Falmer Parish Council reveal who is funding the Judicial Review Application

[Lord Bracknell]

From http://www.angelfire.com/space/falmer/LatestNews.htm

Falmer Village will be joint applicants in the High Court challenge to John Prescott’s decision to allow the building of a 23,000 capacity stadium in Falmer. His decision not only goes against his own planning policies of not building in areas of outstanding natural beauty, but also against the advice of two of his own inspectors. To get around this he has said that although a football stadium is not in the national interest the regeneration of an area of deprivation such as Moulsecoombe is. This actually means that any developer could in the future use this argument to build on AONB or even National Park land, as long as it was close to somewhere designated as an area of deprivation. All the downland between Falmer and Sheepcote could be threatened. Sheepcote is also an area of deprivation. The irony is that not only can a developer use these areas of deprivation to build on protected land, but can also get grants from the government to do it. The football club are hoping to get 10 million pounds in grants to help in this so called regeneration.

The legal action, if we lose, will cost £60000. The Society of Sussex Downsmen and South Downs Conservation board have both pledged £5000. We are paying half the costs along with Lewes District Council. This means we need to find £25,000. We have already raised £15,000, and so need to find another £10,000. We need to raise this money before we go to court. This will probably not be before June next year. The strange thing about these appeals is that if we win, and I think we will, the government have to pay our costs. We pay nothing. If we lose we pay their costs.

 

[ShorehamGull]

Only £10,000 needed, shall I send them a blank cheque.

 

[perseus]

So who are the Council representatives on the South Downs Conservation Board?

 

[Easy 10]

How do they KNOW it will cost them £60,000 if they lose ?

 

[HampshireSeagulls]

The last sentence is telling. "If we lose we pay their costs". So, the overall cost of them failing will rocket upwards from the initial £60K to whatever the Government send them a bill for!

Far from being a convincing argument in their favour, this actually exposes that they are opening themselves up to huge costs, when you consider that very few of these appeals have ever been upheld.

 

[Gwylan]

"The strange thing about these appeals is that if we win, and I think we will the government have to pay our costs. We pay nothing."

Why such optimism? The government doesn't lose many planning JRs.

The fact that they can't spell 'Moulsecoomb' shows how out of touch they are with anything outside their little world FFS, the place is only about a quarter of a mile from Falmer.

 

[bhafc99]

Did Prescott really say a stadium was NOT in the national interests?

 

[The Large One]

From http://www.angelfire.com/space/falmer/LatestNews.htm

The legal action, if we lose, will cost £60000. The Society of Sussex Downsmen and South Downs Conservation board have both pledged £5000. We are paying half the costs along with Lewes District Council. This means we need to find £25,000. We have already raised £15,000, and so need to find another £10,000. We need to raise this money before we go to court. This will probably not be before June next year. The strange thing about these appeals is that if we win, and I think we will, the government have to pay our costs. We pay nothing. If we lose we pay their costs.

So, let's do the sums here.

The total costs are £60,000. SSD and SDCB are coughing up £5,000 apiece. That's £50,000 to find, and they need £25,000. So, £25,000 + £10,000 (contributed) = £35,000 (that's what they're estimating their solicitors will cost). Take that £35,000 from the £60,000 and that leaves £25,000 - and that's what they believe the government's solicitors will cost?

So, if I've got this right - Lewes DC believe their solicitors are going to cost £10,000 more than the Government's. Are they completely f***ing mad?

For every solicitor Lewes employs, the government will employ three. Each of the government's solicitors will be twice the cost of Lewes, and the government will go full pelt into this one. f*** sake, who did those sums?

 

[lost in london]

They seem to be suggesting that this isn't some act of NIMBYism, but is in fact necessary to stop any future developments in similar areas all over the country. How community spirited of them.

One word for that

BOLLOCKS!

Bunch of self-serving, meddling, losers.

 

[DIFFBROOK]

They dont know, its an estimate. How long is a piece of string, in this case how long will the JR go on for. The longer it goes on, the bigger the bill. Put it this way, the Govt will not want to lose this for Practical and Political reasons.

If the estimate is for £60k, say for 3-5 days high court time, it will be interesting to see what will happen if it drags on and the bills get higher and higher and higher. Govt has immense resources behind this, LDC and in particular Falmer dont. They may have to withdraw, because £60k might be a price worth losing, but what happens if its £100k, 200k, 500k. Who pays then and who stands to lose. Would a Falmer Res, put up his/her house for this. I doubt it.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

Let them have their judicial review - let them lose - let them have to all move out of sodding Falmer because they can't afford to pay the government's costs.

f*** Them.

 

[Gwylan]

Re: Re: Falmer Parish Council reveal who is funding the Judicial Review Application

So, let's do the sums here.
...

So, if I've got this right - Lewes DC believe their solicitors are going to cost £10,000 more than the Government's. Are they completely f***ing mad?

For every solicitor Lewes employs, the government will employ three. Each of the government's solicitors will be twice the cost of Lewes, and the government will go full pelt into this one. f*** sake, who did those sums?

Well, if they end up being hit by a six-figure sum for costs, end up losing their houses and being forced to move away, at least they won't have a stadium on their doorstep.

 

[Tony Le Mesmer]

From http://www.angelfire.com/space/falmer/LatestNews.htm

We need to raise this money before we go to court. This will probably not be before June next year.

What the outcome of the High Court case, the Case itself or payment of it should they lose??

 

[Curious Orange]

Looks like my letter to the Argus from Monday was bang on.

Originally written by Me in the Argus
I assume the council doesn't believe the economic regeneration of deprived areas of the country, such as neighbouring Moulsecoomb, is in the national interest, despite the Government's national policy to the contrary.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I will love it just love it if the Falmer residents re mortgage their houses to the hilt, lose the appeal and get repossessed and rehoused as tenants in Moulescoombe.

I am a patient and tolerant man but I wish them nothing but a fecking huge legal bill for their pathetic nimbyism.

 

[Shizuoka Dolphin]

Regardless of all this, my understanding is we can go ahead and start building the thing as soon as we like, so when are we expected to start churning up the stunning natural beauty of that crappy old field?

 

[Gwylan]

I will love it just love it if the Falmer residents re mortgage their houses to the hilt, lose the appeal and get repossessed and rehoused as tenants in Moulescoombe.

I am a patient and tolerant man but I wish them nothing but a fecking huge legal bill for their pathetic nimbyism.

Nah, they won't be rehoused - they'd be deemed as making themselves deliberately homeless.

And Gareth, it's MOULSECOOMB - there's no 'e'.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I am stressed and pissed off and likely to do something rash

They are self serving numpties who lie and spread unfounded rumours and bullshit.

They seem to think they are living in the middle of the lake district or something.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Who pays the LDC costs when they lose? Named individuals who brought the case, or the LDC tax-payers? If it's the latter, there is surely a case answer to the Audit Commission for reckless misuse of public funds without having any kind of mandate to do so?

 

[Curious Orange]

The interesting thing is that the various opponents are clearly not singing from the same hymn sheet. LDC are clearly not interested in AONBs or open downland otherwise they wouldn't be advocating Toads Hole Valley or Sheepcote Valley, the only two sites that even come close to Falmer in terms of suitability.