Re: Being aware. : Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:26 am  

Tricky2309 wrote:

The trusts objection sets out the fact they believe the council may have acted outside of their power first time around and if they allow the latest one a judicial review will be sought.

I know that I have read the text but a precedent may have been set on the eyes of a court where there is no redress I am just putting potential concerns from my knowledge of Courts albeit this area is not an area I have operated in.

Re: Being aware. : Sat Sep 08, 2018 2:00 pm  

Go for it red white & blue but you are taking on ceramic box never mind teflon, !
The whole saga is disgusting imo.
Nothing is genuine with this guy except prevailing at all costs !

Re: Being aware. : Sat Sep 08, 2018 8:19 pm  

vastman wrote: Oh give over jinjer I thought you were better than that. Frankly I’ve lost interest in the whole thing and I don’t think it has any creedence at all. viewtopic.php?f=33&t=618503&start=60# However as far as i can see it’s the other posters with the attitude especially wren and shifty who I thought to be pretty decent. I think I know who Fisherman’s cap is and all he seemed to be doing was stating what is obvious - it is viable but unlikely. If it is him then he’s not connected as such but he knows the industry, he was the one who told me that the plan for BV wouldn’t hold more than 6000 and he was right. Still if we don’t want advice or help then so be it I’m sure after that hostile response he won’t bother. I’ll PM him and find out. Me I’m grateful for your kind words about me, many thanks. Oh and I don’t own the rights to google maps either. Go on then mate where have I had the attitude exactly and about what. I've hardly given my views on the proposed Balne Lane thing. The only other time recently I posted on the subject was in reply to the feasibility to Flatcapsman and said- I agree with most of your points, especially that a committed Council could get one sorted nearly anywhere within reason have I got an attitude there? and then went on to which I thought was the best and basically why is Balne Lane anymore likely to be a goer than Newmarket, as it's already so far advanced than Balne lane and why would WMDC pull their fingers out to get Balne done when they've done jack so far, plus who's going to fund the project, which is on the other stadium thread. A perfectly reasonable post I thought. Maybe you're talking about the post I replied to where someone said that the other poster posts similar to you (which is on the Crowther thread ftr ), I was actually backing you if it wasn't obvious and said although I could see similarities, I just couldn't see it being you at all and actually wondered where you'd been, plus like I said could care less as long as they're not trolling with it. Because apart from silly crap like this I actually have got along with you over the years and think you bring a lot to the forum, and you don't seem the kind to set up an extra account especially after all the stuff thrown you're way over the years by others. As for this thread, I've posted 3 times, first on page 5 answering PT's question why it may be denied planning and another again on why it may be denied specifically to another and another in reply to one about the Newcold about Newmarket. So again, you know i don't get personal and go in for name calling etc, so if you're going to say I've got an 'attitude' I'd love to know because I can't see anywhere and you know that's not even my style of posting, I leave that to others. Disappointing Vasty, especially when I've been one of the few posters here over the years and on the VT that have backed you up on some of your let's say you're more confrontational posts, when other people play the poster and not the post and tbf you've done the same for me when the likes of the Leeds Mafia are trying to talk crap about Trinity. Obviously, I may have misjudged you.

vastman wrote: Oh give over jinjer I thought you were better than that. Frankly I’ve lost interest in the whole thing and I don’t think it has any creedence at all. viewtopic.php?f=33&t=618503&start=60# However as far as i can see it’s the other posters with the attitude especially wren and shifty who I thought to be pretty decent. I think I know who Fisherman’s cap is and all he seemed to be doing was stating what is obvious - it is viable but unlikely. If it is him then he’s not connected as such but he knows the industry, he was the one who told me that the plan for BV wouldn’t hold more than 6000 and he was right. Still if we don’t want advice or help then so be it I’m sure after that hostile response he won’t bother. I’ll PM him and find out. Me I’m grateful for your kind words about me, many thanks. Oh and I don’t own the rights to google maps either. Go on then mate where have I had the attitude exactly and about what. I've hardly given my views on the proposed Balne Lane thing. The only other time recently I posted on the subject was in reply to the feasibility to Flatcapsman and said- I agree with most of your points, especially that a committed Council could get one sorted nearly anywhere within reason have I got an attitude there? and then went on to which I thought was the best and basically why is Balne Lane anymore likely to be a goer than Newmarket, as it's already so far advanced than Balne lane and why would WMDC pull their fingers out to get Balne done when they've done jack so far, plus who's going to fund the project, which is on the other stadium thread. A perfectly reasonable post I thought. Maybe you're talking about the post I replied to where someone said that the other poster posts similar to you (which is on the Crowther thread ftr ), I was actually backing you if it wasn't obvious and said although I could see similarities, I just couldn't see it being you at all and actually wondered where you'd been, plus like I said could care less as long as they're not trolling with it. Because apart from silly crap like this I actually have got along with you over the years and think you bring a lot to the forum, and you don't seem the kind to set up an extra account especially after all the stuff thrown you're way over the years by others. As for this thread, I've posted 3 times, first on page 5 answering PT's question why it may be denied planning and another again on why it may be denied specifically to another and another in reply to one about the Newcold about Newmarket. So again, you know i don't get personal and go in for name calling etc, so if you're going to say I've got an 'attitude' I'd love to know because I can't see anywhere and you know that's not even my style of posting, I leave that to others. Disappointing Vasty, especially when I've been one of the few posters here over the years and on the VT that have backed you up on some of your let's say you're more confrontational posts, when other people play the poster and not the post and tbf you've done the same for me when the likes of the Leeds Mafia are trying to talk crap about Trinity. Obviously, I may have misjudged you.