Harbour View

No-one in the Council will answer the question or will agree that the  enclosure or shed is nearly 3m taller than the approved plan – see more Evasions and Denials. The response below needs to go in at about 60.
Page 3 is currently being revised. _{MD 25-Oct-20}

—– Original Message —–

From: Customer Advocates
To: mick.dawson@theharbourview.co.uk
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 10:11 AM
Subject: RE: Case ZA4803 – STC and UK Docks v The People

Dear Mr Dawson

To confirm the Council’s position, we will not re-open or open a new complaint regarding this email as the issues are the same as your original complaint to us some years ago. The original complaint was not registered and was overwritten by the Council’s  Planning Manager within a week in January 2014 and my attempts to correct it have been evaded ever since. 

If you wish to seek legal advice your legal representative should contact our Legal Department as advise previously. I will not be forwarding on your email or drawings as they remain the subject or your historic complaint (the emails and drawings are evidence that the Council have mislead the Ombudsman). If you are unhappy with the Ombudsman’s investigation of your complaint you should raise that with them directly (I had already raised the issue with the Ombudsman and they said my complaint remains the same and the Council should have known this).

I have attached a copy of the letter sent to your regarding your breach of the contact restrictions placed on you in 2016, (the complaint that they had given misinformation to the Ombudsman was not registered and my referral to the Customer Advocacy/Legal Section was passed back to the person misusing  Section F of code dealing with unreasonable and persistent complainants)*  please note that we intend to further restrict contact with the Council as advised following the 17 further contacts, mainly regarding the boatshed dimensions and allegations of the Council misleading the Ombudsman(who’s counting). We have attempted to prevent this further restriction by filing and not acknowledging your emails, however the tone of your emails and the allegations contained in them are unacceptable and due to this, any further emails attempting to raise the historic complaint issues will result in an immediate referral to block your email address to prevent further email contacts. All correspondence with the Council would therefore need to be in writing or by telephone.

yours sincerely

Alison Hoy
Performance and Information Support Officer

 * The first and only complaint about South Tyneside Council abusing the services of the Local Government Ombudsman is hardly persistent and it is entirely reasonable when the fact that the shed is actually built 3m higher than  permitted is considered – the height at the river end is 18.2m and the authorised plans from 1996 say it should be 15.5m.

From: Michael Dawson
Sent: 08 August 2017 14:01
To: Cllr John Anglin
Cc: Rebecca Atkinson; Customer Advocates; Residents GP and HV
Subject: Extension of UK Dock’s Slipway Cover, River Drive

Dear Councillor Anglin.
Please see letter attached. I have used this format because of the large number of references used.
The trouble with the Council is that they can say what ever they want without any evidence about the existing slipway cover (shed) and they are believed. If I and other residents say something to the contrary e.g. it is 3m too high, and provide evidence and we are not believed. There is something rotten in the borough.
The extra set of footings were very obvious once the frames were up in September 2013 and the Council still did nothing. All plans of 1996, whether approved or not, give an overall length of 22m not 27.5m. None of them show 6 frames.
There have been suggestions for a way forward, which include involving the relevant Secretary of State, going to the press and involving the police but I think it probably best to properly involve our MP but please let me know quickly which side you and your fellow Councillors are on as UK Docks are currently preparing to extend the shed and the permission for that was gained by deceit (the planning Committee were told the existing structure was built within the permitted height).
I can go into far more detail if you have not been convinced that the existing shed or cover has no permission for its current height but I hope that will not be necessary.
Yours sincerely,
Michael Dawson

Cllr Anglin does not respond but forwards his email the to the very people who are responsible for the inappropriately sited shipyard.

From: Alison Hoy on behalf of Customer Advocates
Sent: 11 August 2017 11:31
To: Michael Dawson
Cc: Cllr John Anglin
Subject: RE: Extension of UK Dock’s Slipway Cover, River Drive
Dear Mr Dawson
Your email to Cllr Anglin has been forwarded to our team in line with your current contact restrictions regarding issues raised regarding the UK Docks boat shed.
I must advise you that this letter is raising your historic complaint again which has been thoroughly investigated by the Council and the Local Government Ombudsman, therefore will be placed on file.
Regarding your comments regarding the additional boat shed, this was subject to a separate planning application and the Council’s planning department advise that past issues do not affect the validity of any new planning applications. Following the standard planning process, planning permission was granted on 1 February 2016 for the additional work. There is nothing for the Council to add on that matter as this does not raise any new issues for Planning.

yours sincerely
Alison Hoy
Performance and Information Support Officer
Customer Advocacy