Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Friday, 4th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the n/a site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

FRIOCKHEIM BOWLERS STILL FEEL CHEATED



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

"I HAVE discussed this matter with Angus Council, and have now come to the definitive view that we are prepared to offer you a 50-year Lease for the property which you occupy at Friockheim Park.
The premium they would require would be £8,500 with the rent being fixed at £1 per annum for the entire length of the Lease, and and there would be no rent reviews carried out."

The letter came from Lickley Proctor, chartered surveyors, Dundee, w
ho were acting for Angus Council.

Any sports club receiving a letter containing the above words would be pretty confident that that aspect of their financial planning for the next 50 years was safely in hand.

Especially when the letter went on to state: "The Lease ... takes into consideration the possibility of you obtaining a Public House Licence for the subjects."

Alas, not so. Friockheim Bowling Club committee feel they have been treated very badly indeed in having the above offer, dated April 26, 2006 - which they saw as a legally binding commitment - snatched away and replaced with a deal that sees them paying a significantly greater sum.

Five months later, the Bowling Club was told by Angus Council that unless it immediately ceased selling alcohol it would "leave Angus Council no option but to consider the remedies within said lease."

And by January 18, 2007, the picture was very different, with the club receiving a letter from Angus Council's principal estates manager, stating: " ... I am prepared to recommend that the rent be increased to £850 per annum to reflect the ability to sell alcohol.

"With regard to a premium, I regret that I am not prepared to recommend to Angus Council that a premium to be paid for a 50 year lease be £8,500. As discussed in our telephone conversation a figure of £18,000 would be more appropriate."

The club's lawyer examined the correspondence and was convinced that the initial offer, as described at the start of this article, was legally binding, and that Angus Council was aware from the very start that alcohol was to be sold at the premises.

The Scottish Ombudsman was contacted by the club, but said that a formal complaint should first be made to Angus Council's chief executive.

This was done and rejected.

But the Ombudsman refused to take further action, and closed the case.
The club's solicitor, and MP Andrew Welsh tried to have this overturned, but the Ombudsman's office is the final court, and there is no appeal.

Former club captain, Alex Paterson, has reiterated his determination to see the case through to the end, and told the Herald that a further complication arose when an Angus Council official told them that there was no way they would have been offered a 50-year rent deal, and that 20 years would have been the maximum.

On being shown the evidence, the lease offered was increased to 25 years.

A spokesperson for Angus Council said: "We have reached agreement with Friockheim Bowling Club with regard to the lease terms and conditions. The lease has not yet been signed as we are discussing alterations to the lease plan to reflect the current position on site, and this will go through the bowling club committee process.

"We are not aware of any problems and the discussions regarding the plan are progressing well."



The full article contains 565 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 08 May 2008 3:50 PM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Arbroath
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.