This is all speculation, so I'm not actually accusing anyone of anything [thus insert the word "allegedly" liberally throughout this post]

... But

isn't it odd how a company like this could go quite so wrong with the development of a house that they bring it down? A house that, if well & intensively re-developed, *might* have included 6 or so flats, maybe even 9, but now that the plot is "empty", they can afford to plan a building with 12 (!!!) flats, and more than make back any money "lost" in the earlier debacle?

3 extra flats at around ?300,000 each pays for the original purchase price of around ?900,000 (and I suspect it was less)

It seems somewhat convenient that having paid a certain sum for a house +plot, they have managed to make the plot worth so much more since the time of the 'accidental' knocking down of what was a lovely building

Now, I repeat, this is pure speculation and I'm NOT accusing anyone of anything, just pointing out the convenience of the events to date.

Am I too cynical?