POTTY TRAINING - Using a potty correctly may be a new skill for your planning team to learn if they keep missing the bowl or forgetting to flush, or maybe even fumble the paperwork. Being patient and firm with them will help them get it right eventually, even if they sometimes feel frustrated at being pushed to do the right thing. They need to known that every person is entitled to a toilet no matter how much the council's legal team tell them to ignore the rules to cause harm to a challenging member of the public - and yes we can imagine how irritating it is to be caught out consistently by some members of the public - and yes of course that makes you dig in your heels even more - leading you into trying more dirty tricks and rule breaking. But will only that lead to more spillages? 


So, if you are going to plan a vendetta, hoping to harass someone to vacate Wealden land for the benefit of someone else locally who you favour, be sure that you don't get caught with your trousers down, forget to flush, or even pull your trousers up too soon. Be careful to stay in the groove by following statute to the letter and don't hope that all Judges or Inspectors will turn a blink eye with a funny handshake - there are many who are not members of that brigade and these are the airings that are sure to come back to haunt you to reveal what you did and why you did it. Sleep safe at night by doing the right thing. Do not try to deprive anyone of their state granted rights and put the lid down after flushing.



Can you imagine a planning officer in charge of a major development who does not know what a material planning consideration is? That is what we think we are looking at in the case of Clarion Group Housing Limited who are working with Thakeham Homes Limited and Latimer Developments Limited, following on from the applications of Tim Watson in 2014 and Gleeson Developments Limited in 2015.


This application is/was for 70 houses by way of a green field site that was purchased by Tim Watson as an investment many years ago. Tim Watson, a local estate agent, abandoned his application, presumably because of identity and a potential conflicts of interest locally, because, exactly the same application was filed with a name change in 2015 by Gleeson Developments Limited, presumably a smoke and mirrors device. If the parties may wish to clarify the situation for us, we'd be pleased to publish any corrections, but as it stands it reads as though their council pals managed to push this one through for old times sake.


Around three hundred local residents were opposed to the application, leading Marina Brigginshaw to give a presentation in the village hall at Herstmonceux, but despite this exceptional turnout, the Parish Council ignored those representations and approved the application. We do not know of any specific reason for the wishes of the public being ignored, and this may become the subject of investigation as to interests and declarations at both Parish Council and District Council levels.


It is suspected that members of Wealden passed the application to in some measure gain revenge on the previous occupier of the old electricity Generating Works. If that proves to be the case, then the grant of permission will have been an abuse of process.


We are though looking for other anomalies, such as the case officers not correctly advising the Members of this Council as to applicable statute, their Local Plan and National Planning Policy, where there appears to be more than one failure to advise - now the subject of investigation. 


For starters, Herstmonceux has only one small school and could not cope with the  additional children, adding to carbon miles to bus the children to other schools on a daily basis.


Access to the site is from a busy road at an inconvenient junction without the necessary visibility splay to cope with speed of 40 miles per hour and braking as trucks and the like enter the village from the east.


Sewage disposal in a potential issue that Wealden were forced to obtain Counsel's Opinion on to be able to proceed at all, though this Opinion is only that, a sort of insurance policy that at least they tried to cover their tracks; another questionable tactic - and an opinion is only an opinion until it is challenged. We would like to see this opinion.



WATER CONTAMINATION - If houses are built on the hill that supplies the last surviving well in Herstmonceux, all of those who presently enjoy a sustainable water supply are likely to be poisoned by pesticides from the gardens of the proposed housing. In addition, where the hard standings of the proposed 70 houses are to be gully drained to a point lower than the twin wells, soakage that supplies the wells will be diverted away potentially starving the wells of water, save that from the garden areas. The amusing cartoon above portrays the situation that perhaps the developers were not aware of, when they bought into a situation that they should have been able to rely on. Unfortunately, the council concerned and the advisers to the original applicants appear to have been less diligent than they might have been in the rush to profit from a windfall situation.



ATT: Claire Turner                                                                                            TRACKED POST
Case Officer (Principal Planning Major Projects)

Planning & Building Control
Wealden District Council
Vicarage Road
Hailsham, BN27 2AX                                                                                               4 July 2018

Dear Mrs Turner,



We write with reference to a telephone conversation that you had with our planning consultant, and the subsequent visit to your offices on Monday the 2nd of July 2018.

We hope that you have may have had sight of our letter to your Chief Executive and Leader of the Council, but that if not, you bring this letter to their attention and that of the DPO.

It has been brought to our attention that when you were advised as to the potential contamination issue and our water supplies, that you said this was not a planning consideration, but rather a civil matter that followed the consent. It was noted that there has as yet been no application against reserved matters, but we anticipate a last minute rush to beat the September deadline, after which the permission lapses.

We wish to be included in the process and would remind you that as per the National Planning Policy Framework @ paragraph 196 (Decision Taking), you will see that the ‘Framework’ is a material consideration.

The fact that there is an ancient well that is fed from the adjacent field is therefore a material consideration with reference to the various applicable sections of that document (some of which you have quoted), that we cannot see is mentioned in any of the Conditions attaching to the consent, unless you can show us otherwise.

Our main concern here is that herbicide contamination will enter the well as glyphosate and other garden (pesticide) chemicals, are known to be poisonous to humans. Such contamination would cause harm to persons drinking well water and anyone drinking bottled water from this ancient source.

The most obvious way to avoid contamination of the ancient well would be to keep the slope ahead of, and the soakage area left and right of the ‘well’ clear of housing. It may be appropriate to raise this with the owners/developers: Clarion and Thakeham Groups and we would welcome constructive dialogue on the subject.


We note that there are many inclusions in the ‘Conditions’ section of the Notice of Decision dated September 11 2015 and signed by Kelvin Williams, concerning dealing with surface water soakage, drainage and contamination, but no mention of the ancient well and those using it for their water supplies.

You do mention ‘Archaeology’ in Condition 4, to protect heritage assets. You mention contamination in Conditions: 6, 14, 15, 26, 27, 28 and 30. But once again there is no mention of potential drinking water contamination from the ancient well, where clearly, contamination of the groundwater (that feeds the well) and drainage is high on the agenda.

The only mention of the ‘Steam House Generating Museum’ is in condition 13. This concerns the planting of trees that you must know cannot be planted adjacent to a historic building or a common law footpath.

It may be possible to avoid contamination of the ancient well by negotiation with the owners of the site and we would urge you to consider that as a means to correct the defective ‘Conditions’ as they stand. Again, unless you can show us otherwise?

Your Council owes the District and the Village a duty to protect historic assets, and that includes the ancient well as being an intrinsic part of the Electricity Generating complex.

We would be grateful for sight of any correspondence in connection with this/these subject(s).

We would also like to know what remains to be concluded in relation to compliance studies and reports in order for the developer to be able to proceed with an application to negotiate Reserved Matters. We’d like a list of what are considered to be the ‘Reserved Matters.’

Lastly, we should like to be included in any negotiations with the developers as to ‘Reserved Matters’ where the above issues remain extant. We feel that without these matters resolved to the satisfaction of all parties, that sales or rentals of the proposed housing might present a problem, with owner/occupiers potentially becoming party to any proceedings that may arise if these matters are not agreed in advance. You can well imagine the cost of monitoring all of the properties in the vicinity to be able to apportion blame.

We hope that you will agree that the points we make are valid and well worth putting pen to paper over, rather than waiting to put the matter before the courts by way of claims various for failing to deal with them now, and we look forward to hearing from you as a matter of considerable urgency.

Yours sincerely,

for Herstmonceux Museum Ltd 





 -  Conditions Index A - Z
1. Permission subject to detailed particulars
2. Appearance & Landscape

3. Application for reserved matters in 3 years

4. No dev. without archaeological programme

5. No dev. until written scheme 4. published

6. Contamination to be reported subsequently

7. Details code of construction TB approved

8. Temporary contractor provisions

 9.  Noise restrictions working hours

10. Details brickwork finishes
11. Joinery details, windows, doors

12. Details hard & soft landscaping

13. Details screening, trees, hedges

14. Planting trees Chapel Row, Museum

15. Landscape management plan

16. Wildlife management details

17. Japanese Knotweed survey

18. Access prior to building works

19. Visibility splays entrance A271

20. Internal site access roads

21. Car parking details

22. Garages no commercial use

23. No felling trees hedgerows

24. Tree protection existing TPO

25. Bins refuse collection & disposal

26. Foul drainage sewerage works

27. Surface water drainage

28. No discharges foul water

29. Flood resilient buildings

30. Surface water drainage

31. Light pollution AONB

32  Renewable energy

33. No permitted dev buildings

34. No permitted gates/fences

36. Limited to included docs







Ian Kay


Ian Kay

Assist. Dist. Plan.


Charles Lant


Charles Lant

Chief Executive


Patrick Scarpa, solicitor Wealden District Council


Victorio Scarpa



Timothy Dowsett


Timothy Dowsett

Dist. Secretary


Christine Nuttall, solcitor, Wealden District Council corruption and monument protection English Heritage 


Christine Nuttall



David Phillips, perjury and corruption Wealden District Council, the Energy Age, Nelson Kruschandl


Dr David Phillips




Daniel Goodwin


Daniel Goodwin

Chief Executive



J Douglas Moss


J Douglas Moss





 Kelvin Williams

Dist. Planning




Trevor Scott




David Whibley, enforcement officer Wealden District Council


David Whibley




Christine Arnold


Christine Arnold










Beverly Boakes


Beverley Boakes

Legal Secretary



Patrick Coffey


 Patrick Coffey




Julian Black planning consultant


Julian Black





Ashley Brown

Dist. Planning




Derek Holness

Former CEO



Abbott Trevor - Alcock Charmain - Ditto - Arnold Chris (Christine) - Barakchizadeh Lesley - Paul Barker - Bending Christopher

Black Julian - Boakes Beverley - Bradshaw Clifford - Brigginshaw Marina - Brown Ashley - Coffey Patrick - Douglas Sheelagh

Dowsett Timothy - Flemming Mike - Forder Ralph - Garrett Martyn - Goodwin Daniel - Henham J - Holness Derek

Hoy Thomas - Johnson Geoff - Kavanagh Geoff - Kay Ian - Kay I. M. - Barbara Kingsford - Lant Charles - Mercer Richard

Mileman Niall - Moon Craig - Moss Douglas, J.Nuttall Christine - Pettigrew Rex - Phillips David - Scarpa Victorio - Scott Trevor

Kevin Stewart - Turner Claire - Wakeford Michael. - Whibley David - White, George - Williams Kelvin - Wilson Kenneth - White Steve






When an officer of the courts omits to include evidence that he or she knows is relevant to a hearing, that is termed misfeasance in public office. Where an officer then tries to cover up his or her misfeasance (as did Ian Kay in the Stream Farm matter), or J Douglas Moss did in the Old Steam House case, that becomes malfeasance. The difference is that misfeasance is a civil wrong, whereas malfeasance is a criminal offence. The leading case precedent on malfeasance is: R. v Bowden 1995 Court of Appeal (98 1 WLR), where police constable Bowden failed in his duty to protect a member of the public.


The only defence that Wealden's officers have in their criminal dealings is that Sussex Police will not investigate any offence committed by their chums at Wealden. The proof of this is the failure of DS Keith Lindsay failed to interview any one of 12 unrelated complainants or the planning or executive officers from Wealden who stand accused.


Where does Claire Turner fit into all of this? At the moment we do not know and we are giving Mrs Turner the benefit of the doubt. In other words we accept that she is innocent of any hand in the approval of the 70 house windfall grant at Herstmonceux, unless and until fresh evidence becomes available to suggest otherwise.




Vicarage Lane, Hailsham, East Sussex, BN27 2AX T: 01323 443322








Wealden District Council  Wealden District Council  Wealden District Council  Wealden District Council











This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.


This site is protected under Article10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.