![\"\"](\"http:\/\/whatliesbeneathrattlechainlagoon.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/S7510002.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/a>The OCG<\/p><\/div>\n
This third and final part of the former Accles and Pollock lagoon site shows how money in the modern age drives bent planning applications turning acid bath lakes into an ambulance base. It again shows how private land, left abandoned and derelict is suddenly brought “back into use” through the public purse , and not by the scum who left it in that state. The politicians who enable this, principally in this case Andy Street’s West Midlands Combined Authority<\/strong> are very much a part of the problem and complicit in allowing tax dodging fake companies to gain at the tax payers loss.<\/p>\n Part 1 of the story<\/a> concerns the former Accles and Pollack history of waste disposal.<\/p>\n Part 2<\/a> describes the Mintworth legacy of foundry sand infilling, a mound to rival their other two abandoned and directionless over tipped sandcastle sites at Coneygree and The Former Duport’s Tip.<\/p>\n The “Cleeve Investments” scam land banking company.\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n As a reminder, the two principle planning applications with the infilling of the lagoon with unspecified “inert materials”<\/span> were<\/p>\n DC\/04\/42934 Infill of lagoon with inert material.<\/strong><\/p>\n And <\/strong>\u00a0DC\/10\/52117\u00a0Variation of condition 18 of planning permission DC\/04\/42934 (Infill of lagoon with inert materials) to allow for the temporary raising of the approved levels so that on the land additional fill can be placed to surcharge the infill material to achieve sufficient bearing capacity.<\/strong><\/p>\n As with the dodgy W H keys site in West Bromwich, Bache Treharne were involved yet again with selling this crap on.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n It is interesting to note that in correspondence form B submitted with the 2004 application, the owners of the site are listed as \u201cCLEEVE INVESTMENTS LIMITED\u201d<\/strong>\u2013\u00a0a company incorporated in Jersey and the address appears as such<\/strong>.\u00a0But who exactly were their directors?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n What is not clear to me at this time is how the process of sale was handled, but land registry documents show that Cleeve Investments Limited officially owned the freehold interest in the site from 10\/9\/2003. The company address handling their activities is Gateley LLP located in Manchester.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n The Jersey company were set up, obviously for the sole purpose of this transaction in January of the same year.<\/strong><\/p>\n From land registry title WM642888<\/strong><\/p>\n It is noted “(09.01.2015) The proprietor’s address for service has been changed.” <\/em>There is no change of physical address filed at companies house however from Jersey to the UK in regard to Cleeve Investments Limited.\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n A list of lenders, who we will get to in a minute<\/span><\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n As the operations by Mintworth<\/strong> at Coneygree<\/a> and in the Duport’s Tip\/Rattlechain area<\/a> were coming to an end, another Jersey registered company called \u201cDenver Limited\u201d<\/strong> was set up. Please note the address of this company, as well as a certain same law firm who operate for Cleeve Investments Limited in the UK. This is obviously no fucking coincidence at work here.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n A UK Cleeve Investments Limited however, company number 00171213 <\/strong>is registered with Companies House being dissolved on 3rd October 2023 but were based in North Somerset. In their accounts, there is no mention of where they are based until a point appears to be made in the 2016 accounts- noted before they started to tap for state aid.<\/p>\n “Domiciled in the UK”<\/p><\/div>\n The main players here were as follows. The age of 1920 is no doubt a red herring and a pick up transfer of an old company bought and given a new name.<\/p>\n Jesus, Mary, the wee Donkey and the Wise Men’s wrapping paper, what is the crack here? This is not the first time that an apparent clone company exists in the tax haven and another appears in the UK for matters of transferring derelict land into housing schemes.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n It is not the first charge against them, as the land registry document shows, and the complex web of aliases, dissolved companies and Channel Island entities continue apace.<\/p>\n Does not say who the lenders were<\/p><\/div>\n 6 (28.02.2011) Proprietor: PAUL ANDREW TAYLOR, DILYS TAYLOR, JOHN BRENDAN KERIN and CHRISTINA KERIN<\/strong> of 45 Anstruther Road, Birmingham B15 3NW.<\/p>\n 7 (05.05.2009) By a Deed dated 19 February 2009 made between (1) Apollo Sports Holdings Limited (2) John Russell and Allan Cooper and (3) Pulver Limited<\/strong> the covenants contained in a Deed of Covenant dated 19 June 2003 made between (1) Cleeve Investments Limited and (2)Apollo Sports Holdings Limited were assigned.<\/p>\n “Pulver Limited” was dissolved on 23\/4\/2014. The main man here appears to be Paul Andrew Taylor- named on the lender list from 2018, but at Pulver being Chief Executive, secretary, and also consultant- what a talented man!<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Another Pulver man on the lender list to Cleeve from 2018<\/p><\/div>\n I take it that the two other females on the list are spouses of the above?<\/p>\n Also on the file at Companies House is the 2018 charge involving Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council<\/strong> which can be read below. I wanted\u00a0 to know why this authority were involved in such affairs in another neighbouring borough involving private land?<\/p>\n Here is the document PDF confirming<\/p>\n companies_house_document (6)<\/a><\/p>\n At this point in time when this document was signed , 20th April 2018<\/strong><\/span> and wikipedia is my friend<\/a>, we see this swing Labour\/Con authority was not under the control of The Walsall Penguin, Mike Bird, but the Willenhall Paedophile Sean Coughlan.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n We also see that this legal document putting Walsall tax payers at financial risk was not even signed by any directors of the phantom Cleeve, but by yet another proxy in the form of Hawksford<\/strong>, who are surprise surprise registered at the same address in Jersey as “Cleeve Investments Limited”. Even this identity is not transparent with the names “Hawksford Director 1 Limited<\/strong> ” and “Hawksford Director 2 Limited”<\/strong><\/p>\n The two signatories on this deed, Sian Huish and James Howe are easier to trace however appearing to flit back and forth between the UK and The Channel islands.<\/p>\n On their website, Hawksford describe themselves as<\/p>\n \u201cHawksford is an international provider of Corporate, Private Client and Fund services. We enable our clients to realise potential and maximise opportunities. We deliver value for our clients by anticipating their needs and thinking beyond tomorrow.\u201d<\/span><\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n I bet they do, and this may all be legal, but it is I am afraid all that is wrong with this world, morally bankrupt and something the super rich are able to do to hide their money whilst not paying their way.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n I decided to tap WMBC to see what their story was in relation to this dodgy deal and the registered charge, not to be confused with the sex offenders register charge of which the former online kiddy fiddler leader is now no doubt on. \ud83d\ude1b \ud83d\ude1b<\/p>\n Loan made by council to private company registered in Jersey – a Freedom of Information request to Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council – WhatDoTheyKnow<\/a><\/p>\n “On 20th April 2018, your council gave the following charge code This company however were also registered in the UK as CLEEVE INVESTMENTS LIMITED Company number 00171213<\/strong> and were dissolved on 3rd October 2023.<\/p>\n (i) please provide the grant agreement between the council and this private company and the value of the loan mentioned in the MR01 form. (This is the one referred to in the charge below).<\/p>\n (ii) At what level within the council, by whose authority and at what meeting was this loan agreed and validated- please provide details. Walsall came back with some surprising information , which drops others further into the frame as to what was going on with our money being used for monopoly speculation.<\/p>\n (i) “Please note this wasn\u2019t a loan, it was a grant award of \u00a3116,719 from the Black Country Local Enterprise Partnership (\u201cBC LEP\u201d) through a competitive application to Stoford Properties Ltd. As the BC LEP\u2019s Accountable Body Walsall Council entered into a grant agreement with Stoford Properties and Cleeve Investments Ltd.\u00a0 Please note Cleeve<\/span><\/em> \u00a0In summary,\u00a0Stoford was the Grantee,\u00a0First legal charge was negotiated<\/span><\/em> As far as I am concerned, this is a matter of pure semantics here, “grant”, “legal charge” “loan” all the same, not their money but ours to give out, but not it seems paid back. If Stoford wanted to pursue this matter, on behalf of their highly dubious client then they should have provided the funds themselves.<\/p>\n (ii) As per above this was a grant award made by the BC LEP and authorised by the Black Country Joint Committee,\u00a0 see attached minutes<\/span><\/em> The second link provided here is a dead one as you will see, but I have found this, see further below.<\/p>\n 17_Minutes_08-03-17<\/a><\/p>\n The first one provides some very interesting information about the players making decisions at the BC LEP- a purely unelected quango, just as the former Black Country Development Corporation had been- and there is little doubt that this is just the bastard son of that corrupt organisation.<\/p>\n We see here that three Labour councillors , Eling from Sandwell, paedo from Walsall, and a sub , Bilson from Wolverhampton had voting rights. Also here are several senior officers, including the disgraced former Sandwell CEO Jan Britton.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n We learn that this approval had been delayed because of Stoford’s unwillingness to put up their own money if things went tits up and they had to pay back the “grant”.<\/p>\n This also confirms what I had already discovered from an earlier source where the also disgraced Nick Bubalo of SMBC, (involved in the sale of several pieces of land in the borough below price made to a former councillor’s son), had presented a report in the time frame specified.<\/p>\n \u00a0“The Black Country Executive Joint Committee” of key decisions show that\u00a0 approval was given for funding of a scheme in at least 2015,\u00a0 and subsequently amended in 2019 with the entity known as \u201cStoford Properties Limited\u201d- who are again not the owners of this site.<\/strong><\/p>\n I am afraid that such \u201ccommercially sensitive information\u201d to me smacks of covering up a bent deal, and we have also seen this with the Lion Farm Fields situation not a million miles away.<\/p><\/div>\n At minute 20, we learn that a delegated decision was made in respect of this loan, by therefore not even an elected person, namely Simon Neilson<\/strong> of Walsall Council. Neilson had been at Essex before Walsall and has since moved on again.<\/p>\n 19_Minutes_13-3-19<\/a><\/p>\n The 2019 minutes show that voting members were now Zada from Dudley, Khatun from Sandwell as a sub, Walsall penguin, now leader of the council again, and Bilson as sub from Wolvo.<\/p>\n At Decision 19\/006 we see Alison knight of Sandwell council apparently now acting as an agent for Stoford, and therefore the owners of the site to back more funding for locating mine shafts and remediation works. I thought HER job was to work for Sandwell council taxpayers, not fucking private land owners! Knight is not a medical doctor but has a PhD in education.<\/p>\n Again this is confirmed in the source below.<\/p>\n (iii) “Walsall Council managed Black Country wide grant funds on behalf of the BC LEP which is why their interest was outside of Walsall\u2019s\u00a0 borough and part of Sandwell\u2019s borough.\u00a0 \u00a0Walsall Council\u2019s interest in this private land was in the form of a first legal charge to protect grants funds awarded the grantee should they not deliver their contractual obligations.”<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n In terms of the site itself, the journey of the abandoned site continues via Google imagery from above.<\/p>\n By 2013, it was visibly starting to spring up greenery between the industrial units on the estate, just as had happened at the Former Duport’s Tip, save for the tatter operation for metal<\/a> , and the Coneygree site in Tipton.<\/p>\n Shidas Lagoon Google Earth 6\/2013<\/p><\/div>\n This appeared to continue with all trace of the former lagoon now gone, except the former deep water signs on the perimeter of the site.<\/p>\n Shidas Lagoon Google Earth 4\/2016<\/p><\/div>\n <\/p>\n Shidas Lagoon Google Earth 3\/2017<\/p><\/div>\n For some unknown reason, but now perhaps we know why given the Sandwell officers and councillors involved with the decision making process, this privately owned site was being touted by Sandwell council itself around this time via a “think Sandwell” moniker. I would again ask WHY? What business is it of the tax payer funded authority to promote privately owned land that has never belonged to Sandwell Council, and worse registered and owned by a highly dubious “company” based in a tax haven? This stinks Sandwell! See link below.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Shidas-Lane-65<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Why are the council asking for interested parties to contact them<\/em>?<\/p>\n Shidas Lagoon Google Earth 4\/2018<\/p><\/div>\n <\/p>\n Shidas Lagoon Google Earth 5\/2019<\/p><\/div>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>Further to this, it appears that Street’s WMCA gave permission and sanction to this approval, with Councillor Mike Bird, leader of Walsall MBC at this meeting, (and Cllr Sleigh from Solihull in the chair). Should he and Walsall council be involved for anything related to this scheme when they were a key lender in getting it off the ground or to fledge if you’ll excuse the avian Walsall connection pun?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agenda for Investment Board on Monday 11th November 2019, 10.00 am :WMCA<\/a><\/p>\n Minute 70 states the following, and at this point there was not even an agreement as to what this would even fund, FFS!\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Why were \u201cCleeve Investments limited\u201d not funding any remediation of their owned site? Not only do we not have an answer to this question from this closed shop political actor meeting, but also the land banking going on here is also covered up by the means stated below.<\/p>\n Furthermore, perhaps we could have some clear investigation as to who \u201cCleeve Investments Limited\u201d were\/are and who their directors were\/are in both the UK and Jersey,\u00a0 if they are of \u201creputable quality\u201d which Street claimed was a necessity at the Ask Andy event when I questioned him about such deals for the land remediation fund and why it appears that tax payer cash was being used to fund their development site? WHY DID THEY NOT PAY FOR THIS THEMSELVES FROM THE JERSEY BOLTHOLE?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n What Andy Said in 2017<\/p>\n \u201cWell, definitely polluted land is perhaps the important part of this. It\u2019s my assumption of what you\u2019re talking about here is the land remediation fund- which is designed specifically to deal with heavily polluted land, and again that is something that I am a strong believer in , that we have to bring that land back into use so that\u2019s my guess what that is about.<\/span><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Now any allocation of funding from that fund, we\u2019ve been very clear; we\u2019ve set the criteria for how it will be judged so no-one can say afterwards about the combined authority \u201cyou\u2019ve inappropriately spent this.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n ..and so any application would have to be measured against all of those criteria to find suitable value for money, and actually to know that the developer is of reputable quality.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0On this matter I put in the following to the WMCA via an FOI request.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Shidas Lane site remediation fund for tax haven company owned site – a Freedom of Information request to West Midlands Combined Authority – WhatDoTheyKnow<\/a><\/p>\n “Dear West Midlands Combined Authority,<\/p>\n Land registry documents for titles WM642888 Land lying to the North side of Shidas Lane Oldbury and WM688412<\/strong> show that this site is owned and has been since 10\/9\/2003 by a firm known as “Cleeve Investments Limited” registered in Jersey on 17\/1\/2003. This site was a former historic landfill site containing an infilled former Accles and Pollock acid waste lagoon, with “inert materials”, to which no one appears to know of what type- least of all in any planning applications associated with the site.<\/p>\n I refer to the following link<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\n0017 1213 0002<\/strong> for private land held by a Jersey Registered company “Cleeve Investments Limited”<\/strong> in Sandwell- “Land on the north side of shidas lane, oldbury and registered at the land registry under title numbers WM642888 and WM688412.”<\/strong>
\nhttps:\/\/find-and-update.company-informat…<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\n(iii) What was Walsall council’s interest in this private land in another borough and why was the loan made using tax payers money?<\/p>\n
\nInvestments Ltd were included as a signatory to this agreement as they provided the underwriting for the grant through a 1st legal charge on land at WM642888 and WM688412.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n
\nwith Cleeve Investments Ltd,The project site land is the same land over<\/span><\/em>
\nwhich we had a legal charge,\u00a0and we gave the grant to Stoford to carry out<\/span><\/em>
\nSite Investigation on Cleeve Investments Limited land.”<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n
\nhttps:\/\/go.walsall.gov.uk\/sites\/default\/…<\/a><\/span><\/em>
\nand<\/span><\/em>
\nhttps:\/\/go.walsall.gov.uk\/sites\/default\/…”<\/a><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n