This is one of the extreme cases where Wealden's officers buried a very clear colour aerial photograph at a CLEUD Appeal in the full knowledge that this photograph would corroborate the Appellants claims.

This Council knew full well that Mr Hudson's application for a Certificate of Lawful, Existing Use or Development was valid.  However, they had it in for him and wanted to frustrate his efforts out of malice.

The photograph in question was removed from the file until some time after a Public Inquiry (an appeal), then mysteriously found its way back into the file.  The photograph was clearly dated and showed the full extent of the use of the site in question 10 years previously.  It proved conclusively that Mr Hudson was telling the truth and this the Council knew - but if they produced it at the appeal, Mr Hudson would very likely have been awarded costs for wasting his and the Inspectors time.  The Inspector would have concluded that it was unreasonable of this Council to refuse a Certificate in light of the supporting evidence.  However, the Council's most skillful witness, Mr Kay, told the Inquiry that he had no idea where such an aerial photo might have come from.  Should we believe him?

It is a criminal offence to withhold evidence at a CLEUD appeal, clearly stated as such in the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.  Hence the Council are guilty of an offence should it be that they had the colour photograph in their files and failed to produce it.  The matter has been reported to the Police, but so far Sussex Police have forgotten what it is they are supposed to do when a crime is reported.  Should the Police remember what their function is and investigate, several witnesses are willing to testify that they have seen the mystery photograph in the Council's file relating to the CLEUD application.  Opps! Mr Kay! 

Since then, repeatedly the owner of Stream Farm has reported to WDC that raw sewage frequently pours from a slaughter house onto the pavement and public highway near his property. This is a distinct and real health hazard about which this Council appear to be looking the other way.  Why?  Why would the authority charged with monitoring public health turn a blind eye?  Could it be that they still have it in for Mr Hudson?

1) Ashley Brown    2) Mr Hudson's Survival Guide    3) Pantomime    4) Bridge Poultry's New Road   

5) Bridge Poultry's Flooding    6) The Aerial Photograph    7) Cross Examination