Re: Upping the Ante! : Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:24 am
bren2k wrote:
That suggests there was no method behind all of this - which I find very hard to believe.
Someone posted earlier that the company which signed the 106 agreement has since been wound up - if that's the case, it indicates that there was a plan all along to renege on the agreement.
I'm sending a brief outline of this case to Private Eye this weekend - they love anything to do with bent councils and dodgy companies.
Someone posted earlier that the company which signed the 106 agreement has since been wound up - if that's the case, it indicates that there was a plan all along to renege on the agreement.
I'm sending a brief outline of this case to Private Eye this weekend - they love anything to do with bent councils and dodgy companies.
Don't know if the company who signed the Section 106 Agreement has been wound up or not but there has been changes in the Directors of the company.
If there was always an intent never to deliver on the Section 106 agreement then to my untrained legal eye that sounds like fraud.