| Topic: | I got an apology and reply on all this from a Conservator | |
| Posted by: | Adrian Pearce | |
| Date/Time: | 02/08/16 11:13:00 |
| Having followed this sorry saga on this forum for a while, yesterday I wrote as a levy payer to all the Conservators expressing my concerns. I have now had a reply from one Conservator. It makes interesting reading so I have pasted it below. I am still waiting to hear from the others. ++++++ Dear Mr Pearce Thank you for copying me on your letter to Prue Whyte. I regret that you have to write to the Trustees about the failure of our legal duty of trust to enforce (or possibly renegotiate) the covenants. I cannot defend the actions of the Trustees. The easement covenants were put in place as the trustees are obliged by a legal duty to ensure the common is protected. The Trustees took legal advice last week which stated; “The Conservators do need to meet to make decisions. In our view the decision in relation to occupation/assurances is one appropriately taken by the Conservators rather than under the implied delegated authority of staff. We are not aware that there has as yet been any express delegation” and “Formal decisions of the Conservators would need to be taken by the Conservators in person at a meeting, because there is no mechanism in the WPCC Act or the Commissioners Clauses Act 1847 for the Conservators to take decisions in other ways.” A request for an interim board meeting (our next scheduled board is 10 October) to discuss the issues raised by the breaches of the covenants has been refused by the Trustees. The reality is that the Trustees have no intention to enforce the covenants, a clear breach of their legal duty. As a Trustee I can only apologise to yourself and levy payers, our behaviour in failing to enforce agreements to protect the common is a both dismaying and a disgrace. Regards John Cameron |