As yet my email remains unanswered however tonight, 31/10/2013, spookily the Chief Executive, Dr Sue, (she was finance officer in 2009 and in charge of "due diligence" partially answered some of the points.
It seems that for those of us who follow the finer points of this saga they will know that part of the evidence said to prove the finances were in place to build (?) the flats and hotel was a letter from SFP Services ltd stating Wetmore were prepared to fund the hotel build to the tune of £5M.
Now questions being asked today wonder whether TDC ever checked the veracity of this letter and when asked by the T&F the same question Dr. Sue said yes but this was done by "External Solicitors"
Wow where is this report and why wasn't it part of the appendixes attached to the 2009 agreement?
Tonight we found out, it seems TDC's solicitor Eversheds were asked to write to SFP's solicitor (Prettys of Ipswich) to ask them to confirm the offer from Wetmore was genuine, that there was a valid agreement and that the finances were available.
No I don't know whether I'm cynical or not but considering Wetmore Foundation is 100% owned by Colin Hill, Shaun Keegan's son in Law I bet you can guess Wetmore were given a clean bill of health
3 comments:
Surely, the first check which should have been made would have been on Wetmore's ownership and accounts? You don't need to employ an external solicitor to do this. Indeed, anyone half competent in business or investment would be able to do those check themselves. Are there not councillors who have any experience of business?
As soon as it became apparent that Wetmore was owned by the same people who were supposed to be building the flats, I would have asked them to provide a substantial bond. i.e. if the development isn't being underwritten by a financially viable third party you have nobody to sue for damages when it all goes wrong.
Dr Sue ! Disclose the solicitors' letter exchange and wait to have it explained to you after unpaid, but more competent, people tell you what the letters are worth.
I would bet that Eversheds had supplementary advice to proffer.
does sue Muck do ANYTHING shes paid to do??
extortionate salary, potential to build or destroy our towns.
why has the draft letter from SFP been handed to sue? why not HP?? (he is after all our supposed legal!
she doesnt have the power or knowledge to change the already amended agreement!
FORS's last petition was for no more extensions to the deadline/contract/agreement. FORS petition was snubbed and not discussed.due to TDC not being seen to hinder SFP, this is way past hindrance, more helpful!
Grrrrr!
Post a Comment