FoI response received 21/9/12
Dear Mrs Oliver,
I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 6106).
The relevant Council Service(s) has searched for the requested information and our response is as follows.
Over the last decade the Council has approached the owners of the precinct on an on-
On 22nd March 2011 the Council served notice on the owners of the precinct under section 59 of the EPA.
A written interview under caution was sent to the owners on 14th November 2011.
The Council's Planning Enforcement team also wrote to the owners -
Alongside these measures the authority has also been pro-
For further information and Area Committee references between July 2001 and May 2011, use the link below:
For references between May 2011 and present, use the link below:
These records are considered complete, however it may not be possible to attribute comment to specific councillors.
If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request for information, you are entitled to ask for an internal review; however you must do so within 40 working days of the date of this response. Any internal review will be carried out by a senior member of staff who was not involved with your original request. To ask for an internal review, contact firstname.lastname@example.org in the first instance.
If you are unhappy with the outcome of any internal review, you are entitled to complain to the Information Commissioner. To do so, contact:
Information Commissioner’s Office
01625 545 745
So we see from the above answer that over the decade the Council has approached the owners on an ongoing basis re the poor condition of the Precinct.
1) On 22/3/11 notice was served on the owners under S59 of the EPA
2) A written interview under caution was sent to the owners on 14/11/1 (how does one"send" an interview>?).
3) Planning Enforcement Team also wrote (no date) with a list of improvements needed. What are they?
In the meantime, the Council has been pursuing a longterm resolution via redevelopment -
Missing information includes the list of improvements required by S215 of the Town and Country Planning Act (and are they under way?)
Which councillors were involved and how often were they involved?
What the SMBC's exposure in the event of having to accept "no deal" in December 2012?
This process must have cost the Council a considerable amount of money and with no progress visible even one month into the last quarter of 2012 and the owners, I suspect, do not intend to have the matter resolved sooner. Otherwise, with their apparent financial muscle, why would they want nothing done -