Following the 2007 flooding and during the preparation of the Mason Clark Report a number of problems were highlighted. The most significant in terms of cost to the comunity, effort required and resources expended has been the deliberate introduction of the two pieces of 12" pipe by one resident as mentioned in the previous blog article.
Following his discovery and revelation he has waged a virtual war on the Parish Council apparently for having the temerity to question his right to install the pipes in the dyke.
There are a number of pre-existing laws which cover such activity. These include the 1936 public health act, the 1991 land drainage act, the 1994 land drainage act, the Lower Ouse Internal Drainage Board by-laws and various aspects of Riparian Law. This same individual stated in a letter to the Flood Action Group that he had approached the Drainage Board and been told not to install the pipes but had gone ahead anyway with a home brewed and inadequate scheme hidden away out of sight behind his house. A disaster waiting to happen and happen it did in June 2007.
At various times subsequently he has claimed he (a) does own the dyke, (b) that he does not own the dyke, and (c) that someone else (anyone but him it seems) should pay for its maintenance.
After the County Council Engineers had designed a drainage improvement scheme and the Parish Council carried out wide consultation within the community (which showed overwhelming support for the project), following which a low interest, capital project, public works was taken out by the council and Mason-Clark Consulting Engineers engaged to oversee the works. This same individual is still attempting to derail the project by issuing leaflets containing blatant lies about the design process and fundamental misrepresentations about the finances. He writes to the press but runs to hide behind the Information Commissioners Office with spurious complaints when his name appears in public in responses to correct the lies he circulated. The false accusations simply add to council administration costs and achieve nothing except delay.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI hear the same bloke is now claiming that there was another scheme drawn up by him in conjunction with the county council and drainage board, besides the county council one which the parish council was given. Pity the county council havent heard anything about this alternative scheme. Can it be he is telling lies again? Is it likely that professional engineers would include such a rank amateur in designing such a scheme?
ReplyDeleteI see the Goole Times ran an article about this. The other scheme being claimed as jointly designed by the same bloke, the east riding council and the drainage board was all a load of hot air. The authority knows nothing whatsoever about it and neither do the drainage board. Its a wonder his nose hasnt grown to scrape on the floor like pinocio.
ReplyDelete