WHAT'S UP DOC?
This Page "Whar's up Doc" is to prompt discussion on current issues. There is a problem that the administrator of the Plas Panteidal Owners Group Facebook page does not like posts critical of the PPEML.
If any of the issues interest you and you want to share and comment on them please post a blog or. if desparate, email the contacr address and I will try to ensure your uncensored views appear on this site (providing they comply with the law).
Current concerns and my views.
1. There is a concern about the water and letting. (12/09/22) I have taken the view that I am not going to let my chalet until the road is less dangerous and the water is safe. My view is also that TLL were ordered by the court in September 2021 to fix the water and the road within a month. This fix could not use the Estate Rentcharge. TLL were bankrupt so they could not do this. The site was bought by PPEML and they were fully aware of this Court Order. How they managed to evade complying with it I don't know, they all have sufficient funds in real estate to have raised the money. Although it is of no help to your renters it does mean that you may be able to sue PPEML for compensation. The residents claim group, the PPCG, had an objective to purchase the site with a community company consisting of all the freeholders. This would not have solved the problems with the water or the roads, but would have given the community more control and management of the site. This seems to have been thwarted by a combination of the PPA Committee and the PPEML
Taking legal action can be expensive so it may be necessary to form an action group to address this problem It may be necessary to have a period of almost civil disobedience, such as with holding Estate Rent Charge (mind you until PPEML have fixed the site to a state where they can assess the coming years maintenance expenditure, they would be on dodgy ground trying to levy it).
Even further in the future, or maybe soon, the law regarding "Service charges" for freehold properties is likely to change to bring it into line with the law covering service charges on leasehold properties. If this happens and a sufficient number of residents wish it, then they will be able to purchase the site. PPEML paid about £14000 for the site, but it could be argued that this money was paid from donations which had actually been intended for the Plas Oanteidal Community, i.e. we've already bought it with our money!.
2. PPEML's September Newsletter. Regarding the loan, this sounds like good news so we need to try not to rock the boat too much
Regarding the water, I did post a comment on the PPOG face book page when I heard that the drilling company couldn't strike water, right next to a question which mentioned the swimming pool and the launderette......Where has all the water gone? I guess the drill company are experts but it strikes me that the Aquifer (a kind of underground lake where water collects) has a limited amount of water which is constantly but intermittently being replenished. If there are at least four boreholes close by, including the Old Stables could we be reaching a limit and do all these boreholes comply with their abstraction licence. Mind you if we are taking more and more water from the Glygyrog Wen (a local stream) we might be interefering with the Aquifer replenishing. Thank God there are experts who know what they are doing. I believe PPEML are considering altering the point at which they extract water but this is strictly specified within their title deeds.
A minor point is that it is only the land owner who can sink a borehole, but we could never expect TLL to protect our future when they were selling things for money.
It could be that we can "purchase" water from the Old Stables. Pumping constraints might mean that the water purchased may only be able to be distributed to properties that are close, but it would relieve the load having to be extracted from the stream or a successful borehole.
3. ROAD CLOSURES
The newsletter was headed by the following:
ROAD WARNING: We have been informed that on Friday 16th September the remaining small section of road at the bottom of the hill is being tarmacked by the property owners there. The road should be considered shut while this work is being carried out. We have asked if the bin lorries can be allowed through in the morning before work commences. Other cars may be able to get past with patience.
This is good news however these roads essentially belong to the freeholders and any other persons (including these property owners) are almost certainly legally trespassing. I raise this because PPEML should be protecting us against this trespass, and if anyone wants to do work that affects our right of way it should be done in consultation with us (the freeholders). The negotiations surrounding this need to be done in co-operation with the freeholders and PPEML should be negotiating with those wanting to do the work with this as a background principle. They cannot just say we are doing this or we have agreed to this. I know elsewhere PPEML are talking about defining site rules. The site rules are already defined in the Freeholders Titles and anything PPEML writes (finalises) must comply with these and should cover matters as above!