David L Philips - Wealden's enforcer
Home
Aerial photographs -
and how they use them
Ashley Brown -
The District Planning Officer
'Best Demolition' disposes of
materials for Wealden
Bridge Poultry's Flooding
Bridge Poultry's new road
Bushy Wood Stables get smashed
Bushy Wood Stables own website
Case Law
Civil Rights
Councillors resign because of planning officers' secrecy
Cross examining Ian Kay -
Deputy District Planning Officer
Deception
Discrimination
Enforcement -
the D L Philips enforcer's way
Government policy
Hackhurst Lane piggeries
Harassment
Health and Safety
Local Cases
Local Councillors list -
with email addresses
Missing documents
Lord Newton's Petition
Missing photographs
Pantomime
Planning permission at £ 2k a go ?
Standards - for some
Stream Farm
Survival guide
Sussex Act 1981
'Bully Town' -
an anti-corruption website
(Agenda 21 -
the Solar Navigation project)
ACTION GROUP
Investigating and lobbying against corruption in
Wealden District Council's legal & planning departments
"now you see it, now you don't" technique
Old Heathfield,
East Sussex,
TN21 9BN
31.i.04
Dear Mr. Elphick,
My letter to you (below) on the internet has now had hundreds of hits and you have not bothered to reply.
As I know, your executive works by giving individuals (such as Mr. Kruschandl) the run around - for 17 plus years.
As you know, I work by asking the questions you cannot answer.
In order for an incomplete application to be put before members as an emergency item did money change hands?
Yours,
C M Hudson.
Old Heathfield,
East Sussex,
TN21 9BN
10.ii.04
Re:- WD/03/0572.
Dear Mr. Elphick.
Thank you for your letter of February 3rd.
You are in no position to say that I "do not really have any standing in this matter" unless you have seen the notice which accompanied the application which is not on the file. So where is the notice? Just so we all know what we are looking for it will look very similar to that raised by Alan West on 21/11/95 and hyperlinked to the interactive version of this letter. So now there are two documents missing from your file. Does that not concern you?
The questions which you will not answer are:-
1) 16.xi.2003 - would you please send me the "detail" which you "awaited!".
2) 16.i.2004 - you deviated from the proper procedure ... and advanced the item as an emergency item. Can you explain your inconsistency?
3) 31.i.2004 - In order for an incomplete application to be put before members as an emergency item did money change hands?
Finally, please may I see the Fire Officer's comments and the minuted explanation for the matter being an emergency item?
Yours,
C. M. Hudson.
Old Heathfield,
East Sussex,
TN21 9BN
7.iii.04
Dear Mr. Elphick,
Enclosed in the hard copy version of this letter is a CD of to-day's File on Four programme detailing corruption within Flintshire C.C.. You will note that they use most of the techniques employed by Wealden's planning department.
An unminuted emergency meeting timed to coincide with the principal witness's absence features early on in the recording. In order to dispel the increasing suspicion that you pulled the same stunt over WD/03/0572, would you be kind enough please to send me the minuted explanation for this being an emergency item that you are required to provide by statute?
The hard copy version of this letter will be sent under Recorded Delivery docket RA 8816 04920GB.
Yours,
Chester Hudson.
(The question)
Dear Mr. Elphick,
Thank you for your letter of March 30th.
Since you are extremely busy processing your heavy caseload you will not have had opportunity to read the Guardian dated April 6th 2004.
The District Auditor commented that Southwark Council were unable to "conclusively rebut allegations of corrupt and improper practices". What had they done wrong? Not served the appropriate planning notice on The Imperial Gardens club for starters. "Imperial Gardens was not consulted as it should have been". "Officers acted as if the nightclub did not exist and few councillors knew any better".
If you "resent" being reminded of your deficiencies you have two options. 1) improve, or 2) find another job.
You suggest that your timetable was lawful. Then may I ask when and how you informed the Parish Council of this "late item"?
Yours,
Chester Hudson.
(Elphick's reply)
you're going back over old ground..i'm sending you under comp. slip copies of our letters dated 11/9 & 29/9/03 to pursglove & framfield p.c.
>>> "Chester Hudson"
(Our response)
Subject: Re: Wealden Football Club & S. 66 notice
You are quite right we are "going back over old ground", and I will remind you why.
Bent Councillors such as Cllr. Jim Speechley of Lincoln would regard an officer with your ethics as manna from heaven. Why? Because he specialised in failing to declare an interest in the register. That is why he is now convicted of misfeasance in public office.
Consider how such a bent councillor would welcome a bent planning officer who thought that S.66 notices were a dispensable irritation when he had decided to rush something through.
The PA1 would never reveal that Cllr. Speechley had been voting on an application affecting his own land.