real whitby facebook group

Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

A First Class Bastiman – or what?

101 Things To Do In Whitby

Sneaton Castle:  10 September 2013

On Tuesday 10th September 2013, the Coast & Moors Area Committee of North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) convened at Sneaton Castle to debate and resolve the highly contentious matter of the on-street Zonal Parking proposals that form an integral part of the Whitby Park-&-Ride project. This article will not concern itself with the merits of the proposals (there are none), nor will it concern itself with the legality of the Meeting and the Resolution that was passed (and has since survived one sham challenge at the NYCC Transport & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee at County Hall on Tuesday 24th September 2013).

I shall be reporting instead on the conduct of the Chair of the Sneaton Castle meeting (and elsewhere) of Councillor Derek BASTIMAN – category 2 ‘double-dipper’ (please follow the link and read the comments; they are most instructive).

DEREK_BASTIMAN

I must have spoken with twenty or thirty people who attended the meeting. Without exception, they were emphatic in their condemnation of County Councillor Derek BASTIMAN’s haughty and autocratic style of Chairship, which rankled far more than his inexplicable decision to use his second vote – the Chair’s casting vote – to rubber-stamp a radical departure from the status quo – in disregard of accepted protocols e.g. Speaker Denison’s Rule – i.e. to vote to allow further discussion, if this is possible, and otherwise to vote against the proposal concerned.

On 20th September 2013, a member of the public (not me!) emailed NYCC CEO Richard FLINTON to lodge a Formal Complaint in respect of County Councillor Derek BASTIMAN’s autocratic and anti-democratic conduct at the 10th September Sneaton Castle meeting. In accordance with expectations – though contrary to NYCC regulations – Richard FLINTON responded, on 2nd October 2013, with an autocratic and anti-democratic decision of his own:

  • “My overall view of the issue in the light of the information that has been provided to me is that Cllr Bastiman appropriately chaired  what was a difficult meeting and that there are not sufficient grounds for investigating his conduct.” 

However, on 8th October 2013, Richard FLINTON performed an extraordinary volte-face in the face of mounting criticism of County Councillor Derek BASTIMAN, informing the earlier complainant that:

  • “Further to my earlier letter we have now received another complaint relating to the Area Committee meeting that dealt with the proposed Park and Ride at Whitby and related parking issues.  These complaints have also made allegations about the conduct of the Chairman and in the light of both your complaint and the subsequent complaint it has been decided to refer the matter to be dealt with by the Council’s Standards procedures.” 

Note the use of the passive voice“it has been decided”. Decided by whom? Was it you, Richard FLINTON, taking the regs into your own hands again? No doubt a little more lime in your whitewash will serve the purpose in hand.

RICHARD_FLINTON 

Newby & Scalby Parish Council:  11  September 2013

Meanwhile, On Wednesday 11th September 2013 – the twelfth anniversary of the attack on the Twin Towers – Newby & Scalby Parish Council (N&SPC) held one of its monthly Meetings, where County Councillor Derek BASTIMAN sits as a mere Parish Councillor.

According to the Agenda, published on the Council website, the Meeting was scheduled to run begin at 7:00pm at the Newby & Scalby Community Hall, running concurrently with the Ladies Zumba Dance Class, elsewhere in the same building.

According to independent witnesses, the Meeting was already in progress when they arrived at between 6:53pm and 6:57pm. It is unlawful to open a meeting ahead of its advertised start time.

Amongst the public was one who was there for a purpose. He wished to speak in the Council’s Public Forum (Agenda Item 4). His name is Nick HENDERSON.

Nick HENDERSON rose to speak at exactly 7:00pm, not wishing to find his question to the Council ruled out on the grounds that the Meeting was not lawfully convened – under the terms of the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960 and other legislation, it is not permitted to open meetings ahead of the time published on the Agenda, in the present case 7:00pm.

Knowing that his question was of considerable importance and open to intense scrutiny – relating as it does to the issues covered in my recent article, “The Protection Racket” – Nick HENDERSON began by offering a print-out of his question to the Clerk in order that the Minutes of the Meeting would accurately record his form of words. This print-out was passed along the line of Councillors around to the Clerk.

Meanwhile, Nick HENDERSON addressed his question to the Chair of the Council – Councillor Gill KENDALL. Here it is:

  • “Madam Chair, is it appropriate – or even lawful – for an elected member of this Council to continue in office throughout an eleven month criminal investigation into allegations against him, or her, of fraud and forgery – investigations which are still unresolved?”

Nick HENDERSON may (or may not) have been referring to Councillor T.W. ‘Bill’ MILLER and his spouse Councillor Jane KENYON (SBC – and formerly a NYCC Councillor, for ten years Chair of the North Yorkshire Police Authority) who remain the subjects of a number of allegations regarding a whole series frauds and forgeries (covering three decades), presently being disregarded by the North Yorkshire Police (NYP).

Be that as it may; Nick HENDERSON’s question was greeted by 18 seconds of stony silence. Both the Chair and the Clerk appeared dumb-founded. Nobody spoke – until, that is, Councillor Derek BASTIMAN (who did not have the right to speak for the Chair, except at the specific invitation from the Chair – which the audio recording shows did not happen), stepped into the breach with the following response:

Cllr. DB: Madam Chairman, may I just move that we receive that question, and Clerk answers it in full, to give her chance to give it consideration.
Nick: Er, could I ask Cllr Bastiman, you’ve obviously not received that question from me, and I have never had a response to that question, and I would appreciate an answer to that question, myself, directly.
Cllr. DB: Well, the Clerk will give you a written answer to that once she’s had chance to give it consideration.

Clearly, Councillor Derek BASTIMAN feels himself to be unconstrained by the requirements of Council protocol. He likes to take charge. He is ‘The Man’.

BBC Radio YorkP:  13 September 2013

On Friday 13th September 2013, ‘The Man’ featured in a BBC Radio York interview, this time in his rôle as a Borough Councillor and Portfolio Holder at SBC, covering inter alia the bonanza prospects in store for Scarborough contingent upon the success of the much-vaunted Dogger Bank wind-farm proposals.

Given Councillor Derek BASTIMAN’s Portfolio, it is not entirely clear why he should have been the man to tell the BBC that:

  • “Scarborough Harbour can boast of having 24/7 access to its Harbour”

That interview should more properly have been conducted with (formerly, County; presently, Borough) Councillor Mike COCKERILL, whose Cabinet Portfolio is for Harbours, Assets and Coastal & Flood Protection.

In any event, Councillor Derek BASTIMAN contrived to avoid any mention of the three recent cases of vessels running aground at Scarborough’s harbour mouth; the passenger vessel Coronia (owned by Robert GOODWILL MP [Con]) ran aground on 25th August 2013 (“Abandon Ship!” was called and adults and children were photographed in the water without the regulation life-jackets); and just a few days later, two private yachts ran aground in Scarborough harbour mouth – all of which rather gives the lie to County Councillor Derek BASTIMAN’s boasts to the BBC.

CORONIA_COMPOSITE

On 10th October 2013, I lodged a Formal Complaint against Councillor Derek BASTIMAN.

On 13th October 2013, I was surprised to learn that yet another member of the public had quite independently lodged an essentially similar Formal Complaint against Councillor Derek BASTIMAN, this time concerning a quite separate (but equally false) statement made by the latter at a Town Hall meeting on 9th October 2013, relating to misrepresented (i.e. false) fishing catch figures. This Formal Complaint also asserts that Councillor Derek BASTIMAN stated elsewhere in his BBC Radio York interview:

  • ”We can take out any size or piece of equipment, wind turbine or anything like that from any of the ports that we have on offer.”

What utter nonsense.

WHITBY_HARBOUR_24_7_365

Though Councillor Derek BASTIMAN is apparently ever-ready to place his fantasies on the public record, the veracity of his utterances cannot be taken on trust – or even without a pinch of the white stuff.

And I now learn that Nick HENDERSON is pursuing a Formal Complaint against Derek BASTIMAN in regard to his Newby & Scalby intervention.

And one may assume that a Formal Complaint will be forthcoming presently in respect of the infamous “You can f*ck off for a start” outburst at the count for the May 2013 Elections at the Scarborough Spa on 3rd May 2103.

Nevertheless, readers who persist in the belief that Scarborough Borough Council is in the hands of honourable, respectful, competent and trustworthy pillars of society will no doubt dismiss this article out of hand.

So be it. Let them continue with their heads in the sand – or perhaps that should read “in The Sands”.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related reading:

Whitby on-street Zonal Parking

Whitby Park-&-Ride

Broadband/IT Allowances Abuse

SBC Double Standards

 

Posted by on October 27, 2013. Filed under Nigel Ward - In My View,Scarborough Borough Council. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

23 Responses to A First Class Bastiman – or what?


  1. Ian Detute Reply

    October 29, 2013 at 6:47 pm

    Excellent and well put article Nigel as always.Yet they are still there ? .Time for a change in the ivory towers that is the clown hall.Surely the sheeple of this borough MUST now be getting the message that they are governed by self servients and thats it.In it for them selfs and what they can get.

  2. Derek Robinson Reply

    October 29, 2013 at 8:37 pm

    I have no trouble in believing that Cllr Bastiman believes he can speak to anybody in any tone he wishes in fact this is the same Cllr Bastiman who launched a foul mouthed tirade against me when I went to greet him at the recent N.Y. C.C election results at the Spa. In Scarborough in May, His exact words to me we’re ” and you can F- – k Off ” , when I questioned him about his comments, he said that I had maligned him in the press, I said I had not named any individual in my article he then said you had a go at the double dippers (was this an admission of guilt ? ) The verbal attack was witnessed by several people who urged me to complain about Bastimans conduct and I was going to but then came to the conclusion that I would be wasting my time because both S.B.C. And N.Y.C.C. Do not take any notice of take any action in respect to complaints about their councillors.
    I did however mention this incident on a feedback form I received from S.B.C.in regard to the elections for both S.B.C. And N.Y.C.C.

    • Tim Thorne Reply

      October 29, 2013 at 11:50 pm

      I didn’t realise Derek Bastiman was so upset about the email I sent him. I asked if he or his wife could pay back their broadband allowance, as I thought it was unfair his household received two allowances.

      From: Tim Thorne
      To: cllr.derek.bastiman@scarborough.gov.uk ; Cllr.Lynn.Bastiman@scarborough.gov.uk
      Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 12:56 PM
      Subject: Internet Allowance 2011/12

      Hello,

      The latest figures are out regarding members expenses for 2011/12. I
      notice from the figures that both of you claimed the full Internet
      Allowance during that financial year for a property you share. That
      doesn’t seem at all fair to the public purse. Now that you know about
      this will one of you be paying the allowance back in full?

      Regards,
      Tim Thorne

      http://www.scarborough.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=12242
      http://www.scarborough.gov.uk/pdf/cllrs%20allowances%202011-12.pdf

      ———-

      From: Hilary Jones
      To: Tim Thorne
      Sent: Thu Aug 09 13:26:52 2012
      Subject: Internet Allowance 2011/12

      Dear Mr Thorne

      I write in response to your email sent to Councillors Derek and Lynn Bastiman on 6 August querying their annual telecommunications and internet allowance (Internet Allowance) of £255 claimed for 2011/12. Please note Cllr Lynn Bastiman was elected to the Council in May 2011 and therefore has not claimed the full annual allowance.

      I was somewhat surprised by your query as I understand that you have previously made the same query to the Council: initially via a complaint that was fully investigated by Standards Committee in June 2011 – re the payment of this allowance to two Councillors who are members of the same household, and via a Freedom of Information Request in March 2012.

      However for the sake of total clarity I will reiterate the outcome of the complaint to Standards Committee and the information provided to you in your Freedom of Information request. As you are aware this information is in the public domain on the Council’s website however for your convenience I have attached the related documents.

      The Standards Committee decision made clear that the telecommunications and internet allowance was a fixed allowance provided to Council Elected Members under the Members Allowance Scheme towards the any costs they incur. This allowance was determined on the advice of the Independent Remuneration Panel. I would also add that Cllr Lynn Bastiman has always made use of her own equipment and has not requested provision of a laptop or printer from the Council. As stated the Decision Notice and FOI response attached are available on the Council website.

      Further to this issue you may be aware that as part of the Council’s move towards delivering budget savings by implementing modern, more efficient ways of working, we are implementing wherever possible paperless working. The provision of Ipads to replace laptops and printers previously used by Elected Members removes a huge print and post cost burden to the Council. This has also enabled a review of Allowances for Telecommunications and Internet Access. In light of this, at its meeting on 23 February 2012, Council agreed that with the provision of Ipads to Members it would no longer be necessary to provide a fixed allowance under the Members Allowance Scheme for telecommunications and internet connection. From May 2012 this allowance has ceased for Council Elected Members. Should Members incur additional and/or sundry costs for telecommunications or internet connection (should the Ipad internet connection be inadequate) then these expenses will be reimbursed via the usual protocols for Councillors claiming expenses.

      I feel this answers your query sent to Councillors Derek and Lynn Bastiman in full.

      Regards
      Hilary Jones
      Strategic Director

      Debbie Crossley
      PA to the Strategic Directors
      Scarborough Borough Council

      ———-

      From: Tim Thorne.
      To: Hilary.Jones@scarborough.gov.uk
      Sent: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 17:07:30
      Subject: Re: Internet Allowance 2011/12.

      Dear Miss Jones,

      Many thanks for your e-mail. As we both know there is no overriding reason that a Councillor must take the Internet allowance payment from Scarborough Borough Council. In fact, over the years, many Councillors have actually opted not to take the allowance for a variety of reasons and that fact is fully detailed on your web site. Why couldn’t one of the Bastimans have opted not to take allowance? I really don’t understand why there is a compelling reason that Scarborough Borough Council must give two payments to two Councillors who share one household. Would it be possible to explain this to me because I think I am missing the crux of SBCs argument.

      It is good you are aware of the FOI request regarding the Internet Allowance. Perhaps you can encourage someone to answer that FOI request with the information I require? All I want to know is if either Cllr. Tom Fox or former-Cllr. Ros Fox has repaid some of all of that money. If they have repaid nothing then please impart that information so I can close the FOI request.

      Regards,
      Tim Thorne

      ———-

      And so it ended…

  3. Nigel Reply

    October 29, 2013 at 9:42 pm

    I cannot speak for the wider public, Derek. But speaking for myself, I believe that behaviour such as that should always be reported, through the proper channels established by both Councils, to deal with breaches of their respective Codes of Conduct. Whilst I share your view that the matter will never be properly addrssed, it is important to recognise that such evasion iun itself forms a pattern of behaviour, over time, and that pattern of behaviour will carry plenty of weight when the day comes. I would be happy to assist you with the formalities.

    When I bring to mind that disgraceful Bill CHATT email to Tim HICKS, I cannot escape the conclusion that the Leader has surrounded himself with a thuggish little band of yes-men, bullies, turncoats and outright crooks.

    But I think I have found the key.

  4. Real Whitby Webmaster Reply

    October 29, 2013 at 10:24 pm

    Hes not the only. Rudeness and arrogance is rife amongst the hierarchy at Scarborough Borough Council. Mr Cockerill was another cracked from the same mold. Im still astonished at the emails he sent to Jackie Greaves.

  5. A Green Reply

    October 29, 2013 at 11:21 pm

    What an interesting article.

    I also have experience of Cllr Bastiman. Some time ago a Scarborough Council Councillor made a statement denigrating Filey Town Council (FTC). The Councillor in question had not been present at any FTC meetings for some time, if not years. The comment he made was inadvisable and not supported with fact. I wrote a letter to the press about it in which I roundly condemned this statement.

    I also took up the issue and made a complaint to the Conservative Councillors’ Group, whereupon Cllr Bastiman rose to the defence of his colleague, clearly believing that original comments were true. From this I concluded that his integrity was in question (and in about the same vein as the self important letter I once received from a certain Waste Recycling Officer that contained a fabricated statement).

    Cllr Bastiman had also not been present at any FTC meetings for some considerable length of time, if not years and from his response, it was clear to me that there is an unhealthy (if not biased) culture at the Clown Hall.

    No wonder they want to shut down this website.

  6. Brian Dodds Reply

    October 30, 2013 at 8:07 am

    It has been very clear for some time that we are governed by the most corrupt bunch of councillors and paid officials that have ever been assembled in both Town and County Halls. It appears that our elected officials believe that once they are in a position of authority they are free to disregard the rules and guidelines that are supposed to regulate their conduct , and some of them also think their position puts them above the law of the land. The lies and half truths that are fully supported by the paid officials who should be keeping them on the straight and narrow just keep coming in a never ending stream, and their must be a mountainous supply of official whitewash stored in the bowels of both establishments. The only way this will ever change is when enough tax paying members of the electorate wake up and use the sense God gave them to get rid of these parasites when election time comes again, Other than that nothing short of a full scale revolution will suffice, a totally clean sweep of the whole bunch, paid and elected.

  7. James Miller Reply

    October 30, 2013 at 10:00 am

    This is not directly relevant to the behaviour of Cllr. Bastiman but I do want to get it on public record somewhere, and here is a very good place to do so, that I was canvassed by County Councillor Tony Randerson yesterday, who is standing as the Labour candidate in the SBC bye election on November 21st at Eastfield. I expressed concern at the amount of double dipping that went on in North Yorkshire and Scarborough Borough councils and he assured me that he would, if elected, not be claiming any allowances for identical expenses at all. He also said he doesn’t see why broadband is necessary for any local councillor round here.

    There were no witnesses to this promise and comment so I am making it public now in case we have to hold anybody to it. If he wishes to withdraw his promise he should do so now, before the election, on this page.

  8. Patricia David Reply

    October 30, 2013 at 11:15 am

    Tim Thorne and all those of us who were at the Scrutiny Meeting on 31st July 2013 when the SBC Cabinet’s decision regarding closure of the Futurist was upheld, without any scrutiny whatsoever, will remember well Cllr. Bastiman’s interruption (contribution?) in the proceedings, although he was there only as an onlooker as were several other Cllrs. , (he is also the Conservative Party Leader). His wife and 4 other Conservative Cllrs were on a Committee of only 7 members. That is democracy in Scarborough.

  9. Carole Gerada Reply

    October 30, 2013 at 11:53 am

    Interesting what has been stated about Cllr Randerson – Labour politician. I already have it in writing from him that he “feels in is unwise for councillors to wear more than one hat, whether it be County, Borough or Parish” after I asked if he would be standing for a vacancy on Eastfield Parish Council. Of course he is not interested in the grass root issues that affect the majority of residents, regardless to whether they vote or not. Parish councillors receive no allowance. County and Borough councillors do. Hence the change in mind from Cllr Randerson.

    Sadly, he does not reside in Eastfield and has started making demands, arguing and disagreeing with residents who are not Labour supporters. Also he will only visit residents at his convenience between the hours of 5pm and 7pm on Monday nights. What a shame for people voting for career focused party politicians and not fellow residents independent from any political group.

  10. stopcpdotcom Reply

    October 30, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    Excellent stuff, Nigel. Keep at them!

  11. rod mathers Reply

    October 30, 2013 at 7:52 pm

    Now there’s a funny thing. Councillor Bastiman’s Register of Interests. Nothing to declare in the way of disclosable pecuniary interests. How do you suppose s he supports that jet set life style?

    http://democracy.scarborough.gov.uk/mgDeclarationSubmission.aspx?UID=105&HID=4254&FID=0&HPID=0

  12. Glenn Kilpatrick Reply

    October 30, 2013 at 9:49 pm

    So let me get this right ? Councillor Bastiman told a member of the public from Whitby to F$%k Off and yet he remains in office ?

  13. Nigel Reply

    October 31, 2013 at 8:50 am

    My information, from two sources – both absolutely reliable – is that Derek BASTIMAN told a fellow candidate to “F*ck off”, in front of both their wives and a number of election team staff. No apology has been forthcoming. Once you put the word “Councillor” in front of a man’s name, he all too easily thinks he is a demigod. But remember the old saying – you can take the man out of the gutter, but you can’t take the gutter out of the man. Of course, what you can do is give him a Portfolio and let him run around talking sh*te.

  14. Tim Hicks Reply

    October 31, 2013 at 9:31 am

    Having all the candidates at the polling station for the count is an important part of the democratic process. I find it despicable that a candidate could tell another candidate to leave the polling station.

    Presumably the polling station is a public place, so using the F word in this context may also be use of insulting words and behavior, a criminal offence, particularly as it was used in the presence of other candidates wives and the election staff, who were working very hard to ensure there was an efficient and fair election as part of the democratic process.

    Tim

  15. A Green Reply

    November 1, 2013 at 11:18 pm

    Not quite on beam with the argument here but…

    The most amazing thing here is that an investigative journalist does not have to tramp around wet streets, begging for background for his piece. All he has to do is to take RW’s posts, condense them, cross reference them and confirm the details with those who have posted them in support of his own work. It is a journalist’s gift.

    These people are first class gold plated idiots! They haven’t got the common sense to engage with RW (or the electorate it seems), explain their position (in most cases) and seek to rectify the problem. Having lost the Corporate brain cell for some time now, how can they claim to represent the electorate? – ‘F’ words? I just wonder how many other Councillors who remain silent are cringing at this endless stream of revelations. I have an idea of how this could end with the Press if it falls the wrong way, and I have not even commented about the Officers yet.

    I reiterate my previous comment “no wonder they want to shut this website down”.

  16. Bob Roberts Reply

    November 16, 2013 at 11:31 am

    Reference the well known local fantasist Cllr Bastiman, one wonders why the RNLI are spending so much money on a new lifeboat launching tractor and boathouse for the soon to arrive next generation of lifeboats for Scarborough when as claimed by Cllr Bastiman we have a harbour open 24/7 at all states of the tide? Surely if that was the case then the RNLI could quite literally save themselves a “shed” load of money ?
    Worth some thought surely ? Has anyone actually informed the RNLI of this claim?

  17. Glenn Kilpatrick Reply

    November 24, 2013 at 10:35 pm

    Hi guys, Im wondering how we have 1,700 likes on this article yet only have 1000 hits on the page. Can we encourage people to come and read the actual article as well as clicking like from inside Facebook on an article you havent read. The support is appreciated but people should be encouraged to read what they are endorsing.

  18. Al Roberts Reply

    November 26, 2013 at 7:09 pm

    Having listened to the Friday the 13th September BBC Radio York interview posted by Nigel, and the statement relating to ”24/7 access” made by Cllr Bastiman, I will draw your attention to http://www.whitbywind.org.uk/intro.html , which has a glowing endorsement from Cllr Bastiman himself, and is designed to provide the windfarm industry with information regarding the facilities available at Scarborough Harbour.
    Perhaps Cllr bastiman needs to revisit that site because this is the information regarding access to Scarborough Harbour as shown there.

    “Access: 3 hrs either side of high water for 2 metre drafted vessels on average tides.”

    There are other parts the interview that I suggest are equally misleading.

    When speaking about the windfarm support vessels, Cllr Bastiman told the interviewer, “We are providing, or we will provide, pontoons give easy access to these vessels if so required”.

    On Wed 9th October, I attended the Town Hall meeting of the Harbour Users Consultative Group. The Harbour Master was asked to give the users an indication of where in the harbour the pontoons for the windfarm vessels would be located.
    The obviously perplexed Harbour Master, shaking his head in bewilderment, told the meeting that he knew nothing about any plans for pontoons at Scarborough Harbour.
    The Harbour Master then went on to tell the meeting that SBC had barely enough funds to maintain the harbour, let alone provide pontoons.
    It is significant that Cllr Cockerill the Portfolio holder for Harbours, and who was present at the meeting, said nothing in support, or otherwise, of Cllr Bastimans statement.

    • Al Roberts Reply

      November 26, 2013 at 7:17 pm

      I will add that the minutes of the harbour uses group meeting have yet to be published.
      Whats the betting odds of the comments above being accurately recorded?

  19. Adrian porter Reply

    February 2, 2014 at 10:42 pm

    I asked my local Cllr ,to look into some issues regarding a vessel in Scarborough harbour,Yep Cllr . Bastiman,should have saved myself the bother ! This was the reply ,word for word .
    “Dear Mr Porter As I have been off colour and not answering my email.I feel at times I do have the right to some privacy however I can confirm that once the corporate complaint is concluded I will be better informed position to answer your request.”
    He never Did !,lol.
    I sent an email to Cllr John Flinton ,he never replied at all ?
    Thanks very much Mr Bastiman and Flinton for doing bugger all to help me and my family ,
    My case was looked at through a corporate complaints procedure ,which I did not ask for ! I was given a stage 2 response,by a David Kitson ,SBC ,legal department ,which was a joke in my opinion,however I asked for the SBC corporate complaint procedure,weeks latter I was emailed this and was shocked,that I should have received a stage 1 request,had to request a stage 2 request ,obviously I didnt,and could ask for a stage 3 request ,and questioned many other screw ups made on this “corporate complaint” and asked for a stage 3 request,only to be told ,it does not exist ? I told David KItson ,its in black and white and in the papers he gave me !
    David Kitson of the SBC legal dept ,told me that the info he sent me was out of date and no longer in use ?? I couldnt get over this ,I had a corporate complaint ,which I did not ask for,that was innacurate etc,done when there was no procedure in place,he had no guide lines to follow,nothing !how could he even call it a stage 2 corporate complaint response,As far as I can see it was purely a solicitor’s letter, I put this to David Kitson,guess what he did PUT ME UNDER THE SBC PERSISTENT COMPLAINTANTS PROCEDURE,lol
    I cannot contact officers or Cllrs of SBC ,I am refused all FOIA and Data protection ? Infact I dont even get confirmation that they have received my requests in writing,I am effectively stopped from investigating my case !
    This is just the top of the iceberg so to speak.

  20. Karen Reply

    February 27, 2014 at 10:16 am

    Reading the above comments.should the harbour committees not have an experienced Councillor who has in depth knowledge of the Harbour tides,day to day working related issues around the Harbour require someone with a in depth knowledge.As the old saying goes Tide waits for no man”The harbour going back in years was a fully functional working harbour.Timber boats at one side,Trawlers,Cobbles,that went from one side to the other,I respect the European rules finished the fishing trade,The good thing the Harbour had years ago was a Councillor Don Dalton that could tell you everything you need to know about it and fully supported the harbour seems now we are goverend by a councillor with no fishing background just a friend who has a pleasure boat that run aground to the embarrassment of himself needing assistance from a Lifeboat that has helped a good many fishing families over the years,which is why a new Lifeboat is required as it speaks for itself that even the crew that do the job day in,day out can’t always judge the next tide,walking around the harbour maybe a good exercise for councillor they need to ride the tide too!,

  21. here Reply

    May 25, 2014 at 12:07 am

    Very soon this web page will be famous among all
    blog people, due to it’s good articles or reviews


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.