Monkeh Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 Okay thanks. Lets hope the council have played it by the book and reply promptly. as poor as our city's council have been with other things this is not one of them, they seem convinced they have made the right legal choices with the whole affair, Its up to that jumped up cockney **** to prove that they have been unfair in the process which they haven't, the judge only need to see the video (which we all have seen) of the council meeting and the news report after to see the heckling and damn right un-professinal approch these knuckle draggers have had, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melksham Red Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 the judge only need to see the video (which we all have seen) of the council meeting and the news report after to see the heckling and damn right un-professinal approch these knuckle draggers have had, Is Crispin the cockney guy who mocked our club whilst giving his speech at that meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 Is Crispin the cockney guy who mocked our club whilst giving his speech at that meeting? Nah that was Charlie Bolton - who to his credit realised his mistake and wrote a letter of apology to the club/ST afterwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 Is Crispin the cockney guy who mocked our club whilst giving his speech at that meeting? No, thats Charlie Bolton of the so-called "political" green party Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
del ete Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 Okay thanks. Lets hope the council have played it by the book and reply promptly. Worryingly on the article which was removed by the EP im sure it read "council spokes person has stated that the VG applicants should send a letter to the courts and not them, and that they should know the procedure". This is a concern if they do not have a clue as to the procuedure they should follow. A simple google search highlights that the council would need to reply to the letter asap, even if it is to tell them to go forth and multiply. Also Crispin said in his radio interview that he was shocked that the council had not replied to their letter (he handed it in friday - interview tuesday?) which makes me wonder what type of timescale they had put down on the letter in order to obtain a response. Could this be a way of pushing the JR review perhaps. Claiming the council have not replied to their letter. All very concerning, I really hope the council have this tied up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbert Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 Worryingly on the article which was removed by the EP im sure it read "council spokes person has stated that the VG applicants should send a letter to the courts and not them, and that they should know the procedure". This is a concern if they do not have a clue as to the procuedure they should follow. A simple google search highlights that the council would need to reply to the letter asap, even if it is to tell them to go forth and multiply. Also Crispin said in his radio interview that he was shocked that the council had not replied to their letter (he handed it in friday - interview tuesday?) which makes me wonder what type of timescale they had put down on the letter in order to obtain a response. Could this be a way of pushing the JR review perhaps. Claiming the council have not replied to their letter. All very concerning, I really hope the council have this tied up. Yes my understanding is that the council should reply to the letter within two weeks for it not to be viewed badly by the courts if it does go to JR. The EP report seemed to very much paraphrase their conversation with the council spokesman. My guess is that maybe the reported asked something like "Any comments on the judicial review of the TVG decision?" which would lead to the line in the EP article which said "But the council says Mr Crispin would have to apply to the courts and not to them before a review could go ahead. Officially, therefore, a judicial review does not currently exist.". The other question is what did the letter set out as a proposed solution to their complaint? I get the impression that they may have said that they want it to go to a judicial review, which is why the council have pointed out that would be up to a judge to decide. Sadly it doesn't look like we can get hold of the letter using a FOI request to the council. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark43 Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 Is that right. So to clarify the only people who can apply for JR are the original bunch who applied for the TG in the first place. So any new people that have got themselves involved can't apply? But I thought this Crispin bloke was part of that group wasnt he? He's definitely been interviewed in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 I would hope the council know to reply to the letter, especially after having to go to a JR for the stokes croft tesco.. should be well versed on the practice by now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
del ete Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 I would hope the council know to reply to the letter, especially after having to go to a JR for the stokes croft tesco.. should be well versed on the practice by now! Maybe they are all off sick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 But I thought this Crispin bloke was part of that group wasnt he? He's definitely been interviewed in the past. I dont believe he is part of the AV group who put forward the TG application, he has spoken against the stadium sorry, for the town green in council meetings as an independant. He may have been given additional coverage by the media due to his previous role as a councillor. It must be reiterated that an application for JR can only be made by the original claimants or somebody who is directly affected by the decision.......he is neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.