Carcinogenic hazardous waste discharge detected at Ramyar Car Wash
- Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
8 November 2021 19:14372888to answer your question, my answers are as follows.
1/ yes.
2 thrugh to 4 not defending any bugger.
regards brian,Button and Jan Higgins like this - Button
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 3,109
8 November 2021 21:08372890There was a covenant on our property in Aylesham - couldn't mine coal commercially below 500ft. I suppose we could have done it for fun and given it away, but initially the only access to the garden was through the house and it would've dirtied the carpets.(Not my real name.) - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
9 November 2021 06:14372894I don't know if this is just me, but I do get frustrated when Sue indicates councillors have taken the case up.
I would rather Sue stated, the Councillors have taken up the case , and this is there findings.
From secret sues post we are no further forward .
I must comment on the outside looking in, it must be frustrating for those living next door to not get action, if the comments they make are found to be correct.ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 9 November 2021 07:22372900Well i know Cllr Walkden has taken the case up and I think Cll Biggs.I also sent an email .I think that there are two sides to this story .I will try to find my original email .
- 9 November 2021 07:2837290114 th June response from the Leader of the Council stating Officers we’re dealing with the matter.
- 9 November 2021 07:45372902I sent an email on 6th June to the Leader .Its up to the owners of Castle Hill House to meet their local Councillors.One Town Councillor lives in Castle Street .
- 9 November 2021 11:18372906Still baffled no reply re Convenants & has action been taken to enforce the Convenants in law.Jan Higgins likes this
- 9 November 2021 11:22372908Very baffling .
- 9 November 2021 12:15372910Sue, with all due respect, you suggesting I go and talk to a Town councillor just because they live round the corner, I fear this is not going to really help, no matter how interested they may be in this matter and how nice they are. What makes you think that DDC will take any notice of a Town councillor, when you remember the whole Town Council voted against the granting of planning permission for the car wash. What did DDC’s planning committee, which included Cllr Walkden, do? They ignored the whole Town Council and granted planning permission, in fact Cllr Walkden and the planning committee ignored everyone’s advice to not grant planning permission and went ahead and granted it.
You say councillors looked into this matter, well, they didn't achieve much, did they? We are now in November 2021, and not one DDC enforcement notice has been sent to Mr Pishtiwan Karim, even though he breaches 6 of his 7 planning conditions daily, sublets the site to a second hand car dealers who uses the site as a junkyard, and a graphic design business that has no planning permission to operate a business from the site, and who allows new signage erected on the site, that also has no planning permission.
I take it you read the two damning letters from the Car Wash Association on post #91, think they sort of some things up in a very clear and succinct way.
As it seems you have a hot line to DDC could you please ask them to answer our solicitors’ letters of the July 6, 2021 and September 3, 2021? for ease of reference to remind DDC of the letters contents, see the said letter of September 3rd from our solicitors attached below; and while you are at it could you please ask DDC why they have never recognised our independent acoustics report that irrefutably proves that the Ramyar car wash breaches its conditions of planning on a daily basis relating to sound levels allowed, which was originally sent to DDC by our barrister in December 2020.
If you could get DDC to answer those fair and simple questions, maybe that would be a good start.
Do good and throw it in the sea... - 9 November 2021 13:25372913Paul Watkins wrote:Still baffled no reply re Convenants & has action been taken to enforce the Convenants in law.
Paul, if I recall correctly, won't you the Leader of DDC when planning permission for the controversial Car Wash was granted, and the whole China Gateway debacle happened? So in some ways you share collective responsibility for DDC’s actions during your time in office.
I know you are now in retirement from DDC duties, but I am sure you still have close connections with serving DDC councillors, maybe you could get DDC to answer our solicitors’ letters and their very fair and simple questions.
Did you read the Car Wash Association’s damning analysis of how planning was granted and our solicitors’ assessment of the true facts of the matter, and how DDC to date have refused to answer these letters or address the ongoing daily breaches of its own planning conditions, and other planning and environmental laws being broken on the site?
Re the Land Covenants relating to our house and the adjacent car wash site, they are for all to see on the Government’s Land Registry website.
As you know, property covenants bear no relation to actions or non-actions taken by a local authority, they are purely civil matters under common law and form part of our forthcoming civil case against Mr Pishtiwan Karim and the site’s freeholder, for legal reasons I cannot say more on that at this point.
I note you are trying to deflect attention from DDC and their total failure to handle this matter in the correct manner, by focusing on the land covenants, which are a whole separate legal issue.Do good and throw it in the sea... - 9 November 2021 13:36372914Somehow, I doubt that you will garner much support on here, Julie.
There is a body of opinion on this forum, mainly involving ex-councillors who refuse to accept that they might have shown either incompetence or poor judgment on planning matters.
Roger Walkden has the dubious distinction of being mentioned in the summing up in the verdict of the case between CPRE and China Gateway as having failed to do his job properly (I paraphase Lady Justice Hale - the full verdict may be read here https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0190.html
What is not widely known is that DDC funded China Gateway's failed appeal with taxpayers' money. I raised an FOI request to ascertain just how much the people of Dover had to fork out to do this. It amounted to over £250,000 not including DDC's own internal legal costs.
All this was essentially to serve the interests of a developer that had made donations to the local Tory party and had made great play (and still does, nauseatingly!) in their annual reports of being able to influence DDC's judgment. I refer of course to the proposed massive house building development in the AONB Farthingloe valley.
So please pardon my scepticism. I know that what gets posted here is read eventually by the relevant people. They will have ample chance to contradict what I have said but, of course, they won't. - 9 November 2021 13:46372915Yes, Ray, I agree with you wholeheartedly, and as I've said in previous posts, these posts are to bring this matter to a national and world audience, not just a few friends of the Dover district council.
There are times in people's lives when sometimes they have to speak truth to power when there is injustice, and not just walk on by.Do good and throw it in the sea... - Captain Haddock
- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,397
9 November 2021 14:24372916Paul Watkins wrote:Fascinated to read that there is a Restrictive Convenant applying to the site. Who has the benefit of the Covenant & has it been applied? If not why or has it been brought out?
A bit like the restrictive covenant on the Regent in Deal!
Now THAT worked out well?
"The world is still a weird place, despite my efforts to make clear and perfect sense of it".
Dr. Hunter S Thompson - 9 November 2021 15:21372917JulieS wrote:Yes, Ray, I agree with you wholeheartedly, and as I've said in previous posts, these posts are to bring this matter to a national and world audience, not just a few friends of the Dover district council.
There are times in people's lives when sometimes they have to speak truth to power when there is injustice, and not just walk on by.
Julie - I don't know the rights and wrongs of your case personally because I haven't researched it. As I've said, based on the prima facie facts that you have presented it, DDC have a lot of questions to answer. You won't have much joy escalating the matter to a national or world audience on here though, even if it might merit such an audience.
However, as you might have seen from previous posts, many involved in the Farthingloe debacle will not comment for fear of making themselves accountable. Perish the thought!
There will be lots of deflection tactics. These people are very good at it. And also lots of evasion (they're keen on that as well). - 9 November 2021 15:34372918Still doesn’t answer the question Bob.
- 9 November 2021 16:23372919Paul Watkins wrote:Still doesn’t answer the question Bob.
In much the same way as nobody has ever answered the points that I raised about China Gateway. Weren't you involved at the time, Paul? - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
9 November 2021 17:25372920June was a fair time away so I wonder if the councillors or council had updatesALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 9 November 2021 18:42372924Ray. Yes I was. To put it succinctly from memory. The Appeal was taken on advice from external Planning QC. I have nothing other to add .
- 9 November 2021 20:10372926Paul Watkins wrote:Ray. Yes I was. To put it succinctly from memory. The Appeal was taken on advice from external Planning QC. I have nothing other to add .
I'm not surprised. I seem to remember from an earlier post that you sought to blame this fiasco on a secretary's minute taking. Who decided that the advice of a QC was necessary and on what basis? This thread is about the accountability of DDC's planning department and the influence of councillors and politicians upon it.
Here's a great chance for you to come to their defence over an incident that was a shocking waste of public money.
"I have nothing further to add". As I said, why am I not surprised.Guest 1416 likes this - 9 November 2021 21:21372927Paul Watkins wrote:Ray. Yes I was. To put it succinctly from memory. The Appeal was taken on advice from external Planning QC. I have nothing other to add .
Are you telling me you and your cronies pissed away £250,000 ++++ of our tax payers money because a smart ass lawyer told you to, to protect the interests of a private company seeking to destroy an AONB for their own profit and to protect the egos & reputations of certain councillors on the Planning Committee at the time?
Why are you all not all in jail? Aren’t there any controls in place? Is this how the law works round here in Dover? It looks like you are willing to do it all over again and piss away more of taxpayer’s money over a car wash!!!
Why is councillor Walkden still on the planning committee even after the Supreme Court’s decision??How on earth can this be so? Or am I just living in the Twilight Zone!!!!A clear conscience is the sure sign of a bad memory.
