Wakey to get new ground maybe

[HuddsTigers]

Just a blame game.

They're blaming everyone but anyone associated with the clubs.

Interesting that there was a post stating that one other trust member was present when Rodney informed them that Newcold was falling outside the Unilateral Undertaking. Also interesting that no one is criticising the Trust Member for not passing on that info to the new trust members or for not doing anything about it.....

I know I'm guilty of blind faith at times myself - and have been historically - but at least we have quantum of our fanbase willing to question everything too and at least provide some balanced opposition. Least means that everything is scrutinised.

Thats a intresting thought if the roles were reversed there would be just as meny people having a go at the club on here as there would be having a go at box and the council , apart from the odd post and ones from cas fans all the 30 or so regulars who post on the wakey forum are singing from the same hymn sheet

What I meant is that everything along the way is scrutinised to the nth degree. We all interpret things differently. It could quite easily have been us but again, we're lucky we have WR to fall back on.

[WallTiger]

Interesting that there was a post stating that one other trust member was present when Rodney informed them that Newcold was falling outside the Unilateral Undertaking. Also interesting that no one is criticising the Trust Member for not passing on that info to the new trust members or for not doing anything about it.....

I think you've misread this. Only one current member of the trust was a member at that time, but he wasn't present at the meeting nor informed afterwards. SRW kept it to himself.[/quote

But from the Councils viewpoint the Trust were made fully aware because the Chairman was in the meeting. Now forgetting for one minute the whole WMDC could have done more to object this and make sure it counted etc. They will surely argue that the Community Trust were involved and had no problem with it!? Shouldn’t the current Trust members and Club be gunning for SRW as much as WMDC in all this?

[HuddsTigers]

Interesting that there was a post stating that one other trust member was present when Rodney informed them that Newcold was falling outside the Unilateral Undertaking. Also interesting that no one is criticising the Trust Member for not passing on that info to the new trust members or for not doing anything about it.....

I think you've misread this. Only one current member of the trust was a member at that time, but he wasn't present at the meeting nor informed afterwards. SRW kept it to himself.

Fair point, you're right I did misread it. So many threads, so much information.

However, the question remains as to when the rest of the Trustees found out.

[Toady]

Interesting that there was a post stating that one other trust member was present when Rodney informed them that Newcold was falling outside the Unilateral Undertaking. Also interesting that no one is criticising the Trust Member for not passing on that info to the new trust members or for not doing anything about it.....

I think you've misread this. Only one current member of the trust was a member at that time, but he wasn't present at the meeting nor informed afterwards. SRW kept it to himself.[/quote

But from the Councils viewpoint the Trust were made fully aware because the Chairman was in the meeting. Now forgetting for one minute the whole WMDC could have done more to object this and make sure it counted etc. They will surely argue that the Community Trust were involved and had no problem with it!? Shouldn’t the current Trust members and Club be gunning for SRW as much as WMDC in all this?

As I said, SRW may have questions to answer over his failure to protect the best interests of the trust, but really that's just a side issue. The main point is why the body charged with the duty to enforce the deal have completely failed to do that. They have allowed or even encouraged the developer to believe that the s106 is something they can ignore or get around. Unfortunately, they spent too long denying it was anything to do with them. Somehow they managed to completely misunderstand what a unilateral undertaking is and what role the LPA have in it, even blaming the SoS. We'll have to wait and see how it pans out.

[The Firm]

Interesting that there was a post stating that one other trust member was present when Rodney informed them that Newcold was falling outside the Unilateral Undertaking. Also interesting that no one is criticising the Trust Member for not passing on that info to the new trust members or for not doing anything about it.....

I think you've misread this. Only one current member of the trust was a member at that time, but he wasn't present at the meeting nor informed afterwards. SRW kept it to himself.[/quote

But from the Councils viewpoint the Trust were made fully aware because the Chairman was in the meeting. Now forgetting for one minute the whole WMDC could have done more to object this and make sure it counted etc. They will surely argue that the Community Trust were involved and had no problem with it!? Shouldn’t the current Trust members and Club be gunning for SRW as much as WMDC in all this?

As I said, SRW may have questions to answer over his failure to protect the best interests of the trust, but really that's just a side issue. The main point is why the body charged with the duty to enforce the deal have completely failed to do that. They have allowed or even encouraged the developer to believe that the s106 is something they can ignore or get around. Unfortunately, they spent too long denying it was anything to do with them. Somehow they managed to completely misunderstand what a unilateral undertaking is and what role the LPA have in it, even blaming the SoS. We'll have to wait and see how it pans out.

There’s also that small matter that Newcold or not THE TRIGGER POINT HAS NOT BEEN REACHED. I’m shouting it because you wakey fans seem to be glossing over that rather important fact. There is nothing statutory to enforce yet and i’m really not sure why you lot don’t seem to get that. Yorkcourt haven’t built on all of the greenbelt and buggered off, it’s still there mostly untouched.

[alcasfan]

ShakeyWakey RLfans are now rounding on John Trickett!

Corbyn next!!

8)

[alcasfan]

Post a link then to show it wasn't hindsight.

To show what wasn't hindsight?

You are losing me here. (but maybe that is a good thing)

[Toady]

Post a link then to show it wasn't hindsight.

To show what wasn't hindsight?

You are losing me here. (but maybe that is a good thing)

A link to something (allegedly a post from you) that highlights that this 'clear evidence' (one sentence taken out of context) means that the s106 obligation would not be transferred to the Newcold application and it would not count towards the trigger point, posted before it came out from the council that this would be the case and before the period for objections expired. You know, without the power of hindsight. The smoking gun that warned all Wakey fans what was going to happen.

[Toady]

hind·sight
ˈhīn(d)ˌsīt/Submit
noun
understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed.
"with hindsight, I should never have gone"

[HuddsTigers]

Given that was taken from the planning application itself I’m sure anyone had plenty of time to object.

[alcasfan]

Given that was taken from the planning application itself I’m sure anyone had plenty of time to object.

I don't think he has got it yet !

[Toady]

Given that was taken from the planning application itself I’m sure anyone had plenty of time to object.

I don't think he has got it yet !

OK. One more time.

Position 1:

There was nothing in the public domain that stated newcold would not count towards the trigger point before the period for objections passed.

Bloody Hell! How many times does it take.!

08/07/2013 Design and Access Statement Page bloody 4!!

http://cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf


"This detailed application is a stand alone application and in no way legally ties it to the extant outline consent mentioned above"


.

That on 8/7/2013 it was obvious to anyone who cared to read this statement on the planning portal that the Newcold application would not count towards the trigger point for the community stadium build. In fact someone on here actually warned all the Wakey fans at the time that this was the case.

Position 2:
That on 8/7/2013 and until such time that the council revealed that the Newcold application would not count towards the trigger point (after the time limit for objections had passed) no-one could have read that statement in context at the time and come to that conclusion. The whole statement relates to the two planning applications and dissociates them. The council at the time asserted that the reason for a stand-alone application was that the height of the Newcold build was in excess of that allowed by the original outline planning.

So, if position 1 is true, there will be some link on the internet to where this assertion/warning was made at the time.

Otherwise, the assertion was made with hindsight once the council had made its declaration that for some reason (unknown to anyone) that the new application could not count to the trigger point because it was a new application after taking legal advice (that later was proved not to exist).
This involved going back to the planning portal after the event, finding and highlighting that one sentence, which could, at a push, suggest the scope of 'in no way legally ties' included the s106 obligation associated with the land.

Which is it?
link or no link?
obvious at the time or only with hindsight?
warning or urban myth?

[mart0042]

Is srw being named in the court papers along with the council, otherwise he might not have to answer anything. Just a point

[HuddsTigers]

Toady, that line was pulled out and posted on here by Al himself at the time when the application went up. And possibly on RLFans too.

Wakey fans read this forum and ignored it. So the question remains why if a Cas fan picked it out, not one Wakey fan did.

[The Firm]

Given that was taken from the planning application itself I’m sure anyone had plenty of time to object.

I don't think he has got it yet !

OK. One more time.

Position 1:

There was nothing in the public domain that stated newcold would not count towards the trigger point before the period for objections passed.

Bloody Hell! How many times does it take.!

08/07/2013 Design and Access Statement Page bloody 4!!

http://cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf


"This detailed application is a stand alone application and in no way legally ties it to the extant outline consent mentioned above"


.

That on 8/7/2013 it was obvious to anyone who cared to read this statement on the planning portal that the Newcold application would not count towards the trigger point for the community stadium build. In fact someone on here actually warned all the Wakey fans at the time that this was the case.

Position 2:
That on 8/7/2013 and until such time that the council revealed that the Newcold application would not count towards the trigger point (after the time limit for objections had passed) no-one could have read that statement in context at the time and come to that conclusion. The whole statement relates to the two planning applications and dissociates them. The council at the time asserted that the reason for a stand-alone application was that the height of the Newcold build was in excess of that allowed by the original outline planning.

So, if position 1 is true, there will be some link on the internet to where this assertion/warning was made at the time.

Otherwise, the assertion was made with hindsight once the council had made its declaration that for some reason (unknown to anyone) that the new application could not count to the trigger point because it was a new application after taking legal advice (that later was proved not to exist).
This involved going back to the planning portal after the event, finding and highlighting that one sentence, which could, at a push, suggest the scope of 'in no way legally ties' included the s106 obligation associated with the land.

Which is it?
link or no link?
obvious at the time or only with hindsight?
warning or urban myth?

No-one could have read that sentence in that context at the time? Except someone did as has just been proven and informed Wakey fans of it. He was then rounded on as a Cas troll, stirring up trouble, not knowing what he was in about etc. Sound familiar with what happens on that rlfans board of yours everytime someone says simething against the trust or club? Thing is he was right.

Your lots problem is you won’t listen and are blind to what is staring you straight in the face. You also seem to like to blame eveybody but yourselves for your own failings. And you are doing exactly the same again here. Carter is leading you into a battle you can’t and won’t win, one which will paralyse your club for many years to come. Feel free to pop back on here in 18 months or so then i can tell you ‘i told you so’. Until then toddle on back to the Wakey forum where you can stick your hand in the sand with the rest of the ostriches.

[alcasfan]

I get the feeling my post touched a nerve with someone close to the action/inaction there. 8)

"What's done, is done" as the saying goes.

[Tigerade]

I think you have Al. Wonder who Toady is ? Only 14 posts and all stadium related. :-k :-k :-k

For what it's worth - I cannot see a lawyer taking WT's case up in court. Not enough evidence against the accused. Meanwhile, the clock keeps ticking away.

[tigerfeat]

Tigerade why dont you or al or the firm go on the wakey board and put the points across youve been making on here you all know the ins and outs of it would be interesting to see that following debate ...

[Tigerade]

I can't tigerfeat. Banned for a joke that was taken as an offence by the politically correct Wakey fans.

[WallTiger]

What I still dont get on their board is whilst they are clearly miffed shall we say with SRWs involvement why there still doesn’t seem to have been much questioning of the fact he was privy to the information about Newcold and asking serious questions of the Trust/Club how this would affect any court case?