THESAURUS DEFINITION OF A STORYTELLER

“Someone who tells lies.”

STRANGER THAN FICTION

RAYDEN ENGINEERING LTD

“The company’s turnover has steadily increased since its inception to a current annual turnover of £10 million. The amount of staff employed by the company has also steadily increased and the company currently employs over 100 staff.”      NOVEMBER 2008

COMMENT: Naughty, naughty - this is not what Rayden Engineering declared in the last abbreviated accounts submitted to Companies House. With a  £10 million per annum turnover and over 100 employees one would be forced to question why  Rayden Engineering Ltd is registered at Companies House  as a small business with an annual turnover not exceeding £6.5 million and employing the less than 50 employees both required by law in order for Rayden Engineering Ltd to submit the relevant to small businesses abbreviated accounts.

Hector from HM Revenue and Customs would also wonder why a large company with a turnover of £10 million and employing over 100 staff is not submitting full accounts and paying the full rate of Corporation Tax instead enjoying the lower rate of Corporation Tax applicable only to small companies

OH OH DISCREPANCY ALERT

THE LEGITIMATELY PURCHASED PLOT 1 & 2 PARCELS OF LAND

THE FOURTH PARCEL OF ADJOINING LAND WHICH DID NOT BELONG TO THE WOOD BROTHER BUILDERS LTD AND NOW OCCUPIED BY RAYDEN ENGINEERING LTD. FORMERLY A FUNCTIONAL FLOOD PLAIN WHICH PROTECTED THE ADJACENT HOMES.

COMMENT: So when parcels of land 1 & 2 was legitimately purchased one year before the sellers dissolved as a company, they informed Rayden Engineering Ltd that they could use Plot 4 parcel of flood land not in the sellers ownership! But Rayden Engineering decided not to use Plot 4 for another 8 years despite immediately occupying  Plot 3 land in Wood Brother Builder ownership when the company ceased trading.

                                   EREWASH BOROUGH COUNCIL

“It would appear that the current ownership of the site is unknown.”    MARCH 2007                                                                   

DICK’S DASTARDLY TALES

In yarn spinning tradition what has been declared to one has been undeclared to another with two totally different versions of the same yarn. A brief synopsis of the Stranger Than Fiction fantasy world of Dastardly Dick  begins with the strange tales told in a futile attempt to justify stealing functional flood land.

EREWASH BOROUGH COUNCIL

“Staff spent a considerable amount of time trying to identify an owner of the site”                                                                                                                                                                   NOVEMBER 2006

COMMENT: Should have consulted with Dastardly Dick as he was privy to better information than a Local Authority’s access to information. When the second planning application was submitted in January 2007, the obligatory legal owner had been found and named on the submitted documents.

NOTICE ANYTHING

YET??

THE THIRD ADJOINING PARCEL OF LAND OCCUPIED BY RAYDEN ENGINEERING LTD WHICH BELONGED TO THE WOOD BROTHER BUILDERS LTD WHO DISSOLVED AS A COMPANY IN DECEMBER 2000.

DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

“”With regard to the triangular piece of land that has been fenced off to the rear of the properties on Wentworth Street, Rayden Engineering has in the past suggested this to be a suitable replacement  area for storage space.”                             SEPTEMBER 2006

RAYDEN ENGINEERING LTD

“Erewash Borough Council asked us to sell a piece of our site, on the condition that a new plot would be found for our use. The agreed spot was the unregistered land.”                                     SEPTEMBER 2006
 

COMMENT: So what you are really stating is that the Wood Brother Builders AND Erewash Borough Council gave you permission to take land not in their legal ownership!

COMMENT: So it wasn’t the Wood Brother Builders OR Erewash Borough Council OR Derbyshire Constabulary who gave you land not in their legal ownership then but your idea all along to take something which did not belong to you then?

RAYDEN ENGINEERING LTD

“At the suggestion of the Council and the advice of the local police, Rayden Engineering allowed the  Council to arrange for fencing to be put up around the disputed land.”                         DECEMBER 2008                    

COMMENT: So what you are really stating is that the Wood Brother Builders AND Erewash Borough Council AND Derbyshire Constabulary all gave you permission to take land not in their legal ownership!

EREWASH BOROUGH COUNCIL

“Having consulted with our Land Terriers we can confirm that we have not disposed of any land in the immediate vicinity.”                                                     DECEMBER 2008

COMMENT: So Erewash Borough Council did not “agree” to give you the land then?

The first planning application had been submitted without the relevant land ownership details and returned as invalid for Dastardly Dick to re-submit with the correct ownership details. By naming one unsuspecting person as the legal land owner it authenticated the planning application for the stolen flood land whilst appearing to have notified relevant parties without attracting unwanted attention through public and site notices - notably absent throughout the planning process.

COMMENT:   So if “the current ownership of the site is unknown” after determination, why was the planning application determined at all based upon known fraudulent legal land ownership documents which authenticated an otherwise invalid planning application then?

APPEAL SITE OWNERSHIP DETAILS CERTIFICATE B

“I certify that the appellant (or the agent) has given the requisite notice to everyone who, on the day 21 days before the start of this appeal, was the owner of any part of the land to which this appeal relates.”

OH OH DISCREPANCY ALERT

COMMENT:  As Dastardly Dick had submitted a Certificate of Ownership which authenticated an otherwise invalid planning application he was also admitting that he was not the legal land owner by doing so.

THESAURUS DEFINITION OF A THIEF

“One who takes property belonging to someone else with the intention of keeping it.”

PLANNING APPEAL NO: APP/N1025/A/07/2055144

APPEAL SITE OWNERSHIP DETAILS

“We need to know who owns the appeal site.  We also need to be sure that any other owner knows that you have made an appeal.”

THE

SEPTEMBER 2007 NOTICE SERVED ON  LAND OWNER

WARNING

“If you knowingly or recklessly sign an ownership certificate which contains any statement which is false or misleading, you are committing an offence and would be liable to a fine if convicted.”

PLANNING INSPECTORATE GUIDELINES

“A trespasser occupying land without the legal land owners permission does not  have any right to appeal refusal of planning permission at Secretary of State level.”

PLANNING APPEAL NO: APP/N1025/A/07/2055144

ESSENTIAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

“A copy of the site ownership certificate and ownership details submitted to the LPA  at application stage.”

PECUNIARY ADVANTAGE BY DECEPTION IS ALSO FRAUD UNDER THE FRAUD ACT 2006.

COMMENT:  So either way Dastardly Dick did not have any right to appeal at Secretary of State level against the LPA refusal of planning permission. If the documents which validated the whole planning application was not fraudulent, then as the legal land owner Dastardly Dick identified and named on those documents submitted to the LPA and The Planning Inspectorate had OBJECTED to Dastardly Dick’s trespass, occupation and development of Plot 4 functional flood land. - there was no right of appeal.  These objections meant that permission was clearly denied.

COMMENT:   How strange that despite Planning Inspectorate guidelines and prior knowledge of these fraudulent documents which “validated” the whole planning and appeal process, the appeal was favourably determined in Dastardly Dicks favour, secure in the knowledge a Judicial Review challenging that decision would have been unattainable to mere mortals.

NOT FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS???

THEN AS THE LEGAL LAND OWNER -

MY PERMISSION IS DENIED!!

RAYDEN ENGINEERING LTD

“When the site was bought from the Wood Brother Builders 9 years ago we were told we could use the land in question.”                                                    SEPTEMBER 2006