@ Sarah I completed my submission to the ICO last week. The ICO confirmed a couple of days ago that they have asked the WPCC for their submission in respect of the exchange of land with the Royal Wimbledon.  The WPCC have 20 working days to provide this - the ICO will then take a couple of months to consider the evidence before issuing thier decision. The WPCC are simply trying to bury these transactions, claiming in the case of the RWGC that it is “historic”, and therefore irrelevant. It is not historic - the swop is in place today, and it loses a huge swathe of common land to the golf club for their private car park. The WPCC agreement breaches the 1871 Act, and they were warned of this by Guy Fetherstonhaugh QC, who voiced his concerns to the WPCC trustees. GF stated; “whether preventing the general public to park in the car park would constitute enclosure which was prohibited by. S 34 of the Act” and “whether the exclusive use of the car park as required by the Golf Club would make the LICENCE in effect a LEASE, which was prohibited by S35 of the Act”.

Entire Thread

Topic	Date Posted	Posted By
ICO and WPCC	05/08/19 19:22:00	John Cameron
Re:ICO and WPCC	05/08/19 19:28:00	John Cameron
Re:Re:ICO and WPCC	15/08/19 09:39:00	Sarah Roberts
Re:Re:Re:ICO and WPCC	15/08/19 10:13:00	John Cameron
Re:Re:Re:Re:ICO and WPCC	17/08/19 15:35:00	Sarah Roberts

Forum Home