Comments

DAMESATHOME@YAHOO.CO.UK
send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Wednesday, 1 April 2015

THE CANDY BOYS OUTFLANK THE ROYAL HOSPITAL GENERALS AND CAUSE HAVOC WITH NEIGHBOURS

40 FOOT MONSTERS



The Candy Bruvvers and the Royal Hospital don't resonate as a marriage made in heaven. 







When the Bruvvers bought the lease of Gordon House the major generals who run the Royal Hospital clearly thought their military skills would protect them and neighbours from the depredations of those wily wheeler dealers.


How very wrong they were....
Had they taken the trouble to look at the Candy’s hideous intrusion on to Hyde Park they might have been a bit more cautious allowing free rein to philistines.

But, in short order, the Bruvvers went on the offensive,
routing the Royal Hospital officers and leaving them to lick their wounds and wipe much egg off their honest, ruddy faces.
And the Royal Hospital's neighbours- all staunch supporters of the Hospital-suddenly found they had a neighbour from hell.


NEIGHBOURS FROM HELL

But what folly for this collection of colonels and major generals to think themselves a match for these billionaires. Did they get good advisers? It seems not; so the Bruvvers, as usual, end up getting just what they want.




A resident in Embankment Gardens overlooking Gordon House tells the Dame,“we were told by Major General Currie, the Royal Hospital Governor, the sale of the house would provide much needed funding. We were very happy with that. To reassure us he showed us plans for attractive shrubs between our homes and the Gardens”. 
RIGHT UP AGAINST THE NEIGHBOURS
Major General Currie mentioned- and seemed frightfully impressed- that the Sainsbury family had agreed to his plans.
Neighbours were told by the Governor they would negotiate very carefully’ with the Candy's .... obviously, they forgot to take a long spoon with them....

HELL!
So what’s gone wrong?
True to form the Bruvvers went on manoeuvres. The beautiful, calm and understated gardens the Royal Hospital promised to protect have been devastated.
And, showing complete contempt for residents, a wall of huge 40ft conifers has been planted along the Embankment Gardens boundary....blocking out the residents’ views; their daylight and threatening their boundary walls.
One associates these hideous, fast growing trees with damp and dismal suburban cemeteries-not the beautiful park like vista of the Royal Hospital grounds.
When residents objected to the Candy’s their representative, the appropriately named Mr Savage, wrote dismissively... “our client wishes to have privacy at home and in their garden. Royal Hospital are in full support of the new planning application and the tree planning schedule".  

Ironically the RH plan to cut down thirty two trees along the South Terrace boundary and replant with trees costing around £1 million to recreate the 17th cent plan. A lot to spend when the RH costs £2 million a year just to keep going.
No wonder locals were horrified! So the Royal Hospital want to cut down trees the locals want to keep and the Candy Bruvvers want to plant monsters the locals don't want!

There are important and unanswered questions:

1. Who negotiated with Candy & Candy during the sale process?
2. Who represented the Royal Hospital in these negotiations? (They did a very poor job of it)
3. Did the Royal Hospital discuss the landscaping plans with Candy & Candy in detail?
4. Did the Royal Hospital know that Candy & Candy were concerned about lack of privacy and planned to put up very tall trees (about 30 - 40 feet high) ?  

"

32 comments:

  1. The Royal Hospital must have been mad to do a deal with Christian Candy and his brother. Bound to get shafted.

    ReplyDelete
  2. seems like the RH are abdicating all repsonsibility

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sloane Square Veteran3 April 2015 at 11:19

      Lambs to the slaughter. The old and venerable of Chelsea are no match for the property spivs and their financial advisers. Enabled by hot money from Russian and Arab crooks who are looking to park their ill gotten gains in a safe haven. It is high time for our Member of Parliament to start making waves and articulate the injustice

      Delete
    2. Who is the Member of Parliament?

      Delete
    3. Greg Hands

      Delete
    4. Greg Hands is a member of the Government and knows his way around. Has he been contacted? It is high time that our MPs started to involve themselves in what is happening in the London property world. Uncontrolled free market forces are not appropriate in Central London Boroughs like Kensington and Chelsea.

      Delete
    5. Hands has been written to several times and has chosen to ignore the pleading of his residents. This is frankly a very bad ploy at election time.

      Delete
    6. Is Hands turning into another Malcolm Rifkind? Perish the thought

      Delete
    7. I wrote to Greg Hands, MP , on 18. March and sent the letter by registered mail. I then sent him an e mail to remind and request a reply. I sent him photographs of the ugly trees which they have planted n front of our window. One of my neighbours has also written to him. He has sent her a very brief reply but I have not received a reply from Mr Hands. I requested his guidance in this matter. So far I have received no help from Mr Hands. I know he is busy with the election.

      Delete
  3. I wonder if the Royal Hospital have thought ahead? Many of their 'Friends' membership live very locally.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't hold your breath. The "Friends" are brain dead

      Delete
  4. Protection from greedy developers cannot be left to pensioners and retired Generals who are semi functioning in their 83rd year. These massive developments need the attention of a resident friendly Planning Committee and expertise from Planning Officers. The Candy's are well know for their activities in the Borough with its exploding property prices and opportunities for developers to "screw the natives". The reptiles have "form" and they need to be handled accordingly

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why is the Chelsea Society silent on this outrage? Time for a clear out of their time serving and sell out Committee. A bunch of Haw Haw persons in the middle of the Royal Borough

      Delete
    2. Is Mr Bore still hanging around in the Planning Department? And is the insect Cllr Warrick still Chairman of Planning and favouring the developers for reasons that few of us can fathom?

      Delete
    3. Person Familiar With The Situation3 April 2015 at 14:12

      The name of the person who will replace mr Bore has been announced. It is Graham Stallwood, an internal appointment.

      This is another triumph for the Dame who has argued long and hard for an internal appointment which carries less risk than hiring some starry eyed interview King.

      Mr Stallwood is young and energetic and has played his cards close to his chest. It remains to be seen whether he has the strength of character and independence to respond to Cllr Ahern's call to make the Borough's planning more "resident friendly". As we all know, the siren calls of the developers can be seductive. The Dame is watching Mr Stallwood closely

      Delete
    4. Some months ago readers will remember that the Dame recommended Mr Stallwood to replace Mr Bore

      Delete
    5. Council Watcher3 April 2015 at 15:03

      Why does the Planning Department get lumbered with names that suggest poor performance? Mr "Bore". Mr "Stall Wood"

      I ask you!

      Delete
    6. 13.58 is being rather thick. It is not difficult to figure out why Cllr Warrick favours developers

      Delete
  5. Retired Chief Executive3 April 2015 at 14:17

    It is reported that Mr Stallwood will take over from Mr Bore "sometime later this year". This never works. New appointments cannot function alongside dead men's shoes. It is high time that the Council gets itself up to speed with elementary good practice in management. If there is a contractual obligation to Bore he should be sent on gardening leave so that the new broom can stamp his style and authority on the Department.

    Cllr Paget-Brown needs to come out of clover and start behaving like a Leader

    ReplyDelete
  6. Time for Cllr Warrick to bugger off and leave the Planning Committee in a pair of safe hands

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fly On The Wall4 April 2015 at 07:56

      The story was that Cllr Warrick would be retired from the Planning Committee Chairmanship and replaced by Cllr Julie Mills. This is taking too long to happen.

      Planning Officers are fearful of Cllr Mills who is considered to be a "somewhat unstable maverick" who consistently refuses to be "trained". Could it be that the new Director of Planning is briefing against Cllr Mills?

      Delete
    2. Cll Mills views of the Planning Department and the Bore regime are well known. She famously wrote to her fellow Conservatives that K&C planning is as "democratic as starched pampers"

      Delete
    3. Officers do not understand democracy. They are box tickers. Councillors should mainly be concerned with representative democracy. Cllr Mills is quite right to resist efforts by Officers to "train her". And the Councillor has the strength of character to crack the whip and make it clear to Officers that it is the Councillors who are in charge and not Officials.

      Delete
    4. Exhausted Councillor4 April 2015 at 09:59

      Would Officers please stop writing the history of the world which exhausted Councillors need to read before every Planning Meeting? A short summary for every application would be appreciated - and then it might actually be read by Councillors on the Planning Committee.

      The paper chase is out of control. And a monumental waste of time.

      Delete
  7. Pathetic Chelsea pensioners and gentlefolk getting well stuffed. Good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Had you thought you might benefit from some psychiatric assistance?

      Delete
  8. Graham Stallwood, the new Director of Planning for Kensington and Chelsea, is a vitally important appointment for residents. Who is this person?

    The Kensington and Chelsea Post needs to do an in depth interview with Mr Stallwood and share with residents his background, priorities and beliefs. And a photo would be nice.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Retired Chief Executive4 April 2015 at 10:06

    In a thriving democracy, Mr Stallwood would publish a short manifesto entitled "My promise to residents".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Kensington Tory4 April 2015 at 10:17

    Cllr Mills needs to carry out a fundamental rethink about the way the Planning Committee works. A new approach, along the lines of Parliamentary Select Committees, could transform the quality of decision taking and restore democracy to planning in the Royal Borough

    ReplyDelete
  11. Please could the Council protect residents' interests against greedy developers, whether they are Candys in Chelsea or Angela McConvile and the Westway Trust trying to jump on the band wagon in North Kensington!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Residents accepted the assurances they were given, and now the developers assume that they can push past the boundaries of the agreement because no-one, (or no-one of any monetary importance) is looking.

    ReplyDelete
  13. From Two Burmese Cats:
    I agree with the comment on 4 April at 15.51. We, the residents, went to a meeting chaired by Peter Currie.When we asked questions regarding the general appearance of the gardens and future planing we were given assurances by Major Currie that the Royal Hospital would negotiate very carefully with the buyers. I was shocked to see the cranes arrive on 13. March with huge trees. I sent an e mail to Dr RA, in South Kensington, to describe what we all saw. The new landscaping application was NOT available to us at the RBKC portal on that day. Did they submit a new planning application to regularise the planting they had already done? How strange!!! When we asked for information from Candy's team regarding these huge ugly trees, we were told by his project manager that the new tree planting was because " our client wishes to have privacy at home and in their garden" and also that " the garden is not intended to be left open". So their main purpose in planting these trees is to obscure and block the view from our homes. It seems that they may continue to plant more trees. Our outlook has been destroyed. Having lived here since 1984 I feel deeply disturbed by the way we have been treated in the hands of an inconsiderate property developer. I find it even more concerning that the Royal Hospital did not negotiate effectively with Candy & Candy; we have been very badly let down by the Royal Hospital.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.