Waste4Fuel site in St Paul's Cray is on fire again

News Shopper: Waste4Fuel site in St Paul's Cray is on fire again Waste4Fuel site in St Paul's Cray is on fire again

FIREFIGHTERS are at the Waste4Fuel site in St Paul’s Cray battling a blaze in the mounds of rubbish.

Four crews were called to the scene in Cornwall Drive at around 7.30am to tackle the fire.

This is reportedly the 11th blaze since mid-March.

Waste4Fuel appeared at the High Court last month, where an order was imposed, compelling the company and director Bryan Hughes to clear the site of all combustible waste by April.

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:18am Fri 6 Dec 13

molsey says...

WASTE4FUEL, NINTH FIRE
ATT ROBIN FISK
Dear Mr Fisk, you have run 2 stories on the above, the first on Tuesday 26th Nov, and the second on Weds 27th Nov. Please review the comments in both stories and you will see I have spelt out the way to have the waste4Fuel yard closed down permanently by way of a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER. I obtained this solution from a good friend of mine who is a Planning Barrister from Chambers in the Temple, London.
At the time of writing neither Jo Johnson MP nor Cllr Colin Smith have replied to my posting/s. May I suggest you contact both of these Bromley officials to see if they are taking the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER route seriously and report their response in the NS.
Regards, Molsey
BY EMAIL 10.15AM MON 2ND DEC 2013

molsey says... 12.45pm Sat 30th Nov 13
AN OPEN LETTER TO COUNCILLOR COLIN SMITH

Dear Cllr Smith,

You have claimed and stated many things in your comments above, including that you and the Council has gone far beyond what it can control itself, I BEG TO DIFFER. You need have gone no further than your own Bromley Council Legal Department to find the LAW and the weapon in the Council's existing Enforcement Armoury that will deal with the Waste4Fuel fiasco once and for all. It is called a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER and I provide it below.

Discontinuance Orders
Section 102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 enables a local planning
authority to make an order requiring that any use of land shall be discontinued, or
continued subject to conditions (s102(1)(a)), or that any buildings or works shall be
altered or removed (s102(1)(b)). An order may also grant planning permission for
development subject to conditions specified in the order.
An order under s102 can be made if the local planning authority is satisfied that it is
appropriate in the interests of the proper planning of the area (including the
interests of amenity and any present or future detriment to amenity). The decision
to make a discontinuance order must take account of the development plan and
other material considerations.
Discontinuance orders are made to deal with the use to which land is being put.
An order can discontinue any existing use of land (whether lawful or unlawful) or,
alternatively, can impose conditions on the continuance of a use of land. It may
also require any buildings or works to be altered or removed.
A claim for compensation may be made to the local planning authority under s115
of the Act if it is shown that a person having an interest in the land has suffered
damage in consequence of the order. Other persons may be entitled to
compensation in respect of disturbance in their enjoyment of the land or for
carrying out works in compliance with the order.
Unlike unopposed revocation and modification orders, discontinuance orders need
to be confirmed by the Secretary of State. He has power to modify the submitted
order, including power to grant planning permission or to modify the order’s grant
of planning permission. Before confirming an order, the Secretary of State must
provide an opportunity to be heard to any person on whom the order has been
served.

I trust now you will bring this to the attention of your Legal Dept and report back here that you have done so?

Molsey
WASTE4FUEL, NINTH FIRE ATT ROBIN FISK Dear Mr Fisk, you have run 2 stories on the above, the first on Tuesday 26th Nov, and the second on Weds 27th Nov. Please review the comments in both stories and you will see I have spelt out the way to have the waste4Fuel yard closed down permanently by way of a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER. I obtained this solution from a good friend of mine who is a Planning Barrister from Chambers in the Temple, London. At the time of writing neither Jo Johnson MP nor Cllr Colin Smith have replied to my posting/s. May I suggest you contact both of these Bromley officials to see if they are taking the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER route seriously and report their response in the NS. Regards, Molsey BY EMAIL 10.15AM MON 2ND DEC 2013 molsey says... 12.45pm Sat 30th Nov 13 AN OPEN LETTER TO COUNCILLOR COLIN SMITH Dear Cllr Smith, You have claimed and stated many things in your comments above, including that you and the Council has gone far beyond what it can control itself, I BEG TO DIFFER. You need have gone no further than your own Bromley Council Legal Department to find the LAW and the weapon in the Council's existing Enforcement Armoury that will deal with the Waste4Fuel fiasco once and for all. It is called a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER and I provide it below. Discontinuance Orders Section 102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 enables a local planning authority to make an order requiring that any use of land shall be discontinued, or continued subject to conditions (s102(1)(a)), or that any buildings or works shall be altered or removed (s102(1)(b)). An order may also grant planning permission for development subject to conditions specified in the order. An order under s102 can be made if the local planning authority is satisfied that it is appropriate in the interests of the proper planning of the area (including the interests of amenity and any present or future detriment to amenity). The decision to make a discontinuance order must take account of the development plan and other material considerations. Discontinuance orders are made to deal with the use to which land is being put. An order can discontinue any existing use of land (whether lawful or unlawful) or, alternatively, can impose conditions on the continuance of a use of land. It may also require any buildings or works to be altered or removed. A claim for compensation may be made to the local planning authority under s115 of the Act if it is shown that a person having an interest in the land has suffered damage in consequence of the order. Other persons may be entitled to compensation in respect of disturbance in their enjoyment of the land or for carrying out works in compliance with the order. Unlike unopposed revocation and modification orders, discontinuance orders need to be confirmed by the Secretary of State. He has power to modify the submitted order, including power to grant planning permission or to modify the order’s grant of planning permission. Before confirming an order, the Secretary of State must provide an opportunity to be heard to any person on whom the order has been served. I trust now you will bring this to the attention of your Legal Dept and report back here that you have done so? Molsey molsey

9:18am Fri 6 Dec 13

concerned.erith says...

The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better.
The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better. concerned.erith

9:25am Fri 6 Dec 13

molsey says...

concerned.erith wrote:
The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better.
The solution is above, but no-one is listening, I wonder why?
[quote][p][bold]concerned.erith[/bold] wrote: The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better.[/p][/quote]The solution is above, but no-one is listening, I wonder why? molsey

11:02am Fri 6 Dec 13

Gypo.Joe says...

@Molsey. is you keep this up you too could be in line for a nice brown envelope full of readies.

Or you will be found brown bread. The choice is your...Gold or Lead ?

;)
@Molsey. is you keep this up you too could be in line for a nice brown envelope full of readies. Or you will be found brown bread. The choice is your...Gold or Lead ? ;) Gypo.Joe

12:03pm Fri 6 Dec 13

dag says...

I passed by this place yesterday and from Footscray road at the Crittalls corner roundabout the pile of waste was the highest I've ever seen it. Apart from the fires that keep occurring there the eyesore of the place is horrendous. The only problem is IF they shut it down, where can they move it to? I imagine it will only move to someone else's back yard. I feel so sorry for the people in Cornwall Drive and surrounding homes.
I passed by this place yesterday and from Footscray road at the Crittalls corner roundabout the pile of waste was the highest I've ever seen it. Apart from the fires that keep occurring there the eyesore of the place is horrendous. The only problem is IF they shut it down, where can they move it to? I imagine it will only move to someone else's back yard. I feel so sorry for the people in Cornwall Drive and surrounding homes. dag

12:30pm Fri 6 Dec 13

molsey says...

dag wrote:
I passed by this place yesterday and from Footscray road at the Crittalls corner roundabout the pile of waste was the highest I've ever seen it. Apart from the fires that keep occurring there the eyesore of the place is horrendous. The only problem is IF they shut it down, where can they move it to? I imagine it will only move to someone else's back yard. I feel so sorry for the people in Cornwall Drive and surrounding homes.
Spread the word Brother.
[quote][p][bold]dag[/bold] wrote: I passed by this place yesterday and from Footscray road at the Crittalls corner roundabout the pile of waste was the highest I've ever seen it. Apart from the fires that keep occurring there the eyesore of the place is horrendous. The only problem is IF they shut it down, where can they move it to? I imagine it will only move to someone else's back yard. I feel so sorry for the people in Cornwall Drive and surrounding homes.[/p][/quote]Spread the word Brother. molsey

12:59pm Fri 6 Dec 13

molsey says...

molsey wrote:
dag wrote:
I passed by this place yesterday and from Footscray road at the Crittalls corner roundabout the pile of waste was the highest I've ever seen it. Apart from the fires that keep occurring there the eyesore of the place is horrendous. The only problem is IF they shut it down, where can they move it to? I imagine it will only move to someone else's back yard. I feel so sorry for the people in Cornwall Drive and surrounding homes.
Spread the word Brother.
My reply post "Spread the word Brother" was meant as my reply to gypo, I got clicking ahead of myself.
If the yard does eventually get shut down, which the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER can definitely achieve, either the EA or Bromley Council, or both jointly could simply remove and transport the waste to a suitably licensed landfill site, in this case Mucking in Essex or another couple up the M1 in Bedfordshire. In actual fact although the pile looks high, in actual volume it's no big deal. If 5 articulated bulkers were put on the job daily the whole lot could be removed in a week or less. To retrieve the cost Bromley/EA could put a legal charge on the land and if the owners don't pay up seize the empty clean yard and sell it, easiest way by auction. No different to a bank/building society repossessing a house for mortgage arrears.

I really should set up as a consultant and get paid for what I am doing here for free. Quite why Bromley, the EA, Cllr Colin Smith, Jo Johnson MP and Uncle Tom Cobbly are still twiddling their thumbs god only knows?
[quote][p][bold]molsey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dag[/bold] wrote: I passed by this place yesterday and from Footscray road at the Crittalls corner roundabout the pile of waste was the highest I've ever seen it. Apart from the fires that keep occurring there the eyesore of the place is horrendous. The only problem is IF they shut it down, where can they move it to? I imagine it will only move to someone else's back yard. I feel so sorry for the people in Cornwall Drive and surrounding homes.[/p][/quote]Spread the word Brother.[/p][/quote]My reply post "Spread the word Brother" was meant as my reply to gypo, I got clicking ahead of myself. If the yard does eventually get shut down, which the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER can definitely achieve, either the EA or Bromley Council, or both jointly could simply remove and transport the waste to a suitably licensed landfill site, in this case Mucking in Essex or another couple up the M1 in Bedfordshire. In actual fact although the pile looks high, in actual volume it's no big deal. If 5 articulated bulkers were put on the job daily the whole lot could be removed in a week or less. To retrieve the cost Bromley/EA could put a legal charge on the land and if the owners don't pay up seize the empty clean yard and sell it, easiest way by auction. No different to a bank/building society repossessing a house for mortgage arrears. I really should set up as a consultant and get paid for what I am doing here for free. Quite why Bromley, the EA, Cllr Colin Smith, Jo Johnson MP and Uncle Tom Cobbly are still twiddling their thumbs god only knows? molsey

1:43pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Petras says...

molsey wrote:
WASTE4FUEL, NINTH FIRE
ATT ROBIN FISK
Dear Mr Fisk, you have run 2 stories on the above, the first on Tuesday 26th Nov, and the second on Weds 27th Nov. Please review the comments in both stories and you will see I have spelt out the way to have the waste4Fuel yard closed down permanently by way of a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER. I obtained this solution from a good friend of mine who is a Planning Barrister from Chambers in the Temple, London.
At the time of writing neither Jo Johnson MP nor Cllr Colin Smith have replied to my posting/s. May I suggest you contact both of these Bromley officials to see if they are taking the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER route seriously and report their response in the NS.
Regards, Molsey
BY EMAIL 10.15AM MON 2ND DEC 2013

molsey says... 12.45pm Sat 30th Nov 13
AN OPEN LETTER TO COUNCILLOR COLIN SMITH

Dear Cllr Smith,

You have claimed and stated many things in your comments above, including that you and the Council has gone far beyond what it can control itself, I BEG TO DIFFER. You need have gone no further than your own Bromley Council Legal Department to find the LAW and the weapon in the Council's existing Enforcement Armoury that will deal with the Waste4Fuel fiasco once and for all. It is called a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER and I provide it below.

Discontinuance Orders
Section 102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 enables a local planning
authority to make an order requiring that any use of land shall be discontinued, or
continued subject to conditions (s102(1)(a)), or that any buildings or works shall be
altered or removed (s102(1)(b)). An order may also grant planning permission for
development subject to conditions specified in the order.
An order under s102 can be made if the local planning authority is satisfied that it is
appropriate in the interests of the proper planning of the area (including the
interests of amenity and any present or future detriment to amenity). The decision
to make a discontinuance order must take account of the development plan and
other material considerations.
Discontinuance orders are made to deal with the use to which land is being put.
An order can discontinue any existing use of land (whether lawful or unlawful) or,
alternatively, can impose conditions on the continuance of a use of land. It may
also require any buildings or works to be altered or removed.
A claim for compensation may be made to the local planning authority under s115
of the Act if it is shown that a person having an interest in the land has suffered
damage in consequence of the order. Other persons may be entitled to
compensation in respect of disturbance in their enjoyment of the land or for
carrying out works in compliance with the order.
Unlike unopposed revocation and modification orders, discontinuance orders need
to be confirmed by the Secretary of State. He has power to modify the submitted
order, including power to grant planning permission or to modify the order’s grant
of planning permission. Before confirming an order, the Secretary of State must
provide an opportunity to be heard to any person on whom the order has been
served.

I trust now you will bring this to the attention of your Legal Dept and report back here that you have done so?

Molsey
Wrong MP though. It's in the Bromley and Chislehurst Constituency. MP is Bob Neill MP. Jo Johnson is Orpington. Order constituency border there
[quote][p][bold]molsey[/bold] wrote: WASTE4FUEL, NINTH FIRE ATT ROBIN FISK Dear Mr Fisk, you have run 2 stories on the above, the first on Tuesday 26th Nov, and the second on Weds 27th Nov. Please review the comments in both stories and you will see I have spelt out the way to have the waste4Fuel yard closed down permanently by way of a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER. I obtained this solution from a good friend of mine who is a Planning Barrister from Chambers in the Temple, London. At the time of writing neither Jo Johnson MP nor Cllr Colin Smith have replied to my posting/s. May I suggest you contact both of these Bromley officials to see if they are taking the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER route seriously and report their response in the NS. Regards, Molsey BY EMAIL 10.15AM MON 2ND DEC 2013 molsey says... 12.45pm Sat 30th Nov 13 AN OPEN LETTER TO COUNCILLOR COLIN SMITH Dear Cllr Smith, You have claimed and stated many things in your comments above, including that you and the Council has gone far beyond what it can control itself, I BEG TO DIFFER. You need have gone no further than your own Bromley Council Legal Department to find the LAW and the weapon in the Council's existing Enforcement Armoury that will deal with the Waste4Fuel fiasco once and for all. It is called a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER and I provide it below. Discontinuance Orders Section 102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 enables a local planning authority to make an order requiring that any use of land shall be discontinued, or continued subject to conditions (s102(1)(a)), or that any buildings or works shall be altered or removed (s102(1)(b)). An order may also grant planning permission for development subject to conditions specified in the order. An order under s102 can be made if the local planning authority is satisfied that it is appropriate in the interests of the proper planning of the area (including the interests of amenity and any present or future detriment to amenity). The decision to make a discontinuance order must take account of the development plan and other material considerations. Discontinuance orders are made to deal with the use to which land is being put. An order can discontinue any existing use of land (whether lawful or unlawful) or, alternatively, can impose conditions on the continuance of a use of land. It may also require any buildings or works to be altered or removed. A claim for compensation may be made to the local planning authority under s115 of the Act if it is shown that a person having an interest in the land has suffered damage in consequence of the order. Other persons may be entitled to compensation in respect of disturbance in their enjoyment of the land or for carrying out works in compliance with the order. Unlike unopposed revocation and modification orders, discontinuance orders need to be confirmed by the Secretary of State. He has power to modify the submitted order, including power to grant planning permission or to modify the order’s grant of planning permission. Before confirming an order, the Secretary of State must provide an opportunity to be heard to any person on whom the order has been served. I trust now you will bring this to the attention of your Legal Dept and report back here that you have done so? Molsey[/p][/quote]Wrong MP though. It's in the Bromley and Chislehurst Constituency. MP is Bob Neill MP. Jo Johnson is Orpington. Order constituency border there Petras

2:09pm Fri 6 Dec 13

molsey says...

Petras wrote:
molsey wrote:
WASTE4FUEL, NINTH FIRE
ATT ROBIN FISK
Dear Mr Fisk, you have run 2 stories on the above, the first on Tuesday 26th Nov, and the second on Weds 27th Nov. Please review the comments in both stories and you will see I have spelt out the way to have the waste4Fuel yard closed down permanently by way of a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER. I obtained this solution from a good friend of mine who is a Planning Barrister from Chambers in the Temple, London.
At the time of writing neither Jo Johnson MP nor Cllr Colin Smith have replied to my posting/s. May I suggest you contact both of these Bromley officials to see if they are taking the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER route seriously and report their response in the NS.
Regards, Molsey
BY EMAIL 10.15AM MON 2ND DEC 2013

molsey says... 12.45pm Sat 30th Nov 13
AN OPEN LETTER TO COUNCILLOR COLIN SMITH

Dear Cllr Smith,

You have claimed and stated many things in your comments above, including that you and the Council has gone far beyond what it can control itself, I BEG TO DIFFER. You need have gone no further than your own Bromley Council Legal Department to find the LAW and the weapon in the Council's existing Enforcement Armoury that will deal with the Waste4Fuel fiasco once and for all. It is called a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER and I provide it below.

Discontinuance Orders
Section 102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 enables a local planning
authority to make an order requiring that any use of land shall be discontinued, or
continued subject to conditions (s102(1)(a)), or that any buildings or works shall be
altered or removed (s102(1)(b)). An order may also grant planning permission for
development subject to conditions specified in the order.
An order under s102 can be made if the local planning authority is satisfied that it is
appropriate in the interests of the proper planning of the area (including the
interests of amenity and any present or future detriment to amenity). The decision
to make a discontinuance order must take account of the development plan and
other material considerations.
Discontinuance orders are made to deal with the use to which land is being put.
An order can discontinue any existing use of land (whether lawful or unlawful) or,
alternatively, can impose conditions on the continuance of a use of land. It may
also require any buildings or works to be altered or removed.
A claim for compensation may be made to the local planning authority under s115
of the Act if it is shown that a person having an interest in the land has suffered
damage in consequence of the order. Other persons may be entitled to
compensation in respect of disturbance in their enjoyment of the land or for
carrying out works in compliance with the order.
Unlike unopposed revocation and modification orders, discontinuance orders need
to be confirmed by the Secretary of State. He has power to modify the submitted
order, including power to grant planning permission or to modify the order’s grant
of planning permission. Before confirming an order, the Secretary of State must
provide an opportunity to be heard to any person on whom the order has been
served.

I trust now you will bring this to the attention of your Legal Dept and report back here that you have done so?

Molsey
Wrong MP though. It's in the Bromley and Chislehurst Constituency. MP is Bob Neill MP. Jo Johnson is Orpington. Order constituency border there
Last weeks two stories had Jo Johnson MP urging action and Cllr Colin Smith wrongly adding his 2 penath (Council can't do any more), but now thanks to you pointing this out Bob Neill is on notice too. Surely between the four of them a reply must be forthcoming?
[quote][p][bold]Petras[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molsey[/bold] wrote: WASTE4FUEL, NINTH FIRE ATT ROBIN FISK Dear Mr Fisk, you have run 2 stories on the above, the first on Tuesday 26th Nov, and the second on Weds 27th Nov. Please review the comments in both stories and you will see I have spelt out the way to have the waste4Fuel yard closed down permanently by way of a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER. I obtained this solution from a good friend of mine who is a Planning Barrister from Chambers in the Temple, London. At the time of writing neither Jo Johnson MP nor Cllr Colin Smith have replied to my posting/s. May I suggest you contact both of these Bromley officials to see if they are taking the DISCONTINUANCE ORDER route seriously and report their response in the NS. Regards, Molsey BY EMAIL 10.15AM MON 2ND DEC 2013 molsey says... 12.45pm Sat 30th Nov 13 AN OPEN LETTER TO COUNCILLOR COLIN SMITH Dear Cllr Smith, You have claimed and stated many things in your comments above, including that you and the Council has gone far beyond what it can control itself, I BEG TO DIFFER. You need have gone no further than your own Bromley Council Legal Department to find the LAW and the weapon in the Council's existing Enforcement Armoury that will deal with the Waste4Fuel fiasco once and for all. It is called a DISCONTINUANCE ORDER and I provide it below. Discontinuance Orders Section 102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 enables a local planning authority to make an order requiring that any use of land shall be discontinued, or continued subject to conditions (s102(1)(a)), or that any buildings or works shall be altered or removed (s102(1)(b)). An order may also grant planning permission for development subject to conditions specified in the order. An order under s102 can be made if the local planning authority is satisfied that it is appropriate in the interests of the proper planning of the area (including the interests of amenity and any present or future detriment to amenity). The decision to make a discontinuance order must take account of the development plan and other material considerations. Discontinuance orders are made to deal with the use to which land is being put. An order can discontinue any existing use of land (whether lawful or unlawful) or, alternatively, can impose conditions on the continuance of a use of land. It may also require any buildings or works to be altered or removed. A claim for compensation may be made to the local planning authority under s115 of the Act if it is shown that a person having an interest in the land has suffered damage in consequence of the order. Other persons may be entitled to compensation in respect of disturbance in their enjoyment of the land or for carrying out works in compliance with the order. Unlike unopposed revocation and modification orders, discontinuance orders need to be confirmed by the Secretary of State. He has power to modify the submitted order, including power to grant planning permission or to modify the order’s grant of planning permission. Before confirming an order, the Secretary of State must provide an opportunity to be heard to any person on whom the order has been served. I trust now you will bring this to the attention of your Legal Dept and report back here that you have done so? Molsey[/p][/quote]Wrong MP though. It's in the Bromley and Chislehurst Constituency. MP is Bob Neill MP. Jo Johnson is Orpington. Order constituency border there[/p][/quote]Last weeks two stories had Jo Johnson MP urging action and Cllr Colin Smith wrongly adding his 2 penath (Council can't do any more), but now thanks to you pointing this out Bob Neill is on notice too. Surely between the four of them a reply must be forthcoming? molsey

2:36pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Eagles_Man says...

molsey wrote:
concerned.erith wrote:
The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better.
The solution is above, but no-one is listening, I wonder why?
Go on, then. Wonder.

Surely no-one, other than the useless site owner, has any interest in keeping the place open.

Perhaps, just maybe, your legal advice isn't as hot as you think ti is.
[quote][p][bold]molsey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]concerned.erith[/bold] wrote: The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better.[/p][/quote]The solution is above, but no-one is listening, I wonder why?[/p][/quote]Go on, then. Wonder. Surely no-one, other than the useless site owner, has any interest in keeping the place open. Perhaps, just maybe, your legal advice isn't as hot as you think ti is. Eagles_Man

3:09pm Fri 6 Dec 13

molsey says...

Eagles_Man wrote:
molsey wrote:
concerned.erith wrote:
The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better.
The solution is above, but no-one is listening, I wonder why?
Go on, then. Wonder.

Surely no-one, other than the useless site owner, has any interest in keeping the place open.

Perhaps, just maybe, your legal advice isn't as hot as you think ti is.
The interest is in closing it, there is no support to keep it open?
[quote][p][bold]Eagles_Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]molsey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]concerned.erith[/bold] wrote: The sooner this place gets shut down for good the better.[/p][/quote]The solution is above, but no-one is listening, I wonder why?[/p][/quote]Go on, then. Wonder. Surely no-one, other than the useless site owner, has any interest in keeping the place open. Perhaps, just maybe, your legal advice isn't as hot as you think ti is.[/p][/quote]The interest is in closing it, there is no support to keep it open? molsey

2:58pm Sat 7 Dec 13

white rabbit9 says...

All that heat gone to waste.
All that heat gone to waste. white rabbit9

10:59pm Sun 8 Dec 13

LeftisRight says...

I bet the councillors and Environment agency officials have done some shady deals with the site owners.
I bet the councillors and Environment agency officials have done some shady deals with the site owners. LeftisRight

7:01am Mon 9 Dec 13

molsey says...

LeftisRight wrote:
I bet the councillors and Environment agency officials have done some shady deals with the site owners.
Their inaction and/or incompetence speaks for itself.
[quote][p][bold]LeftisRight[/bold] wrote: I bet the councillors and Environment agency officials have done some shady deals with the site owners.[/p][/quote]Their inaction and/or incompetence speaks for itself. molsey

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree