDER RIGHTS

click here to read more

The Governement should sycamore rider-friendly policy !

"TAI UNNOS"

How COUNCILS AND "CONSERVATIONISTS" GET SUCH A BIG WEDGE FROM EQUALY CORRUPT MEMBERS OF NATURAL ENGLAND TO USE COMMON LAND AS COLLATERAL

How COUNCILS AND "CONSERVATIONISTS" GET SUCH A BIG WEDGE FROM EQUALY CORRUPT MEMBERS OF NATURAL ENGLAND TO USE COMMON LAND AS COLLATERAL

Says Tony Barnett

IN ENGLISH IT MEANS A NIGHT HOUSE

IF THIS BUILDING WAS IN WALES, THEN MORE THAN LIKELY IT WOULD A LEGAL STRUCTURE, A "NIGHT HOUSE"), BUT THIS IS THE "WARREN HOUSE" IN NORTH SHROPSHIRE, MAKING IT AN UNLAWFUL DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IN THE MID 1800’S AS FAR AS SEARCHES CAN GO, WAS A SOD STRUCTURE FOR HORSES; THERE IS NO REFERANCE AS TO WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SOD STRUCTURE, POSSIBLY A COMMONER.

THE FIRST ALLEGED COVENANT WAS IN 1890; THOSE IN COLLUSION WERE LORD BROWNLOW, SIR JOHN CUST AND STEPHEN WHALLY.

I HAVE A COLLEAGUE IN LIVERPOOL, WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF A TRUST DEALING WITH THE ONCE POWERFUL CUST FAMILY, THE LIVERPOOL AREA WAS THE SEAT OF THE CUST FAMILY, THERE WAS NO SIR JOHN CUST IN THE FAMILY, THE WHEREABOUTS OF WHALLY IS NOT KNOWN.

THE BROWNLOW FAMILY REFUTES ANY SUGGESTION THAT THEY WERE INVOLVED IN ANY PROPERTY IN THE AREA.

DURING MY RESEARCH THERE IS NO RECORDS TO SHOW THAT ANY PLANNING APPLICATION TO THE LOCAL AUTHORITY WAS EVER MADE TO ENLARGE, OR TO HAVE THE “STABLE” REMAIN.

NEVERTHELESS THE AREA OF COMMON LAND DEVELOPMENT HAS GONE UNCHECKED, THAT IS UNTIL NOW, AND ALL FUTURE APPLICATIONS ALTHOUGH GIVEN BY OUR CORRUPT COUNCIL HAVE NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED.

THE STABLES HAD ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT SET ON THE SAME PART OF THE COMMON, WHICH WAS USED AS OFFICER QUARTERS FOR THE 1914-18 CONFLICT, BUT THEN AGAIN THE ENTIRE COMMON WAS REQUISITIONED, AND BILLETS AND RECREATION FACILITIES (GOLF COURSE) WERE ALSO PUT IN PLACE.

THE NORMAL PRCEDURE AFTER MOD REQUISITION IS FOR THE AREA TO BE CLEARED AND PUT BACK AS WAS BEFORE.

THE BUILDINGS WERE NOT REMOVED, BUT THEN IT WAS ONLY A LOW TYPE OF OFFICERS MESS/ LIVING QUARTERS AND NOT WHAT WE SEE TO DAY.

THE NOW EMPTY BUILDINGS WERE RIPE FOR THE TAKING, AND ON 5th AUGUST 1920, AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO CONVEY THE BUILDINGS TO-GETHER WITH THE 330 ACRE’S OF COMMON LAND DE-RQUISITIONED BY THE MOD. THE LOT WAS PUT ON THE MARKET BY LORD ADLEBERT WELLINGTON BROWNLOW, BUT AS THE "WARREN HOUSE ESTATES" TO BE SOLD BY AUCTION.

THE AUCTIONERS FRANK LLOYD, REFUSED THE APPOINTMENT, BROWNLOW HAD NO PROOF OF OWNERSHIP OR ANYOTHER ENTITLEMENT.

NOT TO BE OUT DONE, A CLAIM BY THOMAS PARKER WAS THAT A CONVEYANCE HAD BEEN EFFECTED BETWEEN HIM AND BROWNLOW, NO

INFORMATION OF VALUE, OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENTATION HAS NOT BEEN FOUND, BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY.

THE ASHLEY FAMILEY MOVED INTO THE WARREN HOUSE, AND MRS. ASHLEY DECLARED HERSELF THE LADY OF THE MANOR, THIS WAS DEFEATED IN 1958-60 WHEN SHE TRIED A LAND DEAL EXCHANGE WITH THE AIR MINISTRY.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS WERE MADE, THEN AGAIN HER HUSBAND WAS A DISTRICT COUNCILLOR, SO PLANNING CONSENT WAS EASY, HOWEVER, THE CLAIM TO OWNERSHIP WAS NEVER ATTEMPTED TO EITHER THE COMMON OR THE HOUSE.

AFTER THEIR DEMISE AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO CLAIM THE COMMON AND HOUSE AS FREEHOLD, AND UPUNTIL NOW, IT WAS ACCEPTED AS SUCH. IN 1986 THE COMMON WAS PUT UP FOR AUCTION, ASKING PRICE £500,000, BUT WAS LATER TAKEN OF THE MARKET AFTER IT WAS CLAIMED THE FIGURE HAD BEEN REACHED (MORTGAGE FRAUD)

IN 1987 IT WAS ALLEGED A FURTHER CONVEYANCE HAD BEEN EFFECTED, AND PLANNING CONSENT FOR DRILLING, THIS OBTAINED A GREATER VALUE ESTIMATE.

1989 ONE MICHAEL JAMES AND HIS WIFE CLAIMED THEY HAD PURCHASED THE WARREN HOUSE AND THAT A MORTGAGE HAD BEEN OBTAINED FROM NAT WEST IN WHITCHURCH TOWN CENTRE. NAT WEST SAY THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT CLAIM, YET NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY THEM TO INVESTIGATE THE CLAIM.

IN 1998, JAMES CLAIMED THAT A SECOND MORTGAGE HAD BEEN OBTAINED FROM A FIRM IN BIRMINGHAM "PORTLAND HOUSE".

APPLICATIONS WERE PUT BEFORE THE COUNCIL PLANNING AUTHORITY FOR EXTENSION AND OTHER WORKS SO AS TO MAKE A HOTEL FROM THE PROPERTY, OUR BENT COUNCIL CONSENTED, I PREVENTED.

IN 2005, A JAMES CARLYLE RODDICK APPROACHED THE IRISH ALIIED BANK FOR A LOAN TO PURCHASE THE WARREN HOUSE, ASKING £260,000 THE PURCHASE PRICE.

THAT WAS JANUARY OF 2005, IN FEBRUARY OF THAT YEAR, RODDICK APPROACHED THE FIRM OF AUCTIONERS “PUGH & Co FROM PRESTON” TO PUT THE HOUSE AND 5 ACRE’S OF COMMON LAND UP FOR AUCTION.

HE ALSO EMPLOYED AN EQUALY BENT FIRM OF SOLICITORS "LEES, LOYDD WHITELY FROM LIVERPOOL" TO ACT FOR HIM ALSO, WE HAVE SUCH FIRMS IN THE COUNTY, SO WHY GO OUTSIDE THE AREA? THE PLACE OF AUCTION WAS MANCHESTER AIRPORT ON 25-5-05, ASKING PRICE £450,000, LATER THAT DAY I PHONED PUGH’S TO BE TOLD THAT THE LOT HAD REACHED £600,000, THAT STATEMENT CAME FROM THE PA TO PUGH HIMSELF.

I ASKED TO SPEAK TO PUGH SO AS TO HAVE THAT PUT IN WRITING, PUGH CAME TO THE PHONE (HE AND I HAD, HAD STRONG WORDS OVER HIS ACCEPTANCE OF THE ASIGNMENT).

HE DENIED THAT THE SALE HAD GONE THROUGH, AND CLAIMED HIS PA WAS MISTAKEN (LIAR)

STRANGLEY ENOUGH I HAD THE EXACT STATEMENT FROM THE SOLICITORS, SOLD FOR £600,000, SOLICITOR SEWELL, ALSO CLAIMED HIS PA WAS MISTAKEN, NO YOU’RE THE LIAR, I SAID AND A BENT BASTARD ASWELL, HE OBJECTED TO MY MANNER, TAKE ME TO COURT THEN.

THIS NIGHT HOUSE CANNOT BE SOLD, OR LEASED, BUT IT CAN BE DEMOLISHED, AND WITHOUT COMMITTING ANY CRIME.

AS YOU WILL BY NOW GUESSED, THIS PROPERTY IS BEING USED AS COLLATERAL BY PERSONS HIDING IN THE SHADOWS, THE RESIDENT JAMES, IF CONVERSTION EVER WENT THROUGH "EXPECTS A BIG WEDGE".

COUNCILS AND "CONSERVATIONISTS" GET SUCH A BIG WEDGE FROM EQUALY CORRUPT MEMBERS OF NATURAL ENGLAND TO USE COMMON LAND AS COLLATERAL.

YOU MAY NOW WISH TO WRITE DIRECTLY TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THAT QUANGO TO SEE IF HE WILL SUPPORT THE CRIMINAL NE TEAM LEADERS, YOU JUST MIGHT, GET A DIRECT RESPONSE!

There is a very good reason why your local council and other fraudsters do not use local firms, they know the facts and figures on these properties, plus they also will have in mind; G&K Ladenbau ltd-v-Crawley & de Reya (1978) 1WLR 266, it was held that a solicitor who negligently failed to search the registers of common land was liable in damages to a client who suffered financial loss as a result.

IN THE FORE FRONT OF THE PHOTO IS A MOUND OF EARTH, THERE ONCE WAS A GATE BEING ERRECTED THERE TO ENCLOSE THE ACCESS TO COMMON LAND, I OFFERED TO REMOVE IT IF THEY WORK FORCE DID NOT, TO STOP ME, JAMES HAD IT COVERED OVER WITH SOIL, NOW THAT TAKES BRAINS.

I pine for a more sensible approach to saving our forests

Read more here


Email this to a friend !!

Enter recipient's e-mail: