After last night's meeting I decided to take no further part in this argument. But there are still inaccuracies and misunderstandings being posted.

The application to the Lands Tribunal, of which I have a copy, is asking for the restrictive covenant to be moderated for no 5 Liphook "so as to permit the use of the ground and first floors of the house (with use of the garden) as a day nursery in accordance with the planning permission issued ..... for not more than 12 children at any one time (including children of any family resident at the house) between 8.00 am and 6.00 pm on Mondays to Fridays inclusive but not on Good Friday or Christmas Day in any year."

Personally, as a near neighbour and a beneficiary of the covenant, I have told the Lees's lawyer that I have no objection to this moderation. But that is not the argument. Some of the postings here, and some of the statements made last night and by members of the TLERA committee, have implied that the entire restrictive covenant would be removed from the house, thus allowing goodness only knows what future uses of the building. This must be corrected.

This is a small modification to the restrictive covenant, and the rest of the terms of the covenant will remain active for the house.