Whenever we see an IW Council delegated decision, our interests are raised.
Delegated decisions are made by the council without public debate. Indeed the ones that the planning department take don’t even take notes during the meetings, so the public can’t even find out how a particular decision was come to.
Given this, you can see why some people might be concerned about them now, can’t you?
13 Cross Street
One we noticed today is the sale of 13 Cross Street, Oakfield, Ryde.
It was bought under a compulsory purchase scheme, under delegated powers back around 16 May 2007.
The idea was admirable – to ensure that the house was actually used, rather than be left to rot away. It was all under the ‘Safe and Well Kept Island’ initiative.
Back then, the records show that it was valued by Mr P Kingston FRICS of Kingston and Grist, Chartered Surveyors at £70,000.
From some reason, the council set aside £110,000 to buy it, stating that “part of the procedure that Cross Street is bought and sold back to back.”
Fast forward to August 2008, when another delegated decision is about to be made, this time to sell 13 Cross Street.
How much?
Turns out that they’re planning to sell it for … £76,000.
This sounds like a modest profit from its £70,000 purchase price until you take into account the legal fees of £6,495 (for the original purchase and subsequent sale) and agent’s fees of £1,140.
All of this leads to a loss of tax payers funds of circa £1,635.
Back to back?
Quite how the council defines a “Back to back” purchase/sale is anyone’s guess, but we think even they would find it difficult to justify calling a year and three months, “back to back.”
Perhaps if the sale had gone through a little quicker, the council would be sitting on a profit rather than a loss.
More confusion
The way it was sold was via what they call a “best and final offer” process, which started on 9 June 2008 and closed on 27th June 2008.
The highest offer was £76,000, which is both unconditional and in cash.
Where it gets confusing is that the official papers say “this particular applicant has already increased their offer three times from an original starting point of £70,000.”
Again, this might be a Council-ees thing, but doesn’t “best and final offer,” mean that the bidders are given a single chance to put their offer in? If they’re increasing their offer, how is it “best and final?”
Ho Hum.
We would have asked these questions directly and got more details for you from the IW Council, but Claire Robertson in the Council ‘communication’ department took the decision to cut VentnorBlog off from asking questions. Whatever happened to democracy?
