Greengate who is telling the truth? |
Yesterday I published an article which claimed that former
Labour councillors, David and Elizabeth Green, had converted the basement of their
house at 27 La Belle Alliance Square into a self-contained flat. I also claimed
that the Greens had not sought planning permission for this work, nor had they
applied for building regulations approval for the works, and nor had they paid
any council tax which might be liable to be paid for the self-contained flat.
I stand by what I wrote and believe it to be true. My
article was based on reputable public domain sources which I used in good faith
believing them to be truthful and accurate. The sources were –
· A property
description, photographs and floor plans for 27 La Belle Alliance Square which
are/were published on estate agents, Ward & Partners website, the Zoopla
and Right Move websites, and in a downloadable pdf brochure. I have copies of these
documents.
· A “what
the owner says” statement about 27 La Belle Alliance Square based upon what
Ward and Partners describe an
“insightful interview with the owner”. I have a copy of the this statement
· Thanet
council’s record of planning applications and building regulation applications
for 27 La Belle Alliance Square
· The
Valuation Office council tax register entry for 27 La Belle Alliance Square
· The
Valuation Office guidance booklet “Council Tax and annexes”
· Planning
portal
David Green has contacted me and said that
“the basement of 27 La Belle Alliance is current an office
associated with the main building it does not have separate utilities and so is
not a separate dwelling. The estate agents blurb should say potential for
conversion to a separate self-contained flat. We are in the process of changing
agents and re-advertising. I will make sure the new blurb is clear about that.
Please remove these ridiculous and malicious accusations”.Flat or Office? Who is Telling the Truth? |
As far as I can establish the Green’s house has
been marketed by Ward and Partners
since 25 April 2016 that’s a period of 19 weeks. If the estate agent’s
description and floor plans of their property were wrong, or misleading, as
David Green has suggested, then surely
the Greens would have spotted these mistakes and inaccuracies a long time ago and
asked Ward and Partners to change the published property description and floor
plans. It seems strange that it took my article of yesterday to cause the Greens to discover that their
estate agent had published misleading and inaccurate information about their
house. Perhaps David Green can throw some light on this matter and explain why he and Elizabeth Green didn’t
spot these serious mistakes much sooner?
Ward and Partners are a long established estate
agency who have a very high professional standards and who have served the
people of Thanet well over the many years. The company is a member of the
Property Ombudsman service. The Property Ombudsman has published a Code
of Practice for Residential Estate Agents which is freely avaible on
the internet.According to Ward and Partners this statement was based on an "insightful interview" with the Greens |
Paragraph 7i of the Code
states that residential agents must “take all reasonable steps to ensure that all
statements you make about a property, whether oral, pictoral or written are
accurate and not misleading”. Ward and Partners written description of
the Greens house says that “the basement is currently
arranged as a one bedroom self-contained flat which has been recently converted
and never used! It is accessed from its own entrance to the front and small
courtyard to the rear; perfect for an additional income, or for a dependant
relative”.
Are they telling the truth? |
Office or Flat Kitchen Who's Telling the Truth? |
Being a
former councillor myself I understand how upset and hurt the Greens must feel
when unfounded and malicious information is published about them which damages their
otherwise nonedescript reputation. Being unwittingly the cause of their upset and hurt I genuinely want to help them. So I am
making this offer to David and Elizabeth
Green – if they submit a complaint to the Property Ombudsman
about Ward and Partners misrepresentation of his property, I will provide him with
a supporting statement explaining that my online article was based upon Ward
and Partners description of the Green’s house and that my article may have damaged their well-deserved
reputations in Ramsgate . If David Green’s complaint is successful and Ward and
Partners are found to have breached the Code of Practice I will immediately remove
my article as it will clearly be untrue. You can’t get the fairer than that can
you?
Office or Flat Shower Room? Who's Telling the Truth? |
Continuing
with the Code of Practice for Residential Estate Agents I now want to
look at paragraph 7j which says that “the written details of a property must be
agreed with the seller to confirm that the details are correct”. Being
a reputable estate agent I am certain that Ward and Partners rigorously adhere
to having their clients approve and sign off “all written details of a property”.
This being the case then the Greens have two important questions to answer.
First did the
Greens agree and approve the written details of their property, including the
references to the self-contained basement flat, which were published on the internet and in a
pdf brochure by Ward and Partners? Second did the Greens agree and approve the “What
the owner says” statement about 27 La Belle Alliance Square which was published
on the internet and in a pdf brochure by Ward and Partners? This statement, which, according to Ward and
Partners, is based on “insightful interviews with the owners” attributes
one or both of the Greens as saying that they “have most recently converted
the lower ground floor into a self-contained flat”.
Lots of Questions to Answer. Who's Telling the Truth? |
I am sure that
David and Elizabeth Green will have records, such as e-mails etc, of any
agreements and approvals they made with
Ward and Partners about these important statements . Perhaps the Greens could
post copies of any such documents online so the public can know what
was actually agreed and who is telling the truth about the status of their
basement. If the Green’s have lost these documents then I am sure that Ward and
Partners will be happy to provide them with copies.
If Ward and
Partners failed to ask the Greens to “confirm
that the details (of their property) are correct”, then the company
would be in serious breach of the Code of Conduct for Residential Estate
Agents and the Greens would have very strong grounds for a complaint to the Property Ombudsman. Perhaps
the Greens could clarify whether they
have, or are intending to, complain to
the Property Ombudsman about a breach of
paragraph 7i of the Code by Ward and Partners. If they do complain and
if the Ombudsman upholds their complaint then I will course delete my article as
it would be likely that it was untrue. You can’t get fairer than that can you?
Next, David Green in his complaint to me about
my article, sates that because his
basement flat conversion, or as he now describes it – his office – does not have separate utility
supplies (gas, water and electricity) it cannot be classified as a separate
dwelling. This is not true. According to the Valuation Office guidance booklet Council
Tax Band and annexes a separate area of living within a dwelling house e.g.
a flat or annexe, is defined not by having separate utilities but by having “independent
access, or access from a hallway or landing; its own facilities for sleeping
and preparing food; washing facilities and a toilet”.
According to the Ward and
Partners property description and a floor plan of the basement of 27 La
Belle Alliance Square published on the internet
and a pdf brochure the basement consists
of 2 separate entrance to the front and rear of the basement, a bedroom, a shower room, a kitchen and a toilet. The
Rightmove, Zoopla and Ward and Partners website all include several photographs
of the basement of 27 La Belle Alliance
Square including a photograph of the basement kitchen a photograph of the
basement shower room and photographs of rooms which could be used as bedrooms. Interestingly
the photographs do not show any evidence of office usage of the basement area.
They do not include images of computers, printers, filing cabinets, desks etc. which I would have
expected to see in a space which is described by David Green as “currently
an office”. Perhaps David Green
could explain the absence of office related stuff in a space he describes as
currently an office.
Clearly there is a major discrepancy
between David Green’s account of what the status of his basement is and how his
estate agent describes it. David Green also appears to have misunderstood what criteria are used to decide what is and
is not a self-contained flat or annexe. There is one way to decide this.
I publically challenge David
and Elizabeth Green to invite a Valuation Office inspector to visit their home.
The inspector can then decide whether a basement
which allegedly has had the stairs connecting it to the rest of the house
removed, but which has 2 of its own separate entrances; a kitchen; a toilet; a shower and rooms suitable to be bedrooms; is an office or a self-contained flat. If the latter, the Inspector can also calculate how much council tax the Greens must pay and from when they must pay it. If, on the other hand, the
Inspector decides that the Greens basement is not a self-contained flat then I will of
course delete my article of yesterday. You can’t get fairer than that can you?
Being the helpful type of
person I am I have already written to the Valuation Office to inform them that
the Greens are having difficulties is determining
the status of their basement and that they would welcome a visit from an
inspector who could then advise them. I have also written similar helpful
letters to Thanet Council’s planning and
building control teams who I am sure will be keen to support the Greens in determine
what permissions and approvals they might need for their basement. You can’t
get fairer than that can you?
Office? Looks very much like a kitchen to me!
ReplyDeleteKeep digging Mr Green, the hole's getting deeper.
I'm sure the Greens will appreciate the lengths you have gone to Ian in order to help them with this very confusing matter.Only someone who has had close involvement with Planning and Local taxation matters could be expected to grasp the formalities... and of course given their backgrounds they would be entirely ignorant of these details.
ReplyDeletePerhaps they need to contact "Greenpeace".
ReplyDeleteThe Greens are trying it on - why didn't they reject such tax hikes and interring bureaucracy previously? Or raise the issue of the Pleasurama and Pavilion council fraud and secret documents? OR REJECT the TDC court case against Cllr Driver?
ReplyDeleteThe persecution of a private citizen conducting their affairs isn't what I have come to expect of the Green Party and our representatives. I don't see a public interest in this and I see much of a ongoing feud you clearly take very personally. The Green family have provided the area with their time and energy over a number of years and whilst you are free to disagree with their politics I can see no justification for this line of attack other than petty vindictiveness.
ReplyDeleteNonsense. This is not a feud. I hardly know the Greens and have no quarrels with them. What this is about is 2 former prominent Labour politicians who, I have alleged, have developed a flat without the proper and lawful permissions and who I have also alleged have tried to avoid a potential council tax liability on this property. This is a question about the public accountability of those people who set the rules at Thanet Council and perhaps do no follow the rules themselves - not a feud. The Labour Party was correct to raise the issue of the uKIP Council Leader and his council tax arrears, just I am correct to raise the issue of the former Labour councillor and their alleged unlawful development. Its called public accountability which, in a healthy democracy, is a powerful and important check on those who choose to exercise power. Its not a feud.
DeleteAs to the Greens contribution to Thanet I would argue that being members of a Cabinet which wasted £14.5 million in 4 years is hardly a commendation.
Yeah right Ian!! Now remind us all of you actions in signing a non-disclosure document and then running out of Cecil Towers after leaving fake documents behind and then the subsequent injunction by TDC to stop you disclosing the contents, then the charge against your property for costs. Now remind us all weren't the Greens in the Labour Cabinet that sanctioned the injunction. Coincidence LOL
Deletehttp://www.kentlive.news/monster-shed-build-costly-thanet-advice-boss/story-12002069-detail/story.html\
ReplyDeleteAnother ex-member of Thanet Council who thinks planning regulations don't apply to them...
I had forgotten about this and you are right to bring it up. I had a shed built 7 years ago. I misunderstood the planning rules and the roof was too high. Within a week of learning that the roof was unlawful it was taken down and replaced with a roof which complies with planning rules. This was a genuine mistake which was quickly rectified. The Greens on the other hand appear to have converted their basement into flat without any panning permission and without building regulation and appear to have attempted to conceal this development. Furthermore they also appear to have attempted to avoid paying any council tax which might be due on the flat. Its a pity the Greens did not follow my example with the shed and admit their mistake and comply with the appropriate rules and regulations
DeleteIts interesting to see the Zoopla estimates for properties in this square. One bedroom flats at about £50K, no 26 is estimated to be £280k and no 27 at ££281k. So even if no 27 has planning permission for a flat the owner will be struggling to reach £331k.
ReplyDeleteI see this discussion is going on, on the Friends of Ramsgate Seafront page on Facebook. I thought they were Apolitical but hang on this is about David Green and the Labour party and we all know that some of the admins on there do not like Labour. Also we mustn't forget its a UKIP page. If they had any decency they should have removed the post.
ReplyDelete