Instructions and contact details link at top of Start Menu  

Knott Affidavit accuses Chief Planning Officer

By 1993 Tim Wilmot's research into civil litigation
enabled him to serve six writs upon Caradon District Council,
totally unaware that his approaching bankruptcy
as a direct and forseeable result of Caradon's criminality
meant that English Law removed even his right to sue.

Although in mid-1992, Caradon District Councillor Tony Knott
was too terrified of the Chief Planning Officer, Alan Hartridge,
to join with Councillors Screech and Gist
in prosecuting Tolley in the Public Interest,
by mid-1993 he felt braver.

In June 93, Caradon District Council
were attempting to strike out Tim Wilmot's writs
on the grounds that they were "frivolous and vexatious".

Tim Wilmot therefore drafted this affidavit
for Tony Knott to show his support for the truth.

Surely any reasonable reader will see why the Chief Planning Officer
later internally manipulated the planning process
to achieve the bulldozing of the home that Knott was building.

In plain and simple terms, it was revenge.

What is truly amazing,
is that no councillor or media
has ever publicly exposed this revengefull act for what it is.

An act that cost Tony Knott his home and his life.




I, ANTONY KNOTT, of Richmond Park, Sandways, Calstock in the County of Cornwall,
MAKE OATH and say as follows:-

1.    I am a District Councillor representing Calstock upon Caradon District Council.

2.    The Plaintiff is known to me as the owner of property in South Hill Road, Callington.

3a.    In 1988 the Plaintiff applied for Outline Planning Consent
3b.    for a garden centre at 'Target', South Hill Road,
3c.    and the application came before the Planning Committee of 03 OCT 88,
3d.    where it was unaminously approved.

4a.    I supported the application then
4b.    because I considered it a worthwhile project for the community,
4c.    although the Planning Officer's recommendation was one of refusal.


5a.    A long time after, during 1990, I became aware
5b.    that the Plaintiff was making serious allegations against the Planning Officer,
5c.    and on 29 NOV 90 the Planning Services Committee
5d.    passed a unaminous resolution of confidence in the Planning Officer
5e.    following presentation of reports by Mr Tolley, the solicitor.

6.1a.    In FEB 91 I recieved from the Plaintiff
6.1a.    a copy of his document
6.1a.    which drew attention to Mr Tolley's report dated 22 NOV 90.

6.2a.    Reading the extracts,
6.2b.    I could see that something was not right,
6.2c.    and I contacted the Chief Executive of the time, David Newell,
6.2d.    who persuaded me to take no action,
6.2e.    and all councillors recieved a letter requesting them not to reply.


7a.    The placard and document displayed by the Plaintiff on 2 MAY 91
7b.    gave me further cause for concern,
7c.    but I was uncertain how to express that concern.

8.1a.    By late 1991
8.1a.    I was fully convinced that the Plaintiff had been wronged,
8.1a.    and still uncertain of how to expose the truth,
8.1a.    I decided to await the Police report.

8.2a.    By April or May 1992
8.2b.    it became clear that Police would tell us nothing,
8.2c.    and the Plaintiff has shown me letters
8.2d.    which show clearly that the authorities differ
8.2e.    as to whether criminal offences were, or were not, committed.

9a.    Regardless of the position on criminal offences,
9b.    I am certain that certain officers of the Council
9c.    have committed procedural errors and maladministration
9d.    which have caused a great injustice.

10a.    Although I am a Councillor,
10b.    I am a working man with a limited education,
10c.    and I simply don't know how to set about righting this wrong,
10d.    and the Council's officers will not assist me to do so.

11.1a.    The Plaintiff draws attention to the four words in the official Minutes:-
11.1b.    "The Planning Officer explained ...",
11.1c.    and from my experience of Council Minutes
11.1d.    it seems clear that the Planning Officer is recorded as having spoken.

11.2a.    I am aware that the Council stated officially and repeatedly
11.2b.    that the Planning Officer did NOT speak,
11.2c.    but it seems clear to me that the probability is that he did speak.

12a.    This raises serious questions
12b.    as to the motivation behind the alleged falsification of minutes,
12c.    loss of Clerk's notes,
12d.    and the issuing of a Refusal Notice after a unaminous approval.

13a.    It seems quite wrong to me that a man can be totally ruined,
13a.    have clear evidence that someone, somwhere is not telling the truth,
13a.    and is denied repeatedly any opportunity to cross-examine those he accuses.

14.1a.    As a District Councillor
14.1b.    I believe that the Public Interest would be best served
14.1c.    were this affair to be fully aired in open Court,
14.1d.    and that the Defendant explain in detail the questions
14.1e.    that have previously been avoided.

14.2a.    The Defendant wields enormous power and influence,
14.2b.    and the electorate I represent should be assured
14.2c.    that those powers have been wielded lawfully,
14.2d.    and without wrong being caused.

15.1a.    The Defendant has consistently stated that the Plaintiffs allegations
15.1b.    are "entirely without foundation".

15.2a.    I believe it to be wrong for the Defendfant
15.2b.    to attempt to strike out the Plaintiff's action on procedural grounds.

15.3a.    I want to see the Defendant answer the Plaintiff's Pleadings point-by-point,
15.3b.    and let the facts and evidence speak for themselves.

16.1a.    The Defendant's Chief Executive, Jack Neal, has told me
16.1b.    that they [are hoping for the ] Plaintiff,
16.1c.    who is about to be bankrupt, "to go under,
16.1d.    so that he won't be able to get into Court".

16.2a.    I believe this attempt at striking out
16.2b.    to be motivated by the same desire,
16.2c.    and that it is contrary to the Rules of Natural Justice.

17a.    From my experience as a Councillor,
17b.    I consider it probable that Mr Hartridge, as Chief Planning Officer,
17c.    would have been aware of a major retail development proposal
17d.    at an early stage.

18a.    My understanding is that the Defendants official position
18b.    has consistently been
18c.    that Mr Hartridge did NOT speak at the Planning Meeting of 03 OCT 88,
18d.    and I recall Mr Tolley stating in writing
18e.    that there was no evidence whatsoever
18f.    that Mr Hartridge took any action himself relating to the application.

19.1a.    On 28 JUN 93 I telephoned Neil Harvey
19.1b.    ( former Senior Planning Assistant referred to in Mr Hartridge's Affidavit )
19.1c.    and informed him that Mr Hartridge states
19.1d.    that the Plaintiff and himself met at Target on 29 NOV 88.

19.2a.    Mr Harvey has no recollection of such a meeting,
19.2b.    and further confirms this in a second telephone message
19.2c.    on the morning of 30 JUN 93.

19.3a.    To my knowledge Mr Hartridge's Affidfavit is the first mention of this meeting,
19.3b.    and I know of no evidence for such a meeting occurring.

20a.    I fully support the Plaintiff's request
20b.    that this matter be subject to an open and fair hearing.

21a.    To further demonstrate my support
21a.    ( in view of the Plaintiff's bankruptcy )
21a.    I have paid a cheque for £25 for the Plaintiff's Hearing of 07 MAY 93.

SWORN at Callington in the County of Cornwall this 30th day of June 1993

Signed A.KNOTT

Before me Vivian Carne A Solicitor


This is why the Chief Planning Officer yet again
internally manipulated the planning process
to decieve the Planning Committee
into revoking the Knott family planning permissions,
and the bulldozing of a partly-built home that Tony Knott loved

Sick with worry even before the Revocation Orders were made,
Tony Knott succumbed to cancer,
and was forced to live unlawfully in a hastily converted garage,
where he died three days after the bulldozing.

His widow, Julie, remains in an appalling situation,
and the Caradon Councillors act like puppets
in front of their controllers -
the unelected and unaccountable executive officers.

And that is why Tim Wilmot has to die -
so that these people are shocked enough to get off their fat backsides,
and stand up for what is right.

Link - Return to top of this webpage
Link - Julie Knott tells her story - sequential
Link - Return to Start Menu to Caradon attack Councillor Knott section
Click "back" to your last webpage location

[C] 2010 - Zen asserts copyright on text, context, and design.
Go to Instructions & Contact Details at top of Start Menu for:-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1. you want to use some of this site for a non-commercial purpose.
2. you want to use some of this site for a commercial purpose.
3. you want to use the design of this site for your own legal work,
    and would welcome professional assistance.
This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Zen wishes to say "Thank You!" to BLOGGER