Thanks for joining me!
Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton
The Journey Begins
Published
Corruption by Officials in Public Office
Corruption by Officials in Public Office
Thanks for joining me!
Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton
Coffin Dodger 
Thursday, 06 December 2018
Dear Emily d’Albuquerque
I acknowledge and thank you for your six pages back to back notes type letter I received late on Friday 23/11/2018, sent to my home address and not as I would have preferred to this site, WDTK.
To avoid any future misunderstandingscan I request that Land Registry do not send any future F.O.I. Correspondence to my home address but send it to this site-WDTK to ensure all replies to F.O.I. requests are
Prominently Displayed in the Public Domain for all to See
I find your response very interesting it is undoubtedly well written but unfortunately, after such a long period of time trying to get Land Registry Durham to correct their blatant mistakes I am becoming a little cynical- It is Obvious to me that my Allegations of Misconduct are been ignored swept under the Carpet your response contains a Catalogue of Plausible but very important factual errors?
I do not doubt for a moment your Personal Honesty or your Integrity, but I believe you have been Deliberately given False Misleading Untruthful Evidence Simply to Hide the Truth of my allegations of Criminal activity including Misconduct and Property Fraud in Public Office Committed by Officials of LAND REGISTRAR Durham
My FOI request asked specific questions in order to ascertain the truth quickly and effectively-briefly I wished to know what British Laws were consulted that allowed the assistant Land Registrar Durham Alan H Smith
Employed in a Position of Trust and Authority in Public Office of a Government Department Land Registry Durham
To reject as Groundless and Irrelevant My legally authenticated Documentary Evidence of Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute” purchased from Hartlepool Borough Council on the 1st February 1984 of the Total Area of Land and Property including the Dwelling House-the Boundaries and Outbuildings Clearly Edged in RED
on the Land Registry Durham “Official Copy” of the Property Plan M44684 Dated September 1983 Title
“Sale of Council House” -West-View; Hartlepool
Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980in Consideration of £5750.00 Pounds (Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty PoundsRegistered Title CE74844 “Absolute”
He must have known as a Senior Government Official with Legal knowledge of the LAW on Purchase and registration contained in Land Registration Act 1925, Land Registration-Act 2002-Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989-That he was acting unlawfully and Committing Property Fraud intending to Pervert, the Course of Justice when he reject as Groundless and Irrelevant our Legally authenticated Documents of Purchase
BUT Willingly accept as Sufficient evidence of a Previous Purchase of part of our Registered Land and Property Title CE74844 “Absolute” from our Immediate next-door neighbours A General Drawing SP 78985 dated 1971 Showing the Hartlepool Borough Councils West-View Council Housing Estate
It is Unbelievable that a Government Official occupying a Position of Trust and authority in Public Office of a Government Department and a qualified Solicitor to boot. would Considered this MAP of a Council Housing Estate as Sufficient Evidence of Puchase for our immediate neighbours to CHALLENGE the VERACITY of our Legal Purchase of the Ex-Council House West-View Hartlepool from Hartlepool Borough Council
Pursuant the Housing Act 1980on the 1st February 1984 in Consideration of £5750.00 Pounds
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
As a Solicitor and a Senior Land Registry Official Alan H Smith must have Known it was NOT a Receipt of Purchase of Land and Propertyby our Immediate next-door Neighbours from Hartlepool Borough Council in November 1972
His Dishonest Disgraceful Degusting Deceitful Behaviour questions the Legal Competence and Integrity ofALL the Solicitors involved in the Sale and Purchase of the Ex-Council House Land and Property from Hartlepool Borough Council including the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council J. Anthony Brown
Who with Levinson Walker and Lister the “Buyers” Solicitors had Validated the Purchase of the Ex-Council House Land and Property PRIOR to the Exchange of Contracts and PRIOR to the Registration of the Land and Property
Land Title CE74844 “Absolute” with Land Registry on the 29/3/1984
It is my Belief that this class of title “Absolute” will only be granted by Land Registry-IF-when the title is “FIRST” presented for “Registration” in this case 29th March 1984- the person applying for “Registration” (J. Anthony Brown) Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council- the “Sellers” of the Property-can (show an “Unbroken” chain of “Ownership” going back at least- 15 Years-this is evidence Confirming that a search had been undertaken-PRIOR the exchange of contracts- in order to allow time to deal with any issues which may arise-and clearly supports our belief- that NO previous “Conveyance or Purchase” of any part- of our registered freehold property, Land Title CE74844 “Absolute” had previously take place between our immediate neighbours and the Hartlepool Borough Council- in November 1972-As falsely claimed by the assistant-Land Registrar-Alan H Smith- in his letter to us-dated 3rd December 2008-
Its beggar’s belief that someone in a Senior position of trust and authority in Public Office of Land Registry-Durham could allow himself to be party to an obvious fraudulent B141 application-containing a spurious document falsely claiming that they have Title to that piece of land on which they had illegally erected their kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet- extension Without seeking Council Planning Permission- and Causing Serious Structural Damage- to a neighbour’s private property-intending to pervert the course of jusice and by criminal deception avoid the Heavy Financial Cost of Demolition of the Illegal Building
There can be no doubt that the assistant Land Registrar Durham Alan H Smith an experienced Land Registry Official and a Solicitor KNEW he had No Credible Evidence to Justify or Validate his Spurious Letter dated 14th October 2008 to me, saying that Hartlepool Borough Council had made a MISTAKE when we had Purchased our Property- Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute” on the 1st February 1984
It was my belief that Alan H Smith the assistant Land REGISTRAR Durham deliberately designed this letter Intending to Frighten Intimidate Misinform and Deceive the TWO (2)Very Elderly Vulnerable and Disabled Law- Abiding Innocent Tax Payers into Thinking and Believing that they might have done something Criminally Wrong when they had Purchased in all good faith the Ex-Council House Property 48 Ridlington Way West-View Hartlepool on the 1st February 1984 from Hartlepool Borough Council Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration of £5750.00 Pounds(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
Registered Title CE74844! Absolute
His Letter was in my View a Clear Breach of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and the Fraud Act 2006
It is also my belief that “Misconduct” in Public Office is a Common Law Offence: it is not defined in any statute.
It carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment
The offence requires that: a Public Officer acting as such; wilfully neglects to perform his or her duty and/or wilfully misconducts him or herself; to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder; without Reasonable excuse or justification.”
It is also my Understanding after reading your letter that you have found it difficult to locate some all my historical records relating to this matter? A Situation I honestly find unbelievable, as I was under the Impression that Land REGISTRY Durhamwas one (1) of the Main Depositaries of Registered Land and Property Titles in the Country.
I did expect Land Registry Durham would have retained a Copy of the Letter Dated 16th February 1984 issued by Land Registry Durham themselves Containing the “Official Copy” of the Property Plan M44684 Dated September 1983 I have therefore taken the Liberty to attach a Copy for your Attention
Freehold Law was explained to me by my Solicitor “Solomon Levinson” Head of the Local Firm of Solicitors Levinson Walker & Lister of Church Street Hartlepool PRIOR to our Purchase of the Land and Property from Hartlepool Borough Council !
Mr “Solomon Levinson” Explained to me that in Common Law Jurisdictions, a Freehold is the Common Ownership of Real Property or Land, and all immovable structures attached to such land,
When people buy their house “Freehold” they not only own the HOUSE, they also own ALL outbuilding on the land on which the house is built
. Please Note
the Outbuilding (Wash-House) shown on the Land Registry Durham “Official Copy” of the Property Land Plan No. M44 684 dated September 1983 Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute” Shows Cleary it was-Completely Detached from our Immediate neighbour’s Property Ridlington Way West-View Hartlepool
I believe it is also important to note the two (2) Valid Signatures of the Mayor J Jones and the Chief Executive Mr Abrahams of Hartlepool Borough Council and the date 3.11 1974 !
Which Clearly Contradicts Alan H Smith and your Statement that Part of the Detached Wash-House Building had been Purchased Previously by our Immediate Next-Door Neighbours from Hartlepool Borough Council Two (2) years earlier on the 3/11/1972
It is My Understand from my research of the Internet In English Common Law,
A fee simple absolute is the most extensive interestin real property that an individual can possess
It is also my Understanding that this type of estate Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute”
was Created when the Deed of Purchase was Registered
by J Anthony Brown
the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council
with Land Registry Durham on the 29.3.1984.
it is limited Completely to the individual and his or her heirs and assigns forever that the Land is Owned Completely, and it is NOT subject to any limitations or Condition
The Official Copy of the Property Plan No-M44684 dated September 1983
Hookway Adam -Correspondence
& enquiries Team Leader-
Customer Service 19th October 2009.
Head Office- Land Registry-Direct Line 020-7166-4831
Who said if the property is Conveyed and Registered an “Official Copy” of the Register of Title is “ALL” that is needed to prove ownership?
There is Sufficient authentic Documentary Evidence to Prove that our Immediate next-door Neighbours did NOT Purchase any part of the Registered property CE74844 “Absolute”
from Hartlepool Borough Council on the 3/11/1972
Therefore, there could NOT Possibly have been any Details of purchase by our immediate neighbours of Land and Property from Hartlepool Borough Council in 1972 conveyed and transferred by a Conveyance Solicitor to Officials of Land Registry Durham to accurately Record this non-existing Purchase in the Property or Proprietary Registers at Land Registry Durham in November 1972
To Claim ownership of Land and Property without any evidence of Purchase is Deceitful – Dishonest-plain Theft.
My Irrefutable Evidence of Purchase was Confirmed and Validated By Land Registry Durham themselves in their Letter dated 16th February 1984
BUT WAS
Rejected by the assistant Land Registrar Durham Alan H Smith and his Colleague Anthony Lowes
Which Proves that there is Something Radically Dishonest Happening at Land Registry Durham.
Rt. Hon Lord Denning the late Lord Chief Justice said in His Appeal Court Ruling January 12.13.24.1956
was –No Court in this Land will allow a person to keep an advantage, he has Obtained by FRAUD
NO Judgement of a Court, NO order of a Minister can be allowed to stand if it has been Obtained by FRAUD
–FRAUD unravels everything
My original allegations of Misconduct in Public Office by Officials of Land Registry Durham were Investigated by Mrs Dorrington the Land Registry Complaints Reviewer who awarded me a payment of £300.00 pounds and an apology for mistakes made by officials of Land Registry Durham
I Refused to accept the payment of £300.00. Pounds and returned it to Land Registry London
I explained that for me to have accepted the Payment of £300.00 would have indicated that I had accepted that their mistakes and the theft of part of my Registered Land and Property Title CE74844 “Absolute” had been innocently made by Alan H Smith assistant Land Registrar Durham and his Colleague Anthony Lowesthis is Simply NOT True- I maintain there was No Mistake made in the in the Land Register as Claimed by the assistant Land Registrar Durham Alan H Smith
I have enough authentic Compelling evidence of Purchase that Proves I am the Innocent Victim of an Orchestrated SCAM the Theft of Land and Property
Extensive Searches of ALL Previous Ex-Council House Sales by the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Concil
J Anthony Brown have Proven that Hartlepool Borough Council did NOT sell part of our Ex-Council House Property Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute”to our Immediate neighbours in 1972
Therefore, if there was NO purchase of part of our Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute” by our Immediate Neighbours in 1972 from Hartlepool Borough Council -How Could it Possibly have been Conveyed by Solicitors on behalf of our Immediate neighbours for Inclusion in their Land Title DU 37533 at Land Registry Durham
How then Can the Assistant Land Registrar Durham Alan H Smith and our Immediate neighbours claim as they have- that there was a MISTAKE made in the Register at Land Registry Durham.
It Is a Clear Indication of Criminal Deception and Property FRAUD.
Unfortunately, you have Stated that you have Enclosed a Copy of this Supposed Conveyance of the Property in Question in your Letter to me dated 22 November 2018.that was Incorrect! There was NO Copy of ANY description
Enclosed in your letter
If the Non-inclusion of the elusive Supposed Document of previous Purchase and Conveyance of the Property by our Immediate next-door neighbours from Hartlepool Borough Council in November 1972 was an Innocent Oversight on Your Part? Would you be kind enough to send a Copy to me.
I have been attempting for the Past (10) Ten Years to be Shown this Supposed Document of Purchase without SUCCESS I repeat I am the Innocent Vitim of an Orchestrated SCAM by those named Officials employed in Public Office of Land Registry Durham Which I refuse to Withdraw
What Does Land Registry Durham Propose to do about It? Report it the Proper Authorities- the Police? Sue me?
or Continue to Ignore My Allegations of Fraud at Land Registry Durham.
No-0ne in Land Registry can claim in future they were Unaware of my Allegations of Fraud by Officials in Public Office at Land Registry Durham!
Yours Sincerely
Alan Harvey Flounders
LikeLike
“IF YOU FIGHT YOU MIGHT LOSE-BUT IF YOU DON’T FIGHT -YOU WILL ALWAYS LOSE”-
Dear Ms Alexander Hartlepool Borough Council Chief Executive,
Corruption in Labour Controlled Councils particularly in the North East is nothing new-
I have sufficient factual credible evidence of legal purchase in all good faith from Hartlepool Borough Council of my freehold Ex-Council House Land & Property, Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute” available to legally contest & challenge that obvious fabricated false claim- made by Alan H Smith assistant Land Registrar Durham- a government official employed in a public office in his letters to us signed and dated 5th December 2008 that -try and support his misleading spurious statement without any factual evidence to support his ridiculous claim- that a previous conveyance of the property in dispute had taken place between the Mayor Aldermen and Burgesses of Hartlepool Borough Council and Mr/Mrs E Bennison in November 1974 despite repeatedly asking the chief solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council Peter Devlin to re-examine the fraudulent evidence of property ownership said by Hilary Martin the Freedom of Information Officer to have been examined by Hartlepool Council Planning and Legal Officials prior to granting approval- to the legally flawed Retrospective Planning application H/2009/0568-
I am still awaiting a honest reply from Land Registry Durham, to that ?
Can there be anything more contemptuous than the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Town Council Peter Devlin-and my Labour De Brus Ward Councillor-Bob Cooke- trying to wriggle out of their responsibilities by lying through their teeth.
I am still awaiting a honest reply from Peter Devlin.
How can Both those two (2) named scoundrels in Public and Elected office ( there are others) can only continually to lie as blatantly as this only if they obviously know they are doing so with impunity-courtesy of others in senior positions of authority- but obviously no principles?
There are several question worthy of answers on this matter, as a full Council Tax payer I would appreciate your explanation as to why- my legitimate questions as the Registered freehold property owners –I believe I am legally entitled to make- have been deliberately & continuously brushed under the carpet- who decided that this information should be withheld- it is now obvious that everyone here in Hartlepool can safely assume the “Nolan Principles” went out the window a long time back- particularly in this case
P.S.
I have always thought-that if any law abiding tax paying member of the general public- has irrefutable factual evidence -as I have- of financial fraud and misconduct in “Public Office” then the place to report it is to Cleveland Police-which I honestly believe I did-some time ago- also kept fully informed and given a copy of all my evidence of legal purchase- was my Labour Party Parliamentary representative in Westminster Iain Wright. (still awaiting for a reply from him on that) including one from the last Monkey elected Mayor of Hartlepool- Mr Drummond ?
What good did he do? Nothing-Heard he’s got a very good little earner now?
Could be he knows where the bodies are buried?
Further information if needed can be found at alan harvey Flounders aka “Coffin Dodger” https://alanflounders.blogspot.co.uk/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Setting the Records Straight- Remember!!! Once it’s posted online, it’s out there”
“IF YOU FIGHT YOU MIGHT LOSE-BUT IF YOU DON’T FIGHT -YOU WILL ALWAYS LOSE”
BOB CROW-1961-2014-
love him or hate him- his words NOT -mine-I believe were spot on the money-and it fits all occasions-of life- and can never be challenged-
“be honest-isn’t what BOB CROW said 100% True!
Please find a copy of a polite reminder letter I sent to Ministry of Justice on Monday, 5 February 2018
Misconduct in Public Office
Dear Sir,
Lord Chancellor- Secretary of State for Justice-
Dear Sir or Madam-
I AM STILL AWAITING A REPLY TO THE FOLLOWING FORMAL COMPLAINT SENT ON 14th OCTOBER 2016
To: – Rt Hon:-Elizabeth Truss-M.P.@ Parliament.u.k.-
Lord Chancellor &; Secretary of State for Justice (a combined position)
It Is My Understanding Obtained from My Research of the Internet- that the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) is a ministerial department of the UK Government headed by the-Lord Chancellor-and- Secretary of State for Justice (a combined position)
It Is also my-My Understanding that in Accordance to the Land Registration Act 1925, Land Registration-Act 2002-Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act1989- Land Registry’s Only Remit-is to Record All The Information Conveyed To Them By The Solicitors Acting On Behalf Of The Sellers Or Buyers of the Property-Land Registry-Have No Legal Remit-Or Legal Authority Whatsoever-To Alter Any Of The Details Submitted for Registration Of Any-Land /Property Bought Or Sold-By Conveyancing / Solicitors-
“It is therefore vital –in my view-–that the General Public have Confidence in their Public Officials –particularly Land Registry-Durham- and in the legal framework that sets the boundaries of their conduct.
There is urgent need- to ensure that public officials are appropriately held to account for misconduct committed in connection with their official duties-owing to the gravity of my serious allegation- of misconduct in public office-including-conspiracy to pervert the course of justice- by abuse of office-premeditated fraud-as outlined in the Fraud Act 2006-
Having exhausted all the known avenues of Complaint available to me-including the Labour Dominated Hartlepool Borough Council- the Chief Solicitor-of Hartlepool Peter Devlin-who knows of my Concerns of Fraud & Freehold Property Ownership-and refuses to act- my Labour Party Representative in the Palace of Westminster- Iain Wright-who also knows of my Justifiable concerns- but-refuses to reply to my Letters of Protest
I consider these allegations are a grave-serious matter &; should be brought to your- attention-as- the Lord Chancellor-&; Secretary of State for Justice-without further delay-
I am reluctantly left with no alternative but to Summit a Formal Complaint to –you- Lord Chancellor & Secretary of State for Justice-to request you-Commence an in-depth Inquiry into my serious allegations of Gross Criminal Misconduct -Abuse of Position in Public Office-including-Property Fraud & attempting to Perverting the course of Justice, in Public Office of the following named-Land Registry-Durham- Government Officials- Alan H Smith-the assistant Land REGISTRAR- Durham-his colleague-Anthony Lowes-& Andrew Schofield-Office Manager-
Who for the past five years -have pursued & supported-(for reasons best known to themselves-) a ludicrous obvious vicious spurious claim made by a B141 applicants-first made- in October 2008- to alter some of the registered & recorded freehold property details –on the Registered Land Title CE74844 “Absolute” freehold ex council house land and property -we purchased in all good faith- pursuant to the Housing Act 1980- on the 1st February 1984-from Hartlepool Borough Council- in Consideration of £5.750.00 Pounds- (Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds) the RECEIPT acknowledged by Hartlepool Borough Council-& -transferred & registered by the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council- J Anthony Brown on the 29/3/1984-
Despite the above irrefutable documentary evidence as proof-of purchase-& Ownership- beyond any reasonable doubt-they-refuse-to believe-for reasons best known to themselves- but suspected by others-that the B141 application –made in October 2008-
Is a Fraudulent Document-and outside Land Registry’s Remit-?
Is that not a Clear Deliberate Case of Misconduct In Public Office- by Officials- of Land Registry-Durham- to pervert the Course Of Justice-particularly the assistant Land Registrar-Alan H Smith-and his Colleagues-Anthony Lowes- who-it must be remembered-stated-“categorically” in his signed letter dated 5th December 2008-
that a conveyance-of the property in question-had previously-taken place-between our neighbours and the Mayor-Aldermen and Burgesses of the County Borough of Hartlepool in November 1972-
However-the same area of land was-together with other land conveyed to YOU on the 1st February 1984-by Hartlepool Borough Council-as the council had previously Sold Off-the land in November-1972-
it could NOT repeat could NOT-subsequently have included it in a Conveyance to you in 1984- this means that -your immediate neighbours have the better documentary title to the Land than you.
This statement of fact-made by Alan H Smith- assistant Land Registrar-Durham-that- our neighbours -have the better documentary title to the Registered Freehold Land CE 74844 “Absolute” than you- without any substantive documentary evidence-whatsoever-is based on fallacious reasons-a deceptive mistaken and false belief- (Held for personal Reasons) that a Conveyance had previously taken place between our immediate next-door neighbours and the Mayor-Aldermen and Burgees of Hartlepool Borough Council in November 1972-without any substantive- proof whatsoever -it may also-explain and “Question” -(the reasons best known to Alan H Smith- himself-) his Continual Refusal to accept as Proof-of Purchase & Transfer-the-irrefutable- documentary evidence-presented-for inspection-of the Freehold Property-issued by Land Registry-Durham-themselves-dated 16thFebruary 1984- “Confirming”-the Purchased-and Transfer-in all good faith-of the ex-council house freehold land and property-Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute” – pursuant to the Housing Act 1980-in “Consideration” of £5.750.
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
and the receipt-acknowledged by Hartlepool Borough Council-of Civic Centre-Hartlepool-Conveys-:-to Alan Harvey Flounders and his wife-Jacqueline Flounders-on the Pre-Sale of Council House-Title Plan-No.M44684-dated September 1983-the entire total area of land edged in RED-–Purchased-from Hartlepool Borough Council-Hartlepool- on 1st February 1984-bound up within and with the dwelling house- known as number 48 Ridlington Way-Hartlepool-
There is- in my view- Sufficient substantive-evidence to show-that-he Alan H Smith-the assistant Land REGISTRAR- employed in public office of a government department- assisted by his colleague-Anthony Lowes- with the assistance-of the- B141 applicants- and Officials of Hartlepool Borough Council-Planning & Legal Departments-
Peter Devlin- Chief Solicitor-of Hartlepool Borough Council-
Alyson Carman-Solicitor& Complaints reviewer
Hilary Martin-Solicitor and Freedom of Information Officer-
Richard Trow- Project Planning Officer—
Mr Reece-Planning Development-Manager-
Paul Burgon- Enforcement Officer-Collaborated Conspired to Pervert the Course of Justice- including-Criminal Deception-by abuse of Public Office- intending to deprive the legal owners of part of their registered title-by- Fraud as defined in the FRAUD Act. 2006-
(a)
“FRAUD BY FALSE REPRESENTATION” is defined by Section-2-of the Fraud Act-2006- as a case where a person makes “any representation as to fact or law-expressed or implied- which they know to be UNTRUE or MISLEADING-( i.e. Alan H Smith’s -Categorical claim-in his letter to us- signed and dated 5th December 2008- that a Conveyance of the property-had Previously Taken Place between Mr/Mrs Bennison- and the Mayor-Aldermen and Burgesses of the County Borough of Hartlepool-in November 1974)
(b)
“FRAUD BY ABUSE OF POSITION” is defined by Section 4-of the Act-as a case where a person occupies a position- i.e. assistant Land Registrar-Durham -a Public Office-where they are expected- to safeguard the financial interests of another person- and abuses that position- this includes cases where the abuse consisted of an omission- rather than an overt act—In all classes of Fraud-it requires that for an offence to have occurred-the person must have acted dishonestly- and that they acted- with the intent of making a gain for themselves-or anyone else- i.e. Mr/Mrs Bennison-or inflicting a loss-or risk of loss-on another-i.e.-us- the Registered Legal owners of the property-Alan Harvey Flounders and his Wife-Jacqueline Flounders
The HM Land Registry Adjudicator was established under the Land Registration Act 2002. The HM Land Registry Adjudicator resolves disputes about registered land by considering references from HM Land Registry following applications made to the HM Land Registry by members of the public- my question is as follows-
How can this be right- when the Officials-complained about-particularly the assistant land REGISTRAR- Alan H Smith- are themselves-employed in Land Registry-Durham- does anyone seriously believe they will report themselves for misconduct in Public Office-
There are many different and varied applications that may be made under the rules but the most common matters referred to the HM Land Registry Adjudicator are disputes about boundaries; easements or restrictive covenants; beneficial ownership of land; and, adverse possession claims.
The varied provisions of the Land Registration Rules 2003 deal with each different application. These Rules must be consulted prior to any application.
The formal procedure before the HM Land Registry Adjudicator is set out within the Adjudicator to HM Land Registry (Practice and Procedure) Rules 2003 as amended by the 2008 Rules.
Any hearing will be as local to the dispute as possible, normally at the tribunal centre closest to hand. A site visit will normally be held before the hearing.
The hearings are adversarial, and decisions will normally be reserved and handed down in writing within 28 days.
The HM Land Registry Adjudicator has the power to award costs in essentially the same way as under normal civil litigation. Any appeal from any decision of the HM Land Registry Adjudicator is to the Chancery Division of the High Court Permission to appeal is required from either the HM Land Registry Adjudicator or the High Court.!
Judicial Review of a decision to grant, grant subject to conditions, or refuse planning permission is an alternative to the statutory review available under s.288 of the 1990 Act (which can only be pursued if the applicant appeals to the Secretary of State as a preliminary step).
The procedure is open to any third party of sufficient standing but the first stage of applying for leave to apply for judicial review acts as a filter to prevent unmeritorious applications.
The application for leave is made ex parte and allows the applicant to establish whether or not there is an arguable case without incurring excessive liability for costs.
An applicant has to have a ‘sufficient interest” in the matter to which the application relates’
I believe as the Registered Purchasers of the Freehold Land & Property –CE74844 “Absolute” purchased in all good faith- pursuant to the Housing Act 1980- on the 1st February 1984-from Hartlepool Borough Council- in consideration of £5.750.00 Pounds- (Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
Plus the RECEIPT acknowledged by Hartlepool Borough Council-& Transferred & Registered by the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council- J. Anthony Brown- on the 29/3/1984- gives us sufficient interest” in the matter.
Yours Sincerely
Alan Harvey Flounders
CC.
Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government-Rt Hon Greg Clark MP-
Email: gregclarkmp@parliament.uk
Iain Wright-Labour -Member of Parliament for Hartlepool-
Peter Devlin-Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Council-
F.V. Clough-Land Registry-Durham-
LikeLiked by 1 person
A COUNCIL PLANNING ENFORCEMENT-OFFICER-CALLS
This is NOT a Victimless Crime!
The truth like fraud-will always out, it has NO sell by date-
Without prejudice-!
It’s important to remember and I again repeat-if ANY of the named Hartlepool Council or Durham-Land Registry Officials- wish to Deny or Challenge the truthfulness of any of my allegations
which I refuse to withdraw-on the grounds that they are factually-correct- please- do so- and sue me, in a Court of Law-where PERJURY- is still I believe a Criminal Offence-
Still awaiting a meaningful truthful answer to my valid questions-in an Original letter–sent-to Peter Devlin- Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Council-on-Wednesday, 09 September 2015,
His previous reply was an oily, evasive answer to avoided the point completely, He said our complaints had been investigated previously- this was not entirely true-it was another deceitful misleading smoke and mirrors reply to avoid admitting that my serious complaints of Hartlepool Council-Legal and planning corruption and misconduct—by Officials in Public Office- supported with irrefutable documentary evidence -were in fact valid-
I can only assume- that Peter Devlin-the Chief Solicitor-of Hartlepool Borough Council- of Hartlepool- was referring to the farcical home visit–made- by Paul-Burgon- Hartlepool Council’s Enforcement Officer to our home on Wednesday 18th March 2009! – –
Here- for the record- are my notes- I-made and kept-on the evening-of Wednesday 18th March 2009-following-the farcical home visit made earlier in the day by Paul-Burgon- Hartlepool Council’s Enforcement Officer-supposedly to Discuss & investigate our Serious long standing Complaints of Criminal Damage to our freehold Property & our Continued Serious Objections to our immediate next door Neighbours unlawful and illegal Planning Application H/2008/0467- later to be changed to Retrospective Planning Application H/2009/0568. submitted to Hartlepool Planning authority in August 2008-
It should be remembered that we protested on lawful grounds- that- both planning application were legally flawed-they contained fraudulent ownership certificates A.B.C.D. falsely claiming part ownership of the Registered -Freehold Land and Property CE74844 Title “Absolute”
a very clear and obvious attempt by the Planning applicants-to Mislead and Deceive the Hartlepool Planning authorities- by Dishonestly laying claim to Property already built on- but NOT-in our immediate neighbours Registered Land Title-
In a reply to a Freedom of Information request to the Minister for Local Government Eric Pickles,
Under sections 65 (5) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990-Ownership Certificates are a Statutory Requirement for all planning applicants- section 65(6) states it is an Offence to Wilfully Submit a Planning application knowing it Contained Fraudulent or Misleading-Ownership Certificates A.B.C.D. to gain by Criminal Deception an advantage
-source the Office of the R.H. Eric Pickles M.P. Minister for Local Government Eric Pickles,
I believe that we have enough Irrefutable evidence plus the receipt of Payment- to prove that we legitimately purchased –in all good faith- from Hartlepool Borough Council-the Ex Council House-
48 Ridlington Way- Hartlepool on 1st February 1984-
Pursuant to the Housing Act 1990 in Consideration of (£5,750)-
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Pounds)
PETER DEVLIN- the present Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council- and other Hartlepool Council Officials
I have named- knew who the true owners of the property were –
as would be expected of the Original Owners and SELLERS and Mortgage Providers of the ex-Council House Property 48 Ridlington Way-West-View Hartlepool-Registered Land Title CE74844 “Absolute”
There is no doubt in my mind- that the arranged home visit by Paul Burgon -Hartlepool Council’s Enforcement Officer- was nothing more than a well-rehearsed Pantomime a Charade-a Complete Farce-
something done just for show -simply to create a pleasant or respectable impression for the benefit of our Local elected- Councillors- and to Deliberately Intimidate-Frighten Mislead-Misinform and Deceive the two elderly disabled -law-abiding- innocent owners of the freehold property into believing their protests were of little importance and their allegations of criminal misconduct in Public Office- were being ignored as Irrelevant
by some Hartlepool Planning Officials as were my Criminal allegations of Property theft by our immediate next-door neighbours and their failure to comply with sections 65 (5) under the Town and Country Planning Act
According Paul Burgon – Hartlepool Council’s Enforcement Officer our immediate neighbours illegal Kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet extension were immune from enforcement because of the 4 years rule! in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990!
People need to remember that if one person manages to circumnavigate the Planning regulations by Deception intending to obtain planning permission, simply because they have numerous friends in high places, doesn’t means it’s right.
One example was the idiotic-Stupid legal interpretation of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 by the Hartlepool Borough Council’s
“Enforcement Officer” Paul Burgon on his visit to our home on Wednesday 18th March 2009! –
Ostensibly to investigate our formal complaints that our immediate neighbours had erected a Large Conservatory- kitchen and taxi drivers toilet extension & attached it to the Rear Wall of our Detached Wash-House Outbuildings Causing Severe Structural Damage and Completely Blocking Off- the Gas Exhaust Ducts Positioned High in the Rear Wall of the Detached Wash-House Preventing the Safe Escape of any Highly Explosive Gasses Collected from the Internal Gas Heated Hot Water Boiler to the Outside Atmosphere
CANNOT be enforced against- our immediate next-door neighbours because of the 4-year rule- in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990!
and OUR failure to Object to the erection of the Large Conservatory- kitchen and taxi drivers toilet extension to Hartlepool Borough Council-
The reason given by Paul Burgon Hartlepool Council’s –“Enforcement Officer” that it was OUR fault our immediate neighbours had been allowed to build their Large Conservatory-Taxi-Drivers Toilet and kitchen extension and attached it to our property was simply because we did not complain –
Sounds an absolute ridiculous- statement to make-HOW could we be held accountable for our neighbours Criminal Activities-
HOW were we to object to a Proposed Planning Application by our immediate next -door neighbours to build a Large Conservatory Kitchen and Taxi Drivers Toilet Extension to Hartlepool Borough Council Planning authority when they our immediate next -door neighbours had NOT Sought Planning Permission or Approval from the Hartlepool Planning authorities
who themselves were completely unaware not having received a Planning application from our Immediate neighbours that they intended to build a large
Conservatory – Kitchen and Taxi Drivers Toilet Extension
Surely any building erected without first seeking Hartlepool Council Planning Permission-resulting in Serious Structural Damage to a neighbour’s Freehold property MUST be Considered Unlawful & Cannot be given IMMUNITY from ENFORCEMENT because of the 4-year rule- in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990!
as Emphatically claimed by Paul Burgon the Hartlepool Borough Council’s Enforcement Officer!
What we are dealing with here is yet another example of the Golden Rule- that if you give anyone a modicum of authority,
they will always, always, abuse it-
first, they think-they are above the law- I am untouchable
-next they believe, and think-they can walk on water-
their Arrogance is Unbelievable-
to give anyone who has never experienced a home visit- from a council official- here-is my personal experiences of a home visit- supposedly sent by my Local Labour- Councillor-
to investigate my valid but disputed claims of council planning misconduct by- Paul Burgon-
the Hartlepool Council’s Planning- enforcement officer-
I personally- found him-to be- the most arrogant and self-opinionated-of all the Hartlepool Council- visitors-
My advice-is quite simple- he should be avoided like-the plague-!
PAUL BURGONS HOME VISIT!
• On Wednesday 18thMarch 2009 at approximately 11.00 a.m.
I was visited at Home by Mr Paul Burgon who claimed to be the Enforcement Officer of Hartlepool Borough Council-
sent to discuss – my Complaints of Council Misconduct in Public Office- and Objections to the possible Granting of a Certificate of Lawfulness to planning Application H/2008/0467 later to be changed after my Consistent Objections- to Retrospective Planning Application H/2009/0568 submitted by our next -door Neighbours,
This was our very first meeting with Mr Paul Burgon Hartlepool Borough Councils enforcement Officer-
Naturally- he was invited into our home-and he immediately asked for & was Given Permission to Inspect & Photograph the Criminal Damage we had previously reported to have been done by the Cowboy Builders -when working for our next -door neighbours –
to our Outside Detached Wash-House Building
Paul Burgon- immediately Commenced to take a number of Photographs of the structural damage-done-which was and still is-clearly visible-to this day-such as the section of the unfinished Conservatory kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet extension attached to the Rear Wall of the Detached Wash-House Building-
Completely Blocking off -the External Gas Escape Ducts Effectively Preventing the Essential Escape to the Outside Atmosphere of any TOXIC and HIGHLY EXPLOSIVE GASSES- Collected from the Internal Gas Heated Hot Water Boiler
this photograph below of the ugly carbuncle of an unfinished Conservatory Kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet extension- Showing it attached to the rear wall of our Detached Wash- House-may better highlight and explain our concerns-
– •—HOW could this Carbuncle of a Conservatory Kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet Extension Erected WITHOUT Seeking Hartlepool Councils Planning Permission be Given Retrospective Planning Approval by Hartlepool Borough Council.
Was it also given a Completion Certificate Conforming with building and Safety Regulations! I doubt it-
There is a Powerful Stink of Corruption here-=Remember the Planning Applicants have a Long History of Receiving Favourable and Preferential Treatment-in the past- from Hartlepool Borough Council-
• After spending some Considerable time taking external photographs-e.g. the Deliberate moving of the wall cladding- the extending of the roof guttering and the amateur bricklaying- to increasing the Height of the Brickwork- Separating the TWO Property’s by some Two feet ( 2) which can-still- be clearly seen in the Top Right Hand Corner of the above photograph- when Mr Paul Burgon Hartlepool Borough Councils enforcement Officer said- to our utter amazement– He could see nothing wrong-with our next door neighbours unfinished extension attached –as you can clearly see-to-the Rear Wall- of our Detached Wash-House – Completely-Blocking Off-the Gas Escape Ventilation- Ducts- Deliberately Positioned High in the Rear Wall of the Detached Wash-House-
by the Original House Builder-to allow-the SAFE-UNINTERRUPTED ESCAPE to the Outside Atmosphere-of the possible build up- of any Dangerous-Toxic or Highly Explosive Gasses- collected-from the internal Gas Heated Hot Water Boiler-
Mr Paul Burgon Hartlepool Borough Councils enforcement Officer thought it was perfectly Safe-and did NOT require Council Planning Permission –
Any damage done to the Detached- Wash-House building-shown-in the above– photograph- was a CIVIL MATTER-Absolutely Nothing to do with Hartlepool Council
If I wanted to take the matter further, I should see a Solicitor-?
• The above response and aggressive attitude however, from- Paul Burgon- Hartlepool Borough Councils enforcement Officer astonished me; it -wasn’t what I would have expected from him-a Hartlepool Council Official—in Public Office.
To say-I was shocked would be an understatement-
I was Naturally Stunned- Speechless- Devastated-HOW I eventually asked could anyone with ANY experience of Planning-Building or Construction Work-
Completely Dismiss and Totally ignore- the many beaches of Building and Safety Regulations- Clearly Visible to the Naked Eye-
Particularly the 4” Brass Screws Protruding Dangerously through the Rear Wall of the Detached Wash-House-from our next-door neighbours unfinished Conservatory Kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet Extension as irrelevant—
To further EXACERBATE the Problems-He claimed -that the Deliberate and Dangerous Blocking Off- Completely of the GAS ESCAPE VENTILATION DUCTS Positioned High in the Rear Wall of the Detached Wash-House- Preventing the SAFE Uninterrupted Escape to the Outside Atmosphere of any TOXIC or Highly Explosive Gasses from the Static Internal Gas fuelled Hot Water Boiler-was NOT- itself a Highly Dangerous and Life Threatening Situation- but- was – Perfectly Legal and Completely SAFE –
was to me- a Retired Qualified Construction Safety Engineer an Absolutely- Stupid Ridiculous- Assessment of a Possible Serious and Highly Explosive Situation!
It certainly warranted- in my opinion at least-a fire and Gas explosive risk assessment-
• His attitude-was anything but friendly-It was quite obvious-to me by this time-that Paul Burgon-was getting annoyed- very annoyed-indeed with me-in particular- he certainly- made no attempt to hide his Displeasure-he instantly took umbrage at my Continued questions-
He was certainly unwilling or unable to explain to me when I asked,
WHY our next door neighbours-DID NOT Require Council Planning Permission to erect her ugly Conservatory -Kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet Extension and attach it –to the Rear Wall of our Detached Wash House-Building- Causing Serious Structural Criminal Damage-to our Registered Freehold Property- and the Possible Life Threatening Consequence-of a FIRE or EXPLOSION- by the Deliberate Blocking Of the Essential Gas Escape Ventilation Ducts- Preventing the Safe Escape to the Outside atmosphere of Any Collected Gasses from the Static Internal Gas Heated Hot Water Boiler positioned in the Detached Wash-House Building !
all he would say- was it’s a CIVIL MATTER- it’s a CIVIL MATTER –
See a SOLICITOR-
• Paul Burgon gave the Distinct impression-to both my wife and I- that – he Resented anyone who Dared to Disagree with him,
he certainly had a Very High Opinion of his own Importance-especially his knowledge of the LAW –both CIVIL and CRIMINAL –
I began to suspect that Paul Burgon-was under Strict Instructions from Higher Placed Hartlepool Council Officials to Reject ANYTHING & EVERYTHING we might say-I thought –
that-his mind was already made up-or had been made up for him-
Prior to his visit to our Home-
There can be little doubt- that he tried- Deliberately and Desperately to give us the Impression that he had Extensive Legal Knowledge-
for he Continued to refer-to the damage- done- to our freehold property as a CIVIL MATTER- not a CRIMINAL MATTER-
Then he- Suddenly Introduced the (4) Four Year Rule into the Conversation- it’s the (4) Four Year Rule! – It’s the Law-!
It’s the (4) Four Year Rule!
There’s NOTHING you or Hartlepool Council can do about it-!
• It sounded as though he had just suddenly remembered this Carefully Rehearsed Stock answer to be given to any difficult –awkward questions- that may be asked by an innocent- elderly concerned citizen- when objecting to an unlawful Controversial Planning application being possibly-granted a Certificate of Lawfulness-and possible Retrospective Planning Permission for an erected extension illegally built on private-property-? NOT in the ownership of the planning applicants Title,
and Causing Serious Structural Damage to a Neighbour’s Property.
Surely that can’t be right- rewarding a Dishonest Deceitful neighbour with part ownership of freehold Land and property-they had NEVER purchased
-What law says Hartlepool Council Planning Authority can do that?
• I was later to discover that Paul Burgon- had overrated his own Legal Knowledge particularly-his definition-of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990-
He should have known- as a Professional Planning Enforcement Officer- Employed in Public Office by Hartlepool Borough
Sections 65(5) and 65(6) of-the-Town and Country Planning Act 1990-Anyone applying for Planning Approval-Requires the Completion of Ownership Certificates- A-B-C-D- which are a Statutory Requirement
•source- the answer to a Freedom of Information-request-I made to – the office of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government- Rt.Hon. Eric Pickles M.P.
• Additional information obtain after Paul Burgon Home Visit on Wednesday 18thMarch 2009-is the following-
• Updated on the 8th September 2011-
• The following answer given by David Cameron (British Conservative Prime Minister- Member of Parliament for Witney-) in Parliamentary Questions 7th September 2011-
• “What I say is that it is a basic issue of fairness, everyone in this country has to obey the law, including the law about planning permission “Where this is been done without permission it is an Illegal development?
• By this time-the answers-from – Paul Burgon- were beginning to sound- both frivolous and absurd- farcical-in fact- he continued with his idiotic claim, that all the Criminal Damage done- to our- Property- clearly visible-was a CIVIL matter- not CRIMINAL-
This legal Gibberish -this Absolute Legal–Nonsense -was obviously for our benefit- to try and Frighten and Intimidate us.
.
He-further Compounded the issue-when he added -that we ourselves were partly to blame-
as we had “NOT” lodged- in the past 4 years any formal Objections to our next-door neighbours Original Planning Application to Hartlepool Council-
to build their still unfinished Conservatory kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet extension & it was therefore according to Paul Burgon- legal interpretation-
Legally Excluded from ANY Enforcement Regulation of Hartlepool Borough Council, because of the four (4) year rule-of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
• Paul Burgon Emphasized Once Again-That There Was NOTHING Hartlepool Council Or I Could Do About It -BUT -If I Wished To Continue With My Protests/ Objections-I Should Seek Further Legal Advice From A Solicitor-
• I found- it totally Unbelievable that Paul Burgon employed by Hartlepool Borough Council in their planning department- as their Enforcement Officer-should have been- sent to our home-by Hartlepool Council-after another complaint to my Labour Party Ward Councillor- Sheila Griffin- with specific instructions to investigate our long-standing serious allegation-of Planning Misconduct- was he Claimed to be Totally and Completely Unaware that this unfinished Conservatory kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet- extension-had been originally- erected by our Immediate next-door neighbours without seeking Planning Approval from Hartlepool Council- -was therefore an unlawful development-
He should have known- in his Professional Position in Public Office as Enforcement Officer for Hartlepool Council- Planning authority-that the Hartlepool planning authorities- had themselves been totally and Deliberately Deceived by the Retrospective Planning applicants- H/2009/0568! If as they Claimed they were totally
-for Paul Burgon-to blame us –the innocent next-door neighbours –and to support the Retrospective Planning applicants- wrongdoings- is completely unacceptable-
• To say-that the ugly carbuncle of the unfinished-illegal building- now attached to the rear wall of our Detached Outside Wash-House as can be clearly be seen in the photograph above causing severe property damage- built on land they NEVER-legally purchased-was perfectly legal and did- not requiring Council Planning permission- therefore it-was immune from any legal enforcement by Hartlepool Council- it is legally protected & cannot be enforce against- because of the “Four (4) year Rule” of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 –
• This was NO innocent mistake-it was a well thought out- sophisticated conspiracy- fully intending to gain by criminal deception- a certificate of lawfulness-for registered freehold property CE74844 “Absolute” NOT in the ownership of the Retrospective Planning Applicants- H/2009/0568- when submitting their planning applicant containing fraudulent claims of property ownership certificates-A.B.C.D. should disqualify the planning applicants- from claiming immunity from enforcement -under the 4 year rule-of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990-
• The Hartlepool Council Officials-in both the Legal and Planning-departments- also knew WHO were the true and legal- owners of the freehold property-because Hartlepool Council- were the Previous owners & Sellers- of the freehold property CE74844 “Absolute” on which- the Retrospective Planners- H/2009/0568-had built their illegal structure-yet remained silent- a gross breach of their positions of trust- clearly-Misconduct In Public Office! Fraud- Conspiracy to pervert The Course of Justice!
• WE the immediate next door- neighbours –the innocent victims of our next door- neighbours- deceitful criminal building activities-had NEVER repeat NEVER been given the opportunity to lodge a formal objection to the unfinished Conservatory kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet extension to Hartlepool Council planning authority-HOW- I asked Paul Burgon- under those circumstances-could we-be held responsible-for the deceitful and dishonest criminal action of our immediate next door neighbours-?
It could be clearly seen that Paul Burgon -DID NOT appreciate being Challenged or Contradicted- on any of his ridiculous idiotic answers- he appeared to be completely out of his depth-
At this point I believe Paul Burgon’s realized he had made yet another mistake- he appeared to be on the point of losing his Temper and Self-control Completely-
(my Wife’s Comment latter was he looked as though he was Going to Spit Out his Dummy)
His attitude was very Intimidating He threatened verbally -to leave our home immediately- and made towards the Front Door!
A very clear indication to both my Wife & I -that what had been a very-Disagreeable-Unfriendly & totally Unsatisfactory Investigation into our Genuine Serious long-standing Objections and Complaints of Council Planning Misconduct was OVER- FINISHED-
I thought it prudent- and safer- not to exacerbate the growing moodiness of his bad temper by asking-any further questions-so I said Nothing-!
Just before Mr Paul Burgon reach the front door to leave-
he appeared to suddenly have regained some of His Composure!
He most certainly hesitated & it appeared-he had second thoughts on leaving! Because -he suddenly turned around and re-joined my wife & I in our front room!
I think he suddenly- realized –he had gone over the top-his conduct had been totally unacceptable -certainly not what one would normally expect from a council official-he had not been physically violent or threatening-but his whole attitude throughout-his home visit- had been very hostile- certainly arrogant-and Intimidating
Foolishly -Still thinking at that time that Paul Burgon had some real Authority-I Reminded-him- that our serious Concerns of Property Damage and Our Legal Title to the Freehold Registered Estate- CE74844 “Absolute” had been known to Richard Trow, the project Planning Officer & Self-confessed-draughtsman- for the Retrospective Planning Application H/2009/0568- since our first meeting in Bryan Hanson House-in August 2008-
Had also been discussed at length with him by Independent Councillor “Michelle Anne Plant” In September and again-in October 2008!
-I politely Invited him to examine our “Official Copy” of the Original Land Title Deeds CE74844 “Absolute” Registered at Land Registry Durham- on the 29th 3 1984 .by J Anthony Brown Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council-
including-the Transfer Certificate –pursuant to the Housing Act 1980- stating that- in Consideration of -(£5750.00)-
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
Hartlepool Borough Council-conveys to ALAN HARVEY FLOUNDERS and JACQUELINE FLOUNDERS- his WIFE both of 48 Ridlington Way- Hartlepool-the Total Area of Land Shown and edged in RED –on the “Official Copy” of the Title Plan M44684 dated September 1983 bound up within & with the DWELLING HOUSE-and other BUILDINGS-
(a clear reference to the outside detached Wash-House) thereon known as number 48 Ridlington Way- Hartlepool-)
After inspecting the above- Bone-Fide Legal Documents as Indisputable Proof of Purchase and Legal-Registered Land Title-CE74844 “Absolute” Paul Burgon- appeared to be lost for words-he was uncertain of what to Say or Do Next- and started once more-to leave our home-
Just before Paul Burgon eventually left- our home-I reminded him- that Alyson Carman-Town Solicitor & Complaints Reviewer was also Fully Aware of the True Legal Owners of the Registered Land & Property-CE74844 “Absolute” but had also- chosen –for reasons unknown -to remain silent-on this serious financial issue.!
It should be also remembered -She Alyson Carman-Town Solicitor & Complaints Reviewer had personally requested & had been given by myself an “Official Copy” of the Original Land Title Deeds CE74844 “Absolute” Conveyed Registered -Filed & Recorded in both the Property & Proprietorship Registers at Land Registry Durham-on the 29th 3- 1984 by the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council-
J Anthony Brown-
and a copy of other documents- of purchase -which stated quite clearly that “Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980
-in Consideration of £5750.00 Pounds
Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds
the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged by Hartlepool Borough Council who hereby –conveys-to –ALAN HARVEY FLOUNDERS and JACQUELINE FLOUNDERS—his-WIFE- the Total Area of Land Shown and Edged in RED –on the “Official Copy” of the Title Plan- M44684 Dated September 1983 Bound up within and with the Dwelling House and Other Buildings-thereon known as 48 Ridlington Way-Hartlepool at a Meeting held in Hartlepool Borough Council Offices in December2008 –
Indisputable evidence and undeniable proof- that she- Alyson Carman-Town Solicitor & Complaints Reviewer
also-knew- that the Retrospective Planning Applicants H/2009/0568- were NOT & NEVER had been- the legal owners of the Property Previously and Unlawfully built-
on who were now deceitfully seeking- by submitting fraudulent ownership certificates A.B.C.D. a Statutory Requirement-to obtain by Criminal Deception- from Hartlepool Borough Council a Certificate of lawfulness-and Retrospective planning permission-therefore -by remaining silent-she Alyson Carman-
Town Solicitor & Complaints Reviewer is guilty of serious Misconduct -in Public Office
Yours Sincerely
Alan Harvey Flounders
LikeLiked by 1 person
Alan Harvey Flounders
48 Ridlington Way, West-View
Hartlepool
Land Registry Durham
24th October 2008.
Dear Sir,
Update and Clarification to me letter of Protest sent yesterday the 23rd October 2008
In which I strongly Object to any attempt to alter the details in the Land Register Title CE74844 “Absolute” on the grounds that the property and land we had purchased all good faith and transferred from Hartlepool Borough Council on the 1st February 1984 to ALAN HARVEY FLOUNDERS and His Wife JACQUELINE FLOUNDERS Clearly Shown Edged in RED on the “OFFICIAL COPY” of the Pre-Sale Property Plan-M 44684-dated September 1983-Title “Sale of Council House”
48 Ridlington Way West-View Hartlepool
Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration
of £5,750 Pounds
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
I was also Informed by my Solicitor Mr Solomon Levinson that all the outbuildings inside the Boundary lines clearly shown edged in RED on the Property Plan M44684 dated September 1983, were my responsibility and legally ours,
Mr Solomon Levinson Senior Solicitor of the law firm Levinson Walker and Lister further explained the significance of “freehold”
When people buy their house, “freehold” they not only own the house, they also own the land on which the house is built.
He also explained that Under English Law-
No Two People can own the Same piece of Registered Freehold Land
See attached “Official Copy” from Land Registry Durham of Property Plan M44684 Dated September 1983 -Title “Sale of Council House” 48 Ridlington Way, West-view Hartlepool
Please Note the Boundaries of the Estate including the “Outbuildings” edged in RED were Confirmed by the Mayor J. Jones and the Chief Executive of Hartlepool Borough Council Mr. N.J. Abrahams and dated 3/11/197
My Research in the Public Domain (Internet) has revealed some very interesting facts: – I have discovered for Instance that; –
There are three kinds of freehold estates:
Fee Simple Absolute
In English common law, A fee simple absolute is the most extensive interest in real property that an individual can possess this type of estate is generally created when a Deed of Purchase is Registered by Solicitors with Land Registry, it is limited completely to the individual and his or her heirs and assigns forever that the Land is owned completely,
and it is NOT subject to any limitations or conditions my Solicitor Mr Solomon LEVINSON -Senior Partner in the Local LAW Firm
LEVINSON WALKER and LISTER of Church Street Hartlepool—
Had Explained to us that the Whole of the Detached Wash-House Building was Included in our Freehold Property. when I had asked him when arranging the Property Purchase of 48 Ridlington Way West-View from Hartlepool Borough Council on the 1St February 1984 in Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration od £5750.00 Pounds
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
PRIOR to the Exchange of Contracts.
I have already provided you with irrefutable written evidence of the Purchase of our Ex-Council House 48 Ridlington Way-West-View from Hartlepool Borough Council on the 1st February 1985 Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration of £5750.00 pounds
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
The purchase -transfer and registration of any part of our land and property Title CE74844 “Absolute” from Hartlepool Borough Council as claimed to our immediate neighbours Mr and Mrs E Bennison the original B141 applicants was proved to be a fabrication the fact is it never happened.
Here attached is the “Official Copy” of the Property Plan M44684-dated September 1983.
Title “Sale of Council House” 48 Ridlington Way, West-view Hartlepool
Hope this Finally Clarifies the Position and Proves that our Immediate Next-Door Neighbours Mr and Mrs E Bennison B141 Claim of a Previous Purchase is FRAUDULENT.
Yours Sincerely
Alan Harvey Flounders
LikeLike
Echo’s of Past Misconduct by some Members of the Palace of Westminster
Friday, 22 July 2016
Definition- of -a Hypocrite-a pretence of having a virtuous character, moral- socialist beliefs principles, etc., that he does not really possess.
There was a report broadcast on T.V. to-day- highlighting the activities of the Hartlepool Member of Parliament-Iain Wright-criticizing the Scandalous Disgraceful behaviour of Mike Ashley-owner of the sports firm-and also owner of Newcastle Football Club-
Whether Mike Ashley is a Complete scoundrel I know Not- what I do know is that Iain Wright- the Labour Party Representative in the Palace of Westminster for the People of Hartlepool -is a complete “Hypercritic”
Who- in my view- and I believe many others- will do anything to gain public support- give interviews- make silly comments-anything- but what he is paid to do- represent his own town constituents-
Most people will find it difficult to believe that- Members of Parliament and Town Councillors need NO qualifications whatsoever- NO basic educational or even any work experience-and many don’t have any skills that would help them to do their job, what many Hartlepool Labour Councillors do possess in abundance, is a nasty arrogant attitude, they actually seriously think that they are doing a good job-and honestly believe they can do no wrong?
The latest episode of stupidity is the announced demolition of the Jackson Landing-
Most if not all will certainly not admit to any mistakes- some will blatantly Lie- that they never said this or never said that- despite overwhelming evidence of their dishonest and outrageous comments-exist- it was NOT -my fault, is their cry,
What is even more alarming is that they have the audacity to pass the buck, deny all and any involvement – in any controversial issue- even to delegate their functions- to even less qualified and experienced Council Staff, if that scenario is at all possible- an example is the Council Planning Committee- who do this often, particularly whenever any Controversial Planning application are submitted under the counter- for a consideration –of course- such as my Objection- to- Retrospective Planning Application H/2009/0568.-
Despite our objection it was illegally built on our property- causing serious damage to our property- they hadn’t even applied for planning consent for their Conservatory kitchen and Taxi Drivers toilet extension-BUT having influential friends in the know- where granted Retrospective Planning- Permission-they even tried with the help of the assistant Land Registrar Durham to alter our registered details of freehold property ownership- Title CE74844 “Absolute”
by submitting a B141 application to Land Registry-Durham-
Despite having no credible documentary evidence- or proof of purchase of the freehold property built on-
whereas we have irrefutable documentary evidence of purchase-in all good faith- of the ex-council house freehold property-Title-CE74844 “Absolute” we purchased-from Hartlepool Borough Council-on the 1st February 1984-pursuant to the Housing act 1980-in consideration of £5.750.00-Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds—
the Receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged by- HARTLEPOOL BOROUGH COUNCIL of Civic Centre Hartlepool-in the County of Cleveland (hereinafter called
“the Transferor”) as beneficial owner hereby CONVEY to ALAN HARVEY FLOUNDERS & JACQUELINE FLOUNDERS-his-WIFE-both of 48-Ridlington Way-
Hartlepool- aforesaid-(hereinafter called “the Transferee”) the Land-purchased- shown and edged in RED-on the title plan-number M44,684- dated –September 1983-bound-up-within-and with-the DWELLING-HOUSE-and Other Buildings-thereon known as Number 48 Ridlington Way-Hartlepool- the estate was -Conveyed, Transferred-Registered & Recorded in both the Property Register & the Proprietorship Register of the Land Title Register- by J Anthony Brown Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council-on behalf of the Sellers of the Freehold Property-on the 29th 3.1984
-Irrefutable -Unchallengeable-Documentary Evidence of legal Purchase & Ownership- BUT-completely ignored by Hartlepool Borough Council Planning and Legal Officials-
What a cop-out- what intellectual cowardice, too: afraid to investigate allegations of Misconduct in public office- of Council Officials.
“This thing could not have occurred – without the Connivance and Collusion of Paid Officials in Hartlepool Borough Council i.e. the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council Peter Devlin and the Connivance and Collusion of Officials in the Land Registry Durham-
LikeLike
History of the Labour Party in North East England!
Andrew Cunningham
Andrew Cunningham, was the most powerful man in the North-East of England until he was jailed in 1974 for his part in the “web of corruption” operated by the architect John Poulson and Newcastle’s “city boss” T Dan Smith.
Cunningham and his wife, May, outside their home in 1969 Photo: NORTH NEWS & PICTURES
5:08PM BST 28 Oct 2010
In return for holidays from Poulson and a sinecure for his wife, Cunningham steered contracts the architect’s way from the many public bodies he chaired and from Labour councils he could influence.
With prime minister Harold Wilson in 1967
As regional secretary of the General and Municipal Workers’ Union (now GMB) representing 100,000 members, Andy Cunningham exerted immense power and patronage through the union – and the Labour Party, as its regional chairman and a Right-wing member of its National Executive Committee (NEC).
A Durham county alderman and chairman of Felling council (later a Chester-le-Street councillor), Cunningham became an autocratic chairman of Durham Police Authority, the Northumbrian River Authority, Tyneside Passenger Transport Authority and the North-East Regional Airport Committee, and Poulson reaped the benefits of his power.
Nothing moved in the North-East without Cunningham’s say-so. At the moment of his disgrace, he secured his home seat of Chester-le-Street for a GMWU nominee against the strong claims of the Durham miners. The by-election turned into a plebiscite on the “Cunningham gang” and Labour’s candidate – the blameless Giles Radice – only squeaked home.
While awaiting trial, Cunningham orchestrated the deselection of the Labour MP Eddie Milne for demanding an inquiry into the party’s links with Poulson; Milne held his seat as an Independent and took his campaign to Westminster, to Labour’s national embarrassment.
Few – locally or nationally – dared challenge the former docker who drove around in a white union-owned Jaguar.
After Labour’s unexpected defeat in June 1970, Cunningham was the only member of the NEC to tell Harold Wilson to his face that he had made a mistake in going to the country prematurely. He had been as forthright the year before in standing up for Barbara Castle’s In Place of Strife reform package as fellow union leaders organised to kill it.
Nor did anyone dispute the vigour with which he worked to further the interests of his union’s members, or make the North-East a better, more prosperous place to live. But it was Cunningham’s eagerness to accelerate Felling council’s housing programme in the early 1960s that caught the eye of Smith, who was already on Poulson’s payroll. Smith duly introduced Cunningham to Poulson.
Over six years Poulson paid for Cunningham to take holidays in Bournemouth, Brighton and Estoril, and Cunningham steered important building contracts his way: for his union’s regional headquarters, a police HQ in Sunderland and a headquarters for the river authority, the last of which was vetoed by Whitehall on grounds of extravagance after Poulson had picked up £37,000 in fees.
Questions were asked locally about some of these projects, but Cunningham’s corruption might never have come to light had Poulson not omitted to pay £200,000 in income tax and been declared bankrupt.
At the architect’s examination in Wakefield in August 1972, Muir Hunter QC stunned Britain’s political and administrative establishment by revealing a web of corruption implicating not just Smith and Cunningham but a Scottish Office mandarin; bureaucrats in local government; British Rail; the National Coal Board; the NHS, three MPs and even – though he was never charged – the Conservative Home Secretary Reginald Maudling, who resigned.
Cunningham, then 62, was at the zenith of his power. Nothing showed his determination and the forces at his control better than the way he fought to retain his public offices until his arrest almost a year later. He mobilised Labour councillors to block all efforts to oust him, and managed, until formally charged, not only to keep his union job but also to remain chairman of the Police Authority. He even won re-election to the NEC, though the GMWU had to promise unions who backed him that he would go quietly at the end of his term.
Poulson had already been sentenced to seven years’ jail when Cunningham and Smith went on trial at Leeds Crown Court in April 1974; they pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy and corruption involving the receipt of £1,766 from Poulson. Total benefits to the Cunninghams were put at £6,756, including the “salary” for his wife, May, whose prosecution was not proceeded with.
Cunningham blamed Poulson’s persistent generosity for his disgrace, declaring: “I made the biggest mistake of my life when I accepted the offer of that two-week holiday in Portugal from John Poulson. I just didn’t think it would have led to all this. What is so annoying is that I tried and tried to get invoices for him for the holiday. I kept badgering him, but he was an overwhelmingly generous man and in the end I just gave up asking.”
However Poulson accused Cunningham of having “held me to ransom” by demanding £4,000 worth of holidays; he gave in, he said, because he feared Cunningham might harm his business if the largesse stopped.
Lord George-Brown praised Cunningham in court as “one of the most outstandingly forthright, courageous, solid and loyal men I have met throughout my political life”. Mr Justice Waller nevertheless sentenced him to five years, and the Labour government set up an inquiry into standards in public life.
At a further trial in April 1976 it was alleged that Cunningham, through his union contacts, had bought at half price the bungalow at Chester-le-Street to which he had moved from a 37s 6d a week council house; he was cleared of having a corrupt relationship with the builder Sidney McCullough, but three fellow councillors were jailed.
Cunningham’s sentence was reduced to three years on appeal, and in June 1976 he was paroled from Ford open prison. Within weeks he had tea with Prime Minister James Callaghan at the home of his son, Jack Cunningham, the GMWU-sponsored MP for Whitehaven, whom Callaghan had retained as his Parliamentary Private Secretary despite the scandal.
Jack (now Lord) Cunningham went on to restore the family name and serve in Tony Blair’s Cabinet. But there would be no rehabilitation for his father; Andy Cunningham’s days of power were over and for three decades he lived quietly in retirement at Chester-le-Street.
Andrew Cunningham was born on June 8 1910, the eldest of nine children of a Durham miner. He left school at 14 to work in the Tyne docks and built a formidable power base first as chairman of Felling council; then as a county councillor and alderman; chairman of the Police Authority (in 1962); chairman of the county council (1963) and, the following year, regional secretary of his union.
The appointments continued to flow and on top of those posts previously mentioned, he was a founder member of the Northern Economic Planning Council and a director of Fairfields Shipbuilders.
In 1965 he was elected to the trade union section of Labour’s NEC, his support peaking in 1967 when he came fifth with 4,934,000 votes.
Andrew Cunningham died on June 14. He outlived his wife, a former teacher and JP with whom he had three children.
LikeLike
A Hartlepool Labour Councillors “Outrageous Behaviour”
Prior to his election One would have to be Completely Brain Dead not to have noticed that Corruption in Hartlepool Borough Council is widespread- endemic even – reported allegation of Misconduct by Council Officials is treated with Complete indifference!
A typical outstanding example-without any doubt is Rob Cook the Labour Councilor for the DE-BRUS Ward- West-View- who- even when presented with irrefutable written evidence to support my allegations of Town Planning Misconduct–including a personal home visit- and HIS visual inspection of the illegal large Conservatory kitchen and Taxi-Drivers Toilet extension –Built WITHOUT Seeking Hartlepool Council Planning permission- attached to our property-resulting in severe Structural Damage-gave Prior to his election-what many people would Consider a Wonderful OSCAR Winning Theatrical performance-when Describing and Condemning-the Illegal Structure on his visit to our home Prior to Contesting the West-View De-Brus Ward on behalf of the Labour Party !
It was a Disgrace- he said -WHO authorised- that Monstrosity-that Ugly Carbuncle of an extension–he loudly proclaimed-HIS speech was obviously rehearsed- for just such an occasion- it was accompanied – with vigorous hand gestures- it should be DEMOLISHED- COMPLETLY- he said-
His Performance was so impressive -it could bring tears to your eyes- he was so eloquent-
I personally was so impressed with his performance- that I later went out and voted for him-
Something I had previously vowed never to do- it was only after I received the Letter from Peter Devlin the Chief Town Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council later- did- I discovered I had been well and truly shafted- that Rob Cook- was nothing but a Charlatan- a first class- Snake Oil Salesman-a Complete and utter Hypercritical Scoundrel- a Compulsive Liar of Gigantic Proportions–
who’s immediately reactions- after his successful election to Hartlepool Council-of Course- had been-without any hesitation–to Kick my allegations of Planning Misconduct-and Property Damage-witnessed with his own eyes into the long grass although he had inspected and had seen with his own eyes the Damage done- and Knew our concerns were Genuine ! and are still visible to the Present Day !
It was obvious -he had got my vote-I was no longer of any importance-
He obviously suffers from Political Amnesia- His idea was to forget what you say while canvasing for votes– say absolutely anything- just get into Office- that’s all that matters- and then run to the Chief Solicitor Peter Devlin- to complain that I -a Victim of Council Planning Corruption- had the audacity to write to Him again- highlighting my concerns -and to remined him of his promise made to me that if electeded to the Council He would Investigate my Concerns!
Unbelievable- another sign- if any was needed-that Hartlepool Labour Councillors NO longer represent local working class people-after six years of protests to Hartlepool Council- including numerous letters of protest to the Member of Parliament -Iain Wright M.P.my Catalogue of allegations of Planning Misconduct- supported with all the necessary documents–including the attached Photograph below-have still not been addressed-he cannot claim in future- he was totally un-aware of my Allegations- and Concerns!
To say that I am personally disappointed–at the attitude of the Labour Councillors would be an Understatement -but I have learned- although it’s of little use to me-if you live–has I do in the De-Brus Ward on the West-View Estate
If you have anything you built without applying to Hartlepool Borough Council for Planning Permission and are now thinking of submiting a Retrospective Planning application don’t worry- vote Labour and you are“guaranteed to obtain approval”- but don’t mention my name- that a sure- No- No !
Please Note, If anything I have Written or Published is NOT TRUE – why have NONE repeat NONE of the named Hartlepool Council Individuals Disputed any of my allegations-NOR Commenced ANY Legal Proceeding against ME for Slander, or whatever other crimes they can think of-
Could the reason possibly be-everything I have-Consistently-said- I can support with Documents of Purchase and Photographs of Structural Damge that Prove-Categorically- my statements are TRUE-can I also remind them- they will have to use their OWN Money- to Sue me in a British Court of Law and Take an Oath to tell the Truth – PERJURY- and Perverting the Course of Justice-are very serious Criminal Offences !!!
1. A Council Cannot Sue for Libel (Derby-shire vs Sunday Times House of Lords.1993 )
2. A Council Cannot Indemnify a Councilor or Council Officer who wishes to Sue an Individual (Local authorities indemnity for Members and Officers ) order 2004
Yours Sincerely
Alan Harvey Flounders
LikeLike
Click here to see more
Dismiss
Accessibility Links
Skip to content
Search The Times and The Sunday Times
Today’s sections Past six daysMy articles
Times+
My account
Register
obituary
Lord Toby Jug obituary
Colourful founder of the Eccentric Party who livened up many an election-night count but struggled with alcohol and depression
May 6 2019, 12:01am,
The Times
UK politics
Europe
Lord Toby Jug on the election trail in 2015
REX FEATURES
Share
Save
Not since the heyday of Screaming Lord Sutch has a candidate brought such jollity to election-night counts as Lord Toby Jug, a protégé of the one-time leader of the Official Monster Raving Loony Party and later head of his own Eccentric Party of Great Britain. Wearing his trademark leopard-skin blazer and top hat, the latter formerly belonging to Sutch, Jug stood at various elections, belting through his megaphone the slogan: “Don’t be a mug, vote Toby Jug.”
His policies included plans for five-day weekends and two-day weeks; a requirement that sleeping policemen would be replaced by members of the House of Lords; and proposals that for every selfie taken the photographer must read ten books. The construction of taller buildings for higher education was perhaps a more realistic proposition. Jug was also an enthusiastic campaigner for measures to tackle obesity such as putting strong glue in lip balm.
Immigration would be reduced by placing giant photos of Russell Brand or Katie Hopkins at airports “to discourage foreigners from entering Britain”, while crime would be nationalised to ensure that it did not pay. Jug also demanded the reintroduction of police helmets, insisting “the higher the rank, the higher the hat”, while his policy on the EU was that the country should have an “in, out or shake-it-all-about referendum”.
Discarded chewing gum would be used to fill pot holes; swimming pools would be drained once a week to allow access for non-swimmers; and anyone convicted of a homophobic crime would have to serve their sentence dressed in drag. Text lanes would be introduced on footpaths to prevent mobile phone-using pedestrians walking into lampposts; bottles of beer would be placed on beaches so that an invading army might get drunk instead of attacking; and people with a speech impediment would receive a 15 per cent discount on their phone bills.
Never forgetting that all politics is local, Jug, who latterly lived in St Ives, Cambridgeshire, called for the town’s statue of Oliver Cromwell to be replaced with one of Sutch; for crocodiles to be introduced to the hitherto-peaceful Great Ouse River; and for dogs to be fed with fluorescent food so that their mess can be easily spotted by unsuspecting residents. Although he never won a seat, in 2009 Jug came ahead of two Labour candidates in elections to Cambridgeshire county council.
Like Sutch, Jug found that the best publicity came from standing against high-profile candidates. In 2015 he was on the ballot paper in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, next to “Johnson, Boris”, picking up 50 votes compared with his rival’s 22,511. He thought Johnson would make an ideal member of the Eccentric Party, even offering to stand aside as leader if his rival would defect. Later he had second thoughts. “I went round with a jug of water and a comb to tidy his hair,” Jug recalled. “But he’s too much of an extremist for us — a tad too bonkers.”
Although the Eccentrics were probably the only party to have a guitar as deputy leader, in the form of Jug’s Brenda the Fender, not all their policies were as daft as they sounded: one would require MPs to work from home and connect electronically to a virtual parliament, with the savings being used to benefit the homeless, who would be housed in the Palace of Westminster.
Despite adding to the gaiety of the nation, Jug was a deeply troubled soul, with music and politics being a façade behind which he concealed a deep depression and an addiction to alcohol. Over the years he was in and out of police cells and psychiatric hospitals, wrestling with hallucinations and imaginary encounters with Cromwell and Winston Churchill. As he once said: “Jekyll and Hyde were lucky, because there were only two of them.”
Jug with Boris Johnson in 2015
REX FEATURES
He was born Brian Borthwick in Newham, east London, in 1965, the eldest of three children of Brenda Borthwick. His alcoholic and violent father worked at the Royal Albert and Royal Victoria docks and young Brian was raised in Stratford, east London. “It was really not a happy childhood,” he said, recalling the start of his alcoholism. “When I was about 14 or 15, as soon as I drank my first drink, it was like fireworks going off.” Football and cricket kept him on a relatively straight path, and he played both for Essex schoolboys. He also joined West Ham Boxing Club.
At the age of 15 he left Rokeby School, Stratford, where he had been “hell-bent on being the class clown”. He found work as an apprentice painter and decorator, and later was a landscape gardener before an encounter with the leader of the Monster Raving Loony Party, which had been founded in 1982. “I met Screaming Lord Sutch in East Ham Working Men’s Club in 1989,” he told the Newham Recorder in 2016.
Soon he was a bass player in Sutch’s band, the Savages, adding: “We got on like a house on fire and he asked me to be a candidate — and started calling me Lord Toby Jug.” The name, a reference to Borthwick’s physique, stuck and in 1991 he formally adopted it by deed poll. He ran into problems in 2015 when Facebook suspended his account claiming that Lord Toby Jug could not possibly be his real name.
He campaigned for Sutch at the Bootle by-election of May 1990, when the Loonies overtook David Owen’s continuing Social Democrats, and his first outing as a candidate was in the 1992 general election, when he challenged the Labour MP Tony Banks at Newham North West, winning 252 votes. Five years later, operating out of the Princess Amelia pub in Stratford, Jug increased his vote to 300 against Banks in what was by then the West Ham constituency.
Despite leaving London in about 2003, Jug never relinquished his support for Leyton Orient FC. He spoke of missing the East End. “It was a great area,” he said. “You really did leave your doors open at night — but of course no one had anything worth stealing.” He settled in Vigo, a small village in Kent, from where he inflicted his eccentricity on the good voters of Folkestone and Hythe, polling 175 votes against Michael Howard, the Conservative Party leader, at the 2005 general election. He offered heated lavatory seats to all pensioners and pledged to tackle the demise of the county’s red squirrels by covering half the grey squirrel population with red paint.
While there Jug had a relationship with a lady called Julie Smith, having been introduced by a mutual friend. However, in 2006 he was given a community service order after admitting to assaulting her. They had a son, Thomas. He had another son, Jack, with a previous girlfriend called Jackie. The relationship with Smith broke down and he moved in with his mother and his sister, Nancy, who by then were living in Cambridgeshire. They survive him, as does a brother, Simon, who works in the City of London.
Alcohol continued to get the better of Jug and in 2013 he was sleeping rough. “My friends and family had endured enough and I had nowhere to go,” he said. He was referred to the Gainsborough Foundation, which provided treatment for alcoholism in the county.
Like any self-respecting political party, the Monster Raving Loonies are no strangers to schisms. In 2014 Jug was expelled because of disparaging remarks he made about the pub chain JD Wetherspoon, which the party had been trying to attract as a sponsor. He quickly bounced back, forming the Eccentric Party based in St Ives, which he said needed brightening up. “There are too many men in grey suits,” he told the Hunts Post. “There should be a supertax on grey suits.”
The party received backing from Adrian Bayford, who in 2012 had become the winner of Britain’s second-biggest lottery payout, and Bayford’s shop, Black Barn Records, became the Eccentrics’ headquarters. Their first — and so far only — councillor came in the person of Deborah Richardson, a member of St Ives town council who rejoiced in the nickname Lady Jezebel Fortescue; she lived on the river and was the party’s spokeswoman for floating voters. She also helped Jug to tackle his alcoholism and at the time of his death he was in his fifth year of sobriety.
In 2015 Jug elicited a correction from The Sun newspaper after it confused him with Howling Laud Hope, Sutch’s successor as leader of the Monster Raving Loony Party. “Apologies for the confusion, which must have been hugely embarrassing for both men,” the paper stated. However, when Jug had a letter published in other newspapers he became despondent. “Something’s going wrong,” he told The Sunday Times. “I’m not supposed to make any sense.”
Lord Toby Jug, founder of the Eccentric Party, was born on December 18, 1965. He died suddenly on May 2, 2019, aged 53
LikeLike
alan harvey Flounders aka “Coffin Dodger” https://alanflounders.blogspot.co.uk/
LikeLike
Title to land
Registered conveyancing
In registered conveyancing, there is a single statement of title as it stands at any given time, guaranteed by the State. If any person suffers a loss as a result of some omission or mistake in the register of title, they are entitled to be indemnified for that loss.
Land registration was first introduced to England and Wales by legislation of 1862 and 1875. Those Acts provided only for voluntary registration of title, and few titles were registered until the Land Transfer Act 1897 made registration of title compulsory in dealings with land in the County of London. Under the Land Registration Act 1925 compulsory registration was gradually extended to cover the rest of the country. Since 1 December 1990, the whole of England and Wales has been subject to compulsory registration. This requires registration of a conveyance of a freehold estate, a grant of a lease of more than 21 years, and an assignment of leasehold land with more than 21 years to run. If the disposition is not registered within the required time, it becomes void as regards the transfer or creation of a legal estate or mortgage. The legal estate reverts to the person transferring it (who then, however, holds it on a trust for the intended recipient).
Under this system freehold titles are registered with three degrees of quality, and leasehold with four. A purchaser may also be bound by two kinds of interest on the land: an overriding interest, which does not appear in the register (e.g. leases for 21 years or less and rights of access across the land), and minor interests which only bind if they are protected by some entry in the register (e.g. a contract for sale or a restrictive covenant).
Letter to Land Registry Durham
Alan Harvey Flounders
48 Ridlington Way, West-View
Hartlepool
24th October 2008.
Dear Sir,
Update and Clarification to my letter of Protest I sent to Land Registry Durham yesterday the 23rd October 2008
In which I strongly Object to any attempt to alter the details in the Land Register Title CE74844 “Absolute” on the grounds that the property and land we had purchased all good faith and transferred from Hartlepool Borough Council on the 1st February 1984 to ALAN HARVEY FLOUNDERS and His Wife JACQUELINE FLOUNDERS Clearly Shown Edged in RED on the “OFFICIAL COPY” of the Pre-Sale Property Plan-M 44684-dated September 1983-Title “Sale of Council House”
48 Ridlington Way West-View Hartlepool
Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration
of £5,750 Pounds
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
I was also Informed by my Solicitor Mr Solomon Levinson that all the outbuildings inside the Boundary lines clearly shown edged in RED on the “Official Copy” of Property Plan M44684 dated September 1983, from Land Registry Durham, were freehold, my responsibility and legally ours,
Mr Solomon Levinson Senior Solicitor of the law firm Levinson Walker and Lister further explained the significance of “freehold”
When people buy their house, “freehold” they not only own the house, they also own the land on which the house is built.
He also explained that Under English Law-
No Two People can own the Same piece of Registered Freehold Land
England and Wales are among the few countries that still allow a landlord, or freeholder, to grant a “leaseholder” the right to live there for anything from 99 to 999 years yet retain possession of the home. Scotland has abolished leasehold.
The idea dates back 950 years, to the time when William the Conqueror took England for the crown and leased land to his lords under strict conditions. They, too, leased plots to tenants. Today it allows freeholders to levy high charges for lease extensions, services, consent fees for any changes and ground rents, all for no benefit whatsoever — unless the leaseholder buys the freehold at great cost.
The assistant land registrar Durham Alan H Smith has completely failed to act impartially”
how can he circumvent freehold legal rights?
I continue to be amazed by why people buy new build leasehold flats. You are spending a fortune on something you don’t really own, have realistically no control over service and maintenance costs. They are usually very small and have no private garden, shed, garage or even parking.
Far better to buy a traditional old terrace house freehold, you own it, can pretty much do what you like to it, loft extensions, take out walls, extend out the back etc.
If you want/need to live in a flat, just rent, you’ll probably only be there for a year or two before you want to get out.
See attached “Official Copy” from Land Registry Durham of Property Plan M44684 Dated September 1983
-Title “Sale of Council House” 48 Ridlington Way, West-view Hartlepool purchased from Hartlepool Borough Council
on the 1st February 1984 pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration of £5,750.00 pounds!
There can be No room for misinterpretation, the entire Freehold Estate 48 Ridlington Way West-View previously owned by Hartlepool Borough Council with the Boundaries clearly shown edged in RED was sold to Mr and Mrs A.H. Flounders on February 1st 1984 freehold, including the “Outbuildings” and was Confirmed by the Mayor J.Jones and the Chief Executive of Hartlepool Borough Council Mr. N.J. Abrahams and shown on original Property Plan M44684 dated 3/11/1974!
My Research in the Public Domain (Internet) has also revealed some very interesting facts: – I have discovered for Instance that; –
There are three kinds of freehold estates:
(a) Fee Simple Absolute
In English common law, A fee simple absolute is the most extensive interest in real property that an individual can possess this type of estate is generally created when a Deed of Purchase is Registered by Solicitors with Land Registry, it is limited completely to the individual and his or her heirs and assigns forever that the Land is owned completely,
and it is NOT subject to any limitations or conditions
my Solicitor Mr Solomon LEVINSON -Senior Partner in the Local LAW Firm
LEVINSON WALKER and LISTER of Church Street Hartlepool—
Explained to us PRIOR to the Exchange of Contracts the Whole of the Detached Wash-House Building was Included in our Freehold Property. when I had asked him when arranging the Property Purchase of 48 Ridlington Way West-View from Hartlepool Borough Council prior to the 1St February 1984 in Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration of £5750.00 Pounds
(Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
The authenticity of the Legal Documents of Purchase of the Ex-Council House Land and Property from Hartlepool Borough Council pursuant to the Housing Act 2008 on the 1st February 1984
in Consideration of £5750.00 pounds,
confirms the deeds of Purchase were submitted to
Land Registrar Durham for registration by the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council J Anthony Brown on the 29th March 1984 by Land Registry Durham -themselves
in their Letter dated 16th February 1984 confirming the Purchase, Transfer and Registration of the entire Freehold Estate Registered Title CE74844 “Absolute”
Dishonest Land Registry Officials in Public Office should face the “full force of the law” for deliberately misinforming and deceiving the elderly property owners into believing their authentic legally binding documents of Purchase of their ex-Council House land and property title CE74844 “Absolute” from Hartlepool Borough Council on the 1st February 1984 in consideration of £5,750.00 pounds were fraudulent
“If this were not to happen, many using land registry would begin to lose confidence and a government department could be fatally undermined.”
“Land Registry Durham’s Official Copy” of the Property Plan M44684-dated September 1983.
Title “Sale of Council House” 48 Ridlington Way, West-view Hartlepool
Hope this Finally Clarifies the Position and Proves that our Immediate Next-Door Neighbours Mr and Mrs E Bennison B141 Claim of a Previous Purchase of part of our Registered Land and Property Title CE74844 “Absolute” is FRAUDULENT.
unearthed compelling new evidence contradicting the theory held by Alan H Smith the assistant Land REGISTRAR Durham
“It is my view No one can plausibly question the veracity or accuracy of our disturbing, and entirely convincing, claims of misconduct by Alan H Smith the assistant Land REGISTRAR Durham in Public Office-
There is an extensive dossier of compelling irrefutable evidence that proves the meeting categorically claimed by
Alan H Smith the assistant Land REGISTRAR Durham to have been held in November 1974 between the Mayor Aldermen and Burgees of Hartlepool Borough Council and our immediate next-door neighbours NEVER took place, it was a figment of his imagination deliberately conceived to frighten, mislead the two elderly legal property owners-to doubt the authenticity of their Registered Documents of Purchase-of the ex-Council House on the 1st February 1984 from Hartlepool Borough Council in Consideration of £5,750.00 pounds (Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds)
Oh, they all think they are so smart, but they just come across as a bunch of sanctimonious hypocrites and only interested in their own self -importance
the problem with this bizarre ridiculous decision made by the assistant Land Registrar Durham Alan H Smith is that it is NOT based on legally authenticated fact but his own opinions influenced by monetary gain
it is not remotely objective
LikeLike
1
Alan Harvey Flounders aka “Coffin Dodger”
https://alanflounders.blogspot.co.uk/
Legal Information obtained from the INTERNET the World’s Largest Free and Online Legal Dictionary
DO NOT RESENT GROWING OLD. MANY ARE DENIED THE PRIVILEGE. IRISH PROVERB
“IF YOU FIGHT YOU MIGHT LOSE-BUT IF YOU DON’T FIGHT -YOU WILL ALWAYS LOSE”-
Remember!
I am Setting the Records Straight-
Once it’s posted online, it’s there for the Whole World and His Wife to see, forever!
I CHALLENGE THE NAMED SCOUNDRELS IN THIS ARTICLE TO PURSUE ME THROUGH THE COURTS OF LAW IF WHAT I SAY IS
UNTRUE!
These are the Dishonest
PATHOLOGICAL LYING SCOUNDRELS UNFIT TO SERVE THE GENERAL PUBLIC Employed in Public Office by Hartlepool Borough Council,
-ALL GUILTY IN MY VIEW OF FRAUD-AND MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE,
Alyson Carman, Solicitor and Complaints Reviewer
Hilary Martin, Solicitor and Freedom of Information Officer
Mr. Reece, Development Control Manager
Richard Trow, Case Planning Officer
Paul Burgon Enforcement Officer
How can I forget the leader of the pack-PETER DEVLIN
full investigation by the serious crime and fraud squad,
Be careful, very careful who you vote for next time- you may heaven forbid end up with what we have here in Hartlepool a Council run by a Bunch of Evil, Labour Party Scoundrels, and Compulsive liars!
Here’s an opportunity to read and remember the truth about the Blatant Corruption here in Hartlepool and in Land Registry Durham
LikeLike