Sherwood,

I either read it here or elsewhere, loser pays the winners fees but the winners don't usually recoup 100%, more like 75%. Correct me if I'm wrong somebody.

It seems that regardless of what the majority of the residents want this case is on, with TLERA fully in support. The TLERA committee were probably distributing the latest letter in order to strengthen the legal case against Piplings. To help ensure their mate the lawyer gets some cash out of Piplings on this.

I hope that Piplings have good lawyers.

Disclaimer - This is all personal opinion, please don't sue me!

That is the point.

Costs have already been incurred. If the case is dropped, the lawyers will want their fees paid.

There would be no loser to pay.

Further to all that, and perhaps as a good illustration about the negative effect of TLERA's involvment in all this - the situation we are now in is that after 2 years of TLERA's campaigning and manipulations, my direct neighbour the F*'s have been taking legal action to bankrupt me.

Just for clarity, I am Philip, the husband of Emma. Emma is the owner of the Nursery.

This post was last modified: 24-02-2012 05:14 PM by piplingtoo.

It depends on what you mean by the case bing "dropped". If the case is settled before trial, it is still possible for there to be a technical winner and loser.

A mischievous person might point out that the 'tiny proportion' of the TLERA membership who have requested a meeting is more people than objected to the original planning application. Ironic given that in the latter case, the number was considered significant enough to give the Association a mandate in pursuing its active opposition to the nursery.

If you have not already signed the petition in support of Piplings Nursery, you can find it at http://www.friendsofpiplings.org

-----

Granted that someone might have personal history , I doubt if there are many people who haven't especially in this recession, but my view is increasingly that the action taken by TLRA has a flavour also of personal vendetta against individuals and is not solely related to the covenant matter. I do not think this is appropriate action for a residents association to take. The personal circumstances of Mr Lee are not an issue here in this matter. If he chose to bring them up then is also by the by but the key issue here remains the decisions made by the TLRA to pitch resident against resident and to proceed clearly against the wishes of much of its membership. Revealing the past dealings of Mr Lee is really just creating more smoke and
Mirrors.

Not really sure what relevance Philip Lee's relationship history has here, well actually I do, it has absolutely no relevance. Shame on you Jacks for putting it on here.

Jacks, you came from East Dulwich Forum, after the "hundreds of posts about TLERA"? I just did a quick search on there and can only find 7 posts that mention TLERA - all about the nursery yes, but nothing on there in the last month.

If you're only connection to all this is 'friends' on the hill, why go to the trouble of paying even £4 on the title search?

I smell a very large rat with this new forum account, just set up as the Special General Meeting has finally been called (Thursday 8th March, 7.30pm at Horniman school for all those TLERA members who would like to attend - notes should be getting delivered this weekend)

As Roz and IWAF have said, these comments have no relevance to the nursery, and are just vindictive stirring.

-----

-----

The more I read Jacks post the more I agree with LWL. This post is a little fishy. Someones personal relationship history is not relevant to this issue. I suspect that most of us on this forum have a 'relationship history' of some kind that we would prefer not to see posted publicly. The next thing Jacks will be telling us that hes hacked the Lee's phone and to expect the latest episode to be in the new Sun on Sunday.

Its also inappropropriate to refer to former partners as 'having disappeared' from the home as have children as this is very emotive language.

It is also not a crime to have 'dissolved' businesses as this is common practice. Whether someone is unfortunate enough to have unpaid debts is really their business but it is quite common also to come to some longer term relationship with creditors. As I said, times are very tough for many people and the credit rating of most of us is probably not as good as it has been in recent years due to the barrier being raised. If people feel so above it all that they face no risk of being in that position then good for them, but realistically its quite common.

Again, I feel like LWL, in that this politely written tirade reveals a nastier side and has its own motivation and purpose.

Jacks
Your postings about the personal details of Mr Lee are totally inappropriate on this public forum. You are making suggestions/allegations about his family life and children that you are leaving open to interpretation.

Shame on you.

-----

-----

Jacks, you seem unaware of what details you are posting that are inappropriate. Just so it's clear if they disappear, I've reported those aspects of your posts to Admin. You are obviously more than welcome to contribute to the debate but keep your posts relevant to the topic of the nursery and not individual's private lives.

And there are over 300 people who are very much in favour of Piplings, as evident by the number of people who have signed the online and in paper.

Piplings is a SMALL nursery. 24 (maximum) children is tiny compared to the Asquiths of this world and some other S London nurseries, in residential areas, that take up to 186 children.

Piplings has been granted planning permission to run in a residential property by the council. It has abided by all the conditions set to ensure that it doesn't disrupt or change the residential area. There have been no complaints to Environmental health or directly to the nursery about noise or nuisance.

You needn't have spent your £4. TLERA (although they probably shouldn't) have spent more than enough time and money gathering this type of evidence already. This is one of the main reasons that the SGM has been called, and whilst the nursery issue has instigated the call, there are many issues to do with the wider running of the association that many residents and members feel need to be discussed. I very much hope that at the SGM these concerns can be relayed and dealt with openly and honestly.

So, finally we appear to be seeing the crux of this vendetta against 'Piplings' - it is not about noise, nuisance, traffic, business or all the other smokescreens. Its not even about the nursery itself. It is about a personal grudge some people feel against a neighbour, in which case, even more reason that TLERA shouldn't get involved.

Jacks - you appear to be a personal friend of Mr Lee's ex-partner, by the way you keep referring to her. Is that the case?

I agree, I think this matter is disintegrating further into dangerous territory and further or even past discussion of this nature of someones personal and family life involving children is abhorrent. I agree that boundaries should be drawn and these posts amended to exclude these matters. No one knows or should know about peoples past relationships and decisions made or not made in respect of financial arrangements. Everyone is entitled to a private life. I dont think any of us are immune to life events, good or bad.
This current stoking of bad feeling is most certainly not incidental as it is claimed to be.