1. I found the Leader’s response quite unacceptable simply because the Planning Inspector’s decision says riders already have rights under the terms of the lease, also HCC have had two years to investigate and produce further paths on a permissive basis, to no avail.

2. 17th September 2007 I write another letter to the Leader and try to be as clear and concise as possible to help him understand the situation. If he does not agree with the decision of the Planning Inspectorate, then surely, they should appeal it so that due process can be followed.
   2007 MC to KT email 17.9.0710022021

3. 10th October 2007 I receive a reply. It says that the Inspector’s decision is only binding in respect of bridleway rights. The terms of the lease and the Inspector’s decision only refer to the existence of permissive access.
   The other points are noted and do not prevent the provision of new access for horse riders where this can be achieved in a manner which is not harmful to the nature conservation value of the land.
   2007 KT to MC email 10.10.0710022021

4. Talking about the nature conservation value of the land where 80 acres has been obliterated by unlawful fencing while changing it into grassland and at least another five acres groomed for a sports field, speaks volumes for the sheer hypocrisy from the people who all taxpayers pay to help look after our environment.

5. 15th October 2007 I reply and address his points directly.
   2007 MC to KT email 15.10.0710022021

6. 1st November 2007 I receive a reply saying the Countryside Service will take this up directly with the owner of the land and if I wish to follow that up, I should contact them.
   2007 KT to MC email 23.10.07 10022021

7. Which of course I did but it wasn’t until 1st January 2013 that the Head of Countryside specifically addressed the matter in an email focusing on another problem. He says that it had been followed up, but as no help would come from either the landowner or Natural England (now English Nature) it seemed an inappropriate time to address the situation.
   2012 Andrew Smith re signs copy

8. It seems therefore that Hampshire County Council does not follow due process or heed the decisions of its own committees or the Planning Inspectorate, in fact it had become a law unto itself.
   
   

Next time: This claim was quickly followed by my next.

All 'TCHCC' Parts so far