You may have noticed an item on the news on Friday (including a cameo from me) relating to the successful court case bought against Mr Djurberg by people who were sold houseboats under the assumption that they had legal residential mooring rights.

The judge found wholly in favour of the buyers and now Mr Djurberg must pay back the money in full along with other costs incurred by the buyers.

I've been fortunate enough to be given sight of the full adjudication and I have to say it makes for absolutely shocking reading.  Of course the fact that Mr Djurberg has been obliged to settle the matter financially doesn't, I'm afraid, automatically guarantee that the buyers will see any of the money they paid him.

And we still await the findings of the second public inquiry which was held earlier in the summer.

Regarding the judge himself, he has a nice turn of phrase and literary allusion 'Regarding Mr Djurberg, as Montaigne put it so elegantly, "no one characteristic clasps us purely and universally in its embrace"'

Views: 1228

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Thanks Gareth - Do you know if/where the judgment is available? It's not on the judiciary website (as yet).

I had a copy shared by one of the parties to the case
 
Matt D said:

Thanks Gareth - Do you know if/where the judgment is available? It's not on the judiciary website (as yet).

No worries. It may yet get published on Bailii or elsewhere so I'll keep an eye out.

Good work Gareth I thought I spotted you on the BBC news. Myck Djurberg seems a bit of a shady character - he was in in court last year over an allegation of sexual assault...

http://www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk/news/14622979.Owner_of_...

A historical footnote: the judgment in the Djurberg Hampton Riveria case is available at the purchasers' barristers' website.

http://www.falcon-chambers.com/images/uploads/documents/DJURBERG_ju...

Are there not numerous planning issues outstanding as well as this financial ruling.

RUT Council planners rejected numerous plans, some of which were retrospective.

Hasn't he ignore planning and so far got away with it?

John

Now we have a new Council I hope there will be the enforcement action that is needed to return this property to what it actually has permission to be. The numerous additions which have not obtained planning permission should be requred to be removed.

Why is there no practical action here from the council?

John

Hello John

I share your concern on this one. What I would say, in officers' defence, is that they have to tread incredibly carefully. If they fail to follow procedure properly; if they fail to get the correct document, the correct authorisation, the correct signature on the correct sheet, etc the developer/applicant will be on it like a shot and make a claim against the council for maladministration and almost certainly have that claim upheld by an inspector.

 

John orr said:

Now we have a new Council I hope there will be the enforcement action that is needed to return this property to what it actually has permission to be. The numerous additions which have not obtained planning permission should be requred to be removed.

Why is there no practical action here from the council?

John

Hi

     I saw the enforcement guys and Police in there last week, who were removing all of the non permitted items, what kind of money would this cost and is it down to our Council to foot the bill ?

  Rob

Hello Rob

The council has underwritten the enforcement action and is now seeking financial redress from the applicant using legal powers if needs be



Rob James said:

Hi

     I saw the enforcement guys and Police in there last week, who were removing all of the non permitted items, what kind of money would this cost and is it down to our Council to foot the bill ?

  Rob

Hi,

    So what kind of money are we talking about ?

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2018   Created by Matt D.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service