I A N K A Y
An all star cast, featuring Ashley Brown as the then District Planning officer. Ian Kay, his sidekick henchman, as the Assistant District Planning Officer. David Phillips as the Chief Enforcement Officer, with a peculiar penchant for collecting hair samples from sinks. Derek Holness as the Chief Executive who retired on an enhanced pension for his part in the alleged conspiracy. Doug Moss as the planning and then policy officer for Wealden. Christine Nuttall, as the solicitor working with Victorio Scarpa, to bury the fictional, Victor von Woolfe, and hide the truth about the fictional historic building, water pumping station near Herstmonceux village, they knew all about in secret session, but decided not to admit, in conspiring to abuse the rights of the then owner. Which meant not following procedure, and lying the the Secretary of State and his planning Inspectors.
The all star cast also includes Trevor Scott as the head of legal services, who became the council's Chief Executive. Probably, because nobody else in their right mind would get involved in such an allegedly corrupt local authority. Trevor Scott was involved in the negotiations including Daniel Goodwin and (then) Councillor Andrew Long, where this council would sweep a costs award under the table, and obtain consent for the historic building to be residentially occupied lawfully. But, it was not to be. The offer was simply a ruse. The moment an engagement to a Masonic cabinet member was called off, The deal was called off. That was when they decided to frame Victor von Woolfe for a crime he did not commit. The object being the bury their adversary. With Sussex police being only too willing to soil their hands again.
Ian Macrorie Kay (IMK) was involved in many cases, the following being just four examples, that should properly lead to an outside investigation and prosecution, to include recovery of the proceeds of crime.
1. STREAM FARM
His actions are all the more onerous, where it appears from the evidence, that this officer became more of a paid liar to appear on witness stands and give false and misleading testimony. His misdeeds include lying on oath at a Public Inquiry concerning Stream Farm in Horam. Knowingly misleading a Planning Inspector as to the origin of a monochrome aerial photograph of poly tunnels during a Public Inquiry, etc., claiming he had no knowledge of where this picture came from, and withholding other photographic evidence which was supplied to a barrister, but not to the Planning Inspectorate. When in fact the monochrome picture had come from his own files, another colour version of the same picture was found in the working files, still marked: "Return to IMK".
It transpired that Mr Kay was an amateur pilot, so was very interested in aerial pictures for use in CLEUD applications. He also deceived the Inspector, when during his testimony he claimed that WC did not routinely use aerial pictures in such determinations, knowing full well that a Committee had authorised such expenditure as a cost sharing exercise with East Sussex County Council. We think the Inspector should have been informed of such facts. But Ian Kay decided not to share this information. The decision not to tell the Inspector the truth would have been discussed in advance with his colleagues as part of their strategy, well in advance of the Appeal. B. Best belonged to Tyrian Lodge in South Street, Eastbourne, along with Brian West, another builder.
2. BUSHY WOOD
Commenting in a local paper, WC having lost at an Appeal as to the need for an animal sanctuary off the A22 near Bushywood Scout Camp and Knockhatch Adventure Park. Ian Kay is quoted responding to the decision: "We'll just have to live with it." Clearly, he masterminded the winter service of an Enforcement Notice, on Christmas Eve. Knowing the occupiers, Mr and Mrs Punter were already on holiday elsewhere. He also took to the stand to give evidence, after the Inspectorate and others has expressed doubt as to his continued employment, following the Stream Farm appeal. Why was he still working at WC? Officials had said he should be replaced.
You should know that Wealden bulldozed the animal sanctuary before determining a valid planning application, which was then appealed to the Secretary of State. WC argued ahead of the Public Inquiry, that the Inspectorate could not hear an appeal where there was no building in existence. The Inspectorate disagreed, acknowledging that the planning application should have been determined prior to demolition. Hence, the applicants were fully entitled to a decision, as if the buildings were still extant.
3. FAILING TO DECLARE AN INTEREST
Commenting on his father in-law's application concerning land or a property in Pevensey Bay, during an Area Plans South committee meeting, where he failed to declare an interest. A member asked Mr Kay if it would be appropriate for him to explain the relationship between himself and B. Best, the developer/owner of the property in question.
Instead of answering the question, Mr Kay quickly gathered his papers, and hastily exited the committee chamber. Subsequently altering the Register of Interests book, by tippex-ing over a earlier entry, to make it appear that he did declare an interest. Either that, or one of his staff did it for him. A fraudulent act if on forensic investigation of the Register, the allegation proves to be correct.
4. OLD PUMP HOUSE
TIan Kay was the author of a letter concerning a Tree Preservation Order in 1983/4, and subsequent appeal, relating to the Old Pump House. Together with his boss Ashley Brown and other officers, it is alleged that he conspired to deprive the then occupier of a beneficial use, by attempting to bury the heritage item in sycamore weed trees. This cohort of conspirators must have reached out to the Parish Council, who it appears enjoined in a bout of institutional discrimination. Misleading the Area Plans South committee to enforce, not based on proper planning considerations, but on matters constituting character assassination, that had no place in the planning arena. Not being material planning considerations.
It appears that Brown and Kay obtained permission to bypass the usual heritage consultees, where although the committee had been apprised in a report, that they were dealing with a historic building, without any use, the committee were bamboozled into allowing the planning department to abandon government circulars, and basically, lie to another Planning Inspector. Telling him, that the building they were looking at, was not the historic pumping station.
Ian Kay must have known that he himself, and his council, owed a duty to the then occupier, to provide a reasonable and beneficial use. In the interests of giving a reason to restore a heritage site in their geographical remit.
Working with a staff, that included his co-conspirators, David Phillips and the legal team at that time was led by Victorio Patrick Scarpa and Christine Nuttall, they introduced many more officers into their group. It became a truly institutional pastime. A plan to destroy the occupier, and deliberately blight the historic property. The aim being to devalue and disenfranchise the person clearing the site of detritus and overgrowing flora. Seeking, to obtain the property at an undervalue for near neighbours. Describing Peter and June Townley as preferred occupiers in one letter to Butters Olien Solicitors.
Those of you familiar with planning law, will know that councils have a duty to provide a beneficial use to the occupiers of historic buildings as the incentive to pay for their upkeep.
Some local authorities in the United Kingdom are notoriously corrupt. The Wealden District Council has been identified as one of the worst, because of its appalling human rights record, lack of accountability & transparency, and almost total lack of genuinely affordable housing.
The idea being to make officers and councillors representing renting landlords, as rich as possible, in as short a time as possible. Also, with enhanced pension packages, including paying heating bills for staff working from home at the rate (tax) payer's expense, well past the Covid fiasco that saw procurement fraud rise to astronomical levels, along with the National Debt. Including council's borrowing more than they can afford to repay, generating a spiral, where the ordinary working person is taxed more, and cannot afford to live. With councils neglecting to build genuinely affordable housing, to assuage parliamentary landlords. Despite the cost of housing the homeless in temporary accommodation - again - at the taxpayers expense.
Until such matters are dealt with, the UK is held to be "up shit creek without a paddle."
You might care too agree, the so-called "planning" departments in many councils, could not organise a piss-up, in a brewery. The problem being that no political party, and certainly no British Prime Minister in recent years, appears to have had the stomach to rout out corruption. More the opposite, with the likes of Tony Blair, Lord David Cameron and Boris Johnson, the only hope being the fictional character Honest Edward John Thomas. Otherwise known as 'Honest Johnson.'
Incompatibility in Human Rights terms, is where one statute does not comply with HR statute. The European Convention does include Article 13, the right to an effective remedy.
WEALDEN DISTRICT COUNCIL - CAST OF CHARACTERS
The United Kingdom does not yet have a Written Constitution, leaving the justice system open to abuse via the honours system. [R v Sussex Justices 1924] Without justice being available to the ordinary man in the street, fairly, impartially and affordably, Britain can never truly be great again, or hold it's head high on the international stage.
This website is Copyright © 2023 Injustice Alliance.
The views, performance reviews and opinions of the Trust are protected by Articles 18 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The names of the main character and some of the supporting characters have been changed to protect their identity. Other characters in this work of fiction, retain their original names, where historical facts are quoted essentially and accurately, with reference to key documents tendered as supporting evidence.
Copyright is asserted as per sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988. The truth is stranger than fiction.
The dialogue is fictionalized, no claim is made as to the accuracy of conversations between real persons, living or deceased.