Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:14 am  

Its all a little unsettling, especially as it was confirmed it had been submitted by Yorkcourt. Very strange and yet another delay.

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:25 am  

I cannot see a date on the letter, it could be any time after the 20th June.
Just saying.

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:26 am  

Bloody 106 agreements! I've just had to pay for another copy of one of these on our house!!!

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:33 am  

Theboyem wrote:

Question does have to be asked though, why haven't they yet submitted the S106 agreement? Whats the delay?

The section 106 has been submitted, it just hadn't been submitted at the time of the initial letter (20th June) the 106 was submited on time and completed it just wasn't submitted at the time of the SoS inital approval of planning permision (which was subject to a full section 106 being submitted) so nowt to worry about here, just a straw cluching moment from cas fans

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:49 am  

financialtimes wrote:

Theboyem wrote:

Question does have to be asked though, why haven't they yet submitted the S106 agreement? Whats the delay?

The section 106 has been submitted, it just hadn't been submitted at the time of the initial letter (20th June) the 106 was submited on time and completed it just wasn't submitted at the time of the SoS inital approval of planning permision (which was subject to a full section 106 being submitted) so nowt to worry about here, just a straw cluching moment from cas fans

As it says a decision will now not be issued tomorrow because no S106 has been submitted, then it would suggest that it is still to be submitted.

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:56 am  

kinleycat wrote:

I cannot see a date on the letter, it could be any time after the 20th June.
Just saying.

Exactly what I thought when I was reading it, they're replying to a letter on the 20th June.

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 10:01 am  

The desperation of a few of their fans really is astounding though.

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 10:12 am  

The letter looks to be genuine but, as yet, I personally haven't received it via e-mail although it may have come in the post this morning but that generally comes after I leave home. This is what happened last time but the e-mail also came through the same morning. I am ever more convinced that Townvilletiger is Mr Cubbage who spoke at the Inquiry and had his evidence dismissed by the Inspector. Whom ever the poster is, they clearly either spoke at the inquiry or are close to someone who did if they have got hold of this letter/e-mail. As there were not that many of them, then it is my guess it is probably Mr Cubbage. I do think whomever Townvilletiger is, they should stop being a coward and stop hiding behind a username and come clean about who they really are! They are continuing to make personal & untrue allegations about me and questioning my motives and character without any evidence or foundation. My identity is common knowledge and if they have a problem with me they should have the balls to come out and (metaphorically) put these allegations to me directly. Can someone post this on Cas Forum for me please and tell Townvilletiger to reveal their true identity to me via the Residents for Newmarket E-mail (residentsfornewmarket@gmail.com) address and I will be happy to meet them face to face. We were told exactly what I posted, that all documentation has been submitted to the SoS to deadline. I think we need to be a little careful here, because we never asked directly if the section 106 had been submitted signed or either told directly that it had. I actually expected that they would have submitted all their paperwork, which they said they did, and that would have included their proposed section 106 document for discussion and then further discussions will have taken place between the SoS officers and Yorkcourt to get the agreement signed and finalised prior to 13th September. It would appear that a section 106 has not yet been finalised and signed, but equally the SoS office clearly expecting that it will be resolved, otherwise they would have just pulled the plug on the planning. We will now make some enquires and ask Yorkcourt if they are willing to share with us their side of the story and let us have some more information about why they have been unable to agree and sign a section 106 agreement to date. I am sure that there are very good and clear reasons this hasn't been sorted yet and hope they are able to share the reasons with us. I am not overly worried at this stage because it would appear the SoS officers are expecting this to be resolved and there could be a million reasons it hasn't. Yorkcourt have spent a fair sum of money to get to this stage and I don't think they are going to fall at the last hurdle.

The letter looks to be genuine but, as yet, I personally haven't received it via e-mail although it may have come in the post this morning but that generally comes after I leave home. This is what happened last time but the e-mail also came through the same morning. I am ever more convinced that Townvilletiger is Mr Cubbage who spoke at the Inquiry and had his evidence dismissed by the Inspector. Whom ever the poster is, they clearly either spoke at the inquiry or are close to someone who did if they have got hold of this letter/e-mail. As there were not that many of them, then it is my guess it is probably Mr Cubbage. I do think whomever Townvilletiger is, they should stop being a coward and stop hiding behind a username and come clean about who they really are! They are continuing to make personal & untrue allegations about me and questioning my motives and character without any evidence or foundation. My identity is common knowledge and if they have a problem with me they should have the balls to come out and (metaphorically) put these allegations to me directly. Can someone post this on Cas Forum for me please and tell Townvilletiger to reveal their true identity to me via the Residents for Newmarket E-mail (residentsfornewmarket@gmail.com) address and I will be happy to meet them face to face. We were told exactly what I posted, that all documentation has been submitted to the SoS to deadline. I think we need to be a little careful here, because we never asked directly if the section 106 had been submitted signed or either told directly that it had. I actually expected that they would have submitted all their paperwork, which they said they did, and that would have included their proposed section 106 document for discussion and then further discussions will have taken place between the SoS officers and Yorkcourt to get the agreement signed and finalised prior to 13th September. It would appear that a section 106 has not yet been finalised and signed, but equally the SoS office clearly expecting that it will be resolved, otherwise they would have just pulled the plug on the planning. We will now make some enquires and ask Yorkcourt if they are willing to share with us their side of the story and let us have some more information about why they have been unable to agree and sign a section 106 agreement to date. I am sure that there are very good and clear reasons this hasn't been sorted yet and hope they are able to share the reasons with us. I am not overly worried at this stage because it would appear the SoS officers are expecting this to be resolved and there could be a million reasons it hasn't. Yorkcourt have spent a fair sum of money to get to this stage and I don't think they are going to fall at the last hurdle.

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 10:14 am  

Bit more.

BTW, this was sent on the 11th September so no clutching at straws here:

From: Michael Taylor
Sent: 11 September 2012 14:29
To: ***
Cc: ***
Subject: Called-in planning application - Land adjacent to Newmarket Colliery, Rothwell, Wakefield

Re: Tick Tock : Wed Sep 12, 2012 10:19 am  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote: The letter looks to be genuine but, as yet, I personally haven't received it via e-mail although it may have come in the post this morning but that generally comes after I leave home. This is what happened last time but the e-mail also came through the same morning. I am ever more convinced that Townvilletiger is Mr Cubbage who spoke at the Inquiry and had his evidence dismissed by the Inspector. Whom ever the poster is, they clearly either spoke at the inquiry or are close to someone who did if they have got hold of this letter/e-mail. As there were not that many of them, then it is my guess it is probably Mr Cubbage. I do think whomever Townvilletiger is, they should stop being a coward and stop hiding behind a username and come clean about who they really are! They are continuing to make personal & untrue allegations about me and questioning my motives and character without any evidence or foundation. My identity is common knowledge and if they have a problem with me they should have the balls to come out and (metaphorically) put these allegations to me directly. Can someone post this on Cas Forum for me please and tell Townvilletiger to reveal their true identity to me via the Residents for Newmarket E-mail (residentsfornewmarket@gmail.com) address and I will be happy to meet them face to face. We were told exactly what I posted, that all documentation has been submitted to the SoS to deadline. I think we need to be a little careful here, because we never asked directly if the section 106 had been submitted signed or either told directly that it had. I actually expected that they would have submitted all their paperwork, which they said they did, and that would have included their proposed section 106 document for discussion and then further discussions will have taken place between the SoS officers and Yorkcourt to get the agreement signed and finalised prior to 13th September. It would appear that a section 106 has not yet been finalised and signed, but equally the SoS office clearly expecting that it will be resolved, otherwise they would have just pulled the plug on the planning. We will now make some enquires and ask Yorkcourt if they are willing to share with us their side of the story and let us have some more information about why they have been unable to agree and sign a section 106 agreement to date. I am sure that there are very good and clear reasons this hasn't been sorted yet and hope they are able to share the reasons with us. I am not overly worried at this stage because it would appear the SoS officers are expecting this to be resolved and there could be a million reasons it hasn't. Yorkcourt have spent a fair sum of money to get to this stage and I don't think they are going to fall at the last hurdle. Get YCP asked and let us know what they say mate. I'll copy this and stick it on their forum.

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote: The letter looks to be genuine but, as yet, I personally haven't received it via e-mail although it may have come in the post this morning but that generally comes after I leave home. This is what happened last time but the e-mail also came through the same morning. I am ever more convinced that Townvilletiger is Mr Cubbage who spoke at the Inquiry and had his evidence dismissed by the Inspector. Whom ever the poster is, they clearly either spoke at the inquiry or are close to someone who did if they have got hold of this letter/e-mail. As there were not that many of them, then it is my guess it is probably Mr Cubbage. I do think whomever Townvilletiger is, they should stop being a coward and stop hiding behind a username and come clean about who they really are! They are continuing to make personal & untrue allegations about me and questioning my motives and character without any evidence or foundation. My identity is common knowledge and if they have a problem with me they should have the balls to come out and (metaphorically) put these allegations to me directly. Can someone post this on Cas Forum for me please and tell Townvilletiger to reveal their true identity to me via the Residents for Newmarket E-mail (residentsfornewmarket@gmail.com) address and I will be happy to meet them face to face. We were told exactly what I posted, that all documentation has been submitted to the SoS to deadline. I think we need to be a little careful here, because we never asked directly if the section 106 had been submitted signed or either told directly that it had. I actually expected that they would have submitted all their paperwork, which they said they did, and that would have included their proposed section 106 document for discussion and then further discussions will have taken place between the SoS officers and Yorkcourt to get the agreement signed and finalised prior to 13th September. It would appear that a section 106 has not yet been finalised and signed, but equally the SoS office clearly expecting that it will be resolved, otherwise they would have just pulled the plug on the planning. We will now make some enquires and ask Yorkcourt if they are willing to share with us their side of the story and let us have some more information about why they have been unable to agree and sign a section 106 agreement to date. I am sure that there are very good and clear reasons this hasn't been sorted yet and hope they are able to share the reasons with us. I am not overly worried at this stage because it would appear the SoS officers are expecting this to be resolved and there could be a million reasons it hasn't. Yorkcourt have spent a fair sum of money to get to this stage and I don't think they are going to fall at the last hurdle. Get YCP asked and let us know what they say mate. I'll copy this and stick it on their forum.