In article ,
bert wrote:
really so under the thumb of Cummings?

Quite, he should have gone. But I doubt his thumb can exert the same
pressure as it used to. His day trips and travelling to his second home
saw to that.

Wasn't his second home. Don't mind you criticising him but do be
accurate.

Was it his first or third then? According to reliable sources, that
cottage was built without planning permission but was in his name.

--
*A hangover is the wrath of grapes.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bert wrote:
really so under the thumb of Cummings?

Quite, he should have gone. But I doubt his thumb can exert the same
pressure as it used to. His day trips and travelling to his second home
saw to that.

Wasn't his second home. Don't mind you criticising him but do be
accurate.

Was it his first or third then? According to reliable sources, that
cottage was built without planning permission but was in his name.

I'm afraid your "reliable" sources are anything but. DCC Planning
department specifically stated that planning permission wasn't required
for the cottage. There were minor historical breaches on the estate as a
whole.
--
bert

In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bert wrote:
really so under the thumb of Cummings?

Quite, he should have gone. But I doubt his thumb can exert the same
pressure as it used to. His day trips and travelling to his second home
saw to that.

Wasn't his second home. Don't mind you criticising him but do be
accurate.

Was it his first or third then? According to reliable sources, that
cottage was built without planning permission but was in his name.

I'm afraid your "reliable" sources are anything but. DCC Planning
department specifically stated that planning permission wasn't required
for the cottage. There were minor historical breaches on the estate as a
whole.

Let's see what was actually said:-

*****************

Stuart Timmiss, head of development and housing at Durham County Council,
said:-

'We have now investigated the complaints regarding planning permission.

While there have been historic breaches of planning and building control
regulations, current legislation places a time limit on any enforcement
measures and as a result no further action will be taken.'

*****************

No real surprise the likes of you needs 'tailor' things to suit your
agenda. Just as Cummings did with the whole thing.

--
*I am a nobody, and nobody is perfect; therefore I am perfect*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bert wrote:
really so under the thumb of Cummings?

Quite, he should have gone. But I doubt his thumb can exert the same
pressure as it used to. His day trips and travelling to his second home
saw to that.

Wasn't his second home. Don't mind you criticising him but do be
accurate.

Was it his first or third then? According to reliable sources, that
cottage was built without planning permission but was in his name.

I'm afraid your "reliable" sources are anything but. DCC Planning
department specifically stated that planning permission wasn't required
for the cottage. There were minor historical breaches on the estate as a
whole.

Let's see what was actually said:-

*****************

Stuart Timmiss, head of development and housing at Durham County Council,
said:-

'We have now investigated the complaints regarding planning permission.

While there have been historic breaches of planning and building control
regulations, current legislation places a time limit on any enforcement
measures and as a result no further action will be taken.'

*****************

No real surprise the likes of you needs 'tailor' things to suit your
agenda. Just as Cummings did with the whole thing.

But not related to the cottage. Your selective quoting again.
--
bert

In article ,
bert wrote:
I'm afraid your "reliable" sources are anything but. DCC Planning
department specifically stated that planning permission wasn't required
for the cottage. There were minor historical breaches on the estate as a
whole.

Let's see what was actually said:-

*****************

Stuart Timmiss, head of development and housing at Durham County Council,
said:-

'We have now investigated the complaints regarding planning permission.

While there have been historic breaches of planning and building control
regulations, current legislation places a time limit on any enforcement
measures and as a result no further action will be taken.'

*****************

No real surprise the likes of you needs 'tailor' things to suit your
agenda. Just as Cummings did with the whole thing.

But not related to the cottage. Your selective quoting again.

bert, please go and do some proper research. Or even explain what those
complaints about planning permission would refer to in this context?

--
*I believe five out of four people have trouble with fractions. *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.