This is the response by planning manager Easton to the three questions put by Nick Harvey MP.  To return to the Council Lies page please close this window.

Observations:

It should be noted that the complaint detailed on this website is about lies told by council employees and the subsequent cover up.  It is not about any specific planning application.  All the evidence is from the council's own documentation - the following letter and report goes to confirm this evidence and shows that all the accusations are founded on fact.  Mr Easton's assertion that I view the Council (or Authority as he puts it) in a negative light is incorrect.  The complaint pursued on these pages is against a few named individuals who have lied and tried to cover up those lies.

Mr Easton in point 3 of his letter confirms the lie told to the Ombudsmans that there are three trees in the way of the access from Moorland Rise as he mentions only one.

In the report Ref. No. 30527 Mr Easton confirms that the piece of road he repeatedly refers to as a "turning head" was indeed an "access road" and was approved for such use by the council. This was confirmed by the officer recommendations of approval Ref. Nos.34686 and 35910.  It is interesting to note that although one of the reasons for turning down application 35910 was in the "visual amenities of the locality" the intended access point from Moorland rise remains as a permanent eyesore blocked off by a steel mesh barrier!

The report Ref. Nos. 38761 and 40770 confirm that Mr Easton broke his own planning conditions as the entrance shown on the plans (not reproduced here due to copyright restriction) clearly passes over the root spread of a young Oak the subject of a tree preservation order.  The sum of £25,000 demanded by and paid to the council by the developer in order to cross the ransom strip of grass in Hares Green is not mentioned!  There is no ransom strip in Moorland Rise - so why was that entrance not used?