Prospects trying to get a higher price??

[rowe23]

http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/104...__council_leader_urges_Roots_hall_landowners/

Is this an attempt to get a better price for the land or just threats???

 

[OldBlueLady]

Not the first time we've heard this sort of thing, and probably not the last.

 

[Shrimper]

The fact that Prospects has failed to sell to two people makes me think that the problem isn't with Sainsburys and RM but with Prospects itself.

 

[Feathers]

More posturing by Neil Bates. It is one thing exploring alternatives but who is realistically going to buy this land for residential use knowing that the Council are supporting Fossetts Farm so are hardly likely to grant planning permission on land that will prevent that development.

Similarly what chance have Prospects got of obtaining permission to develop the site for their own use?

 

[Mick]

The fact that Prospects has failed to sell to two people makes me think that the problem isn't with Sainsburys and RM but with Prospects itself.

They agreed terms with Sainsbury's and Sainsbury's chose not to complete, possibly due to uncertainty with the planning permission renewal prevailing at the time. Please explain how that is Prospects' fault.

 

[Smiffy]

Cant blame Mr Bates for looking elsewhere. Sainsbury/Ron have messed Prospects about several times now.

If it all drags on or falls flat then it wont be Prospects fault.

 

[Mick]

Cant blame Mr Bates for looking elsewhere. Sainsbury/Ron have messed Prospects about several times now.

If it all drags on or falls flat then it wont be Prospects fault.

Mr Bates ? Perhaps he should build a Motel ?

 

[WightShrimper]

Is he 'master' of the college?

 

[Feathers]

Cant blame Mr Bates for looking elsewhere. Sainsbury/Ron have messed Prospects about several times now.

If it all drags on or falls flat then it wont be Prospects fault.

I agree you can't blame him for looking elsewhere but why so publicly? I guess he feels this will put pressure on Sainsbury/SUFC to up the price....on the other hand if no buyers are found this could of course backfire on him.

 

[Jam_Man]

I agree you can't blame him for looking elsewhere but why so publicly? I guess he feels this will put pressure on Sainsbury/SUFC to up the price....on the other hand if no buyers are found this could of course backfire on him.

Cant blame him !

He has already agreed to sell and has been stalled and let down.

All he wants is to sell up but because Sainsbury were reluctant to commit due to our inability to progress he was the one getting shafted. Seeing as he seems to have been the most willing to sell and agreed a deal years ago then its hard to put any blame on him for trying to get the sale done.

Fingers crossed Sainsbury will now get it sorted.

Cant see how he could sell it for residential though, surely a CPO would stop anyone buying it for development, but if his posturing means it gets done then so be it.

 

[londonblue]

And at the end of the article we have this:

“I don’t know the current state of negotiations but I do remain hopeful that it is moving slowly forward."

So, they're still talking to Sainsbury's then...

IMO there's no way any property developer would buy the site knowing the council are happy to issue a CPO if necessary. The only thing Prospects can realistically do is start using the site again themselves. If that is what they want to do then fine, but then they miss out on a large financial reward for a site they don't even use. They'd be mad not to sell.

I guess they're just frustrated with Sainsbury's and are trying to move things along. Moreover, I don't think this is really to do with upping the price, after all, they've just said that any previous agreements are null and void, and negotiations start again. This, IMO plays into Sainsbury's hands since (given the continued economic mess) the land value must be less now than it was then the original agreement was made!

 

[IloveShrimp]

More posturing by Neil Bates. It is one thing exploring alternatives but who is realistically going to buy this land for residential use knowing that the Council are supporting Fossetts Farm so are hardly likely to grant planning permission on land that will prevent that development.

Similarly what chance have Prospects got of obtaining permission to develop the site for their own use?

Perhaps you shouldn't believe all the council says, in public they support the new stadium but behind closed doors ??? :winking:

 

[McNasty]

I know nothing about property law but if prospects have kept their side of the deal and sainsburys have defaulted on the purchase previously how can a CPO be invoked ?

 

[united we stand]

And at the end of the article we have this:

. This, IMO plays into Sainsbury's hands since (given the continued economic mess) the land value must be less now than it was then the original agreement was made!

I disagree, their position is IMO stronger today. If they had sold x years ago (can't be bothered to see the exact dates)then they would have been one of the first parts of the jigsaw, now they are one of the last pieces- and they know this and they will use this to bump up the price . Yes we can threaten with CPO's to which their reply will be that now it is only them delaying the project and the CPO will take a long time to go thru. 2 years plus has been bandied around on here . The below explains the process (different council, but they all have to follow the same process- better details than on our councils website) . This suggests 12-15 months plus. ,
http://www.brent.gov.uk/media/527711/CPO%20Booklet%2012119%20DL%20v6.pdf

I did work out the minimum timeline from the below a couple of years ago, but I can't seem to find the post and need to get back to work now so do not ahve the tiem to redo it :blush: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11487/147639.pdf

 

[londonblue]

I know nothing about property law but if prospects have kept their side of the deal and sainsburys have defaulted on the purchase previously how can a CPO be invoked ?

I don't think that's the case. They can try to renegotiate, and if that doesn't work then a CPO can be used. But, the threat of a CPO would move things along a bit...

I also don't think you need to negotiate first. Can't a council issue a CPO regardless?

 

[united we stand]

I know nothing about property law but if prospects have kept their side of the deal and sainsburys have defaulted on the purchase previously how can a CPO be invoked ?

there is no deal , it has expired therefore a CPO can be made if the buyer and seller can not agree a deal (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11487/147639.pdf section 3.2

. However what you have put would certainly be used in mitigation by Prospects if the CPO order was made to the government ( Bates has made this point several times) a, which in turn will add more delays

 

[londonblue]

I disagree, their position is IMO stronger today. If they had sold x years ago (can't be bothered to see the exact dates)then they would have been one of the first parts of the jigsaw, now they are one of the last pieces- and they know this and they will use this to bump up the price . Yes we can threaten with CPO's to which their reply will be that now it is only them delaying the project and the CPO will take a long time to go thru. 2 years plus has been bandied around on here . The below explains the process (different council, but they all have to follow the same process- better details than on our councils website) . This suggests 12-15 months plus. ,
http://www.brent.gov.uk/media/527711/CPO%20Booklet%2012119%20DL%20v6.pdf

I did work out the minimum timeline from the below a couple of years ago, but I can't seem to find the post and need to get back to work now so do not ahve the tiem to redo it :blush: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11487/147639.pdf

OK, so both sides could say the current position suits them better. I'd love to be in the room when they negotiate!

 

[united we stand]

I also don't think you need to negotiate first. Can't a council issue a CPO regardless?

I dont think this is correct
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11487/147639.pdf section 3.2
3.2 If the acquiring authority are unable to purchase by agreement because they are unable to
agree or it is impractical to do so they will go down the compulsory purchase route

 

[Jam_Man]

Perhaps you shouldn't believe all the council says, in public they support the new stadium but behind closed doors ??? :winking:

They have agreed the stadium.

Thats all the support thats needed.

 

[londonblue]

I dont think this is correct
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11487/147639.pdf section 3.2
3.2 If the acquiring authority are unable to purchase by agreement because they are unable to
agree or it is impractical to do so they will go down the compulsory purchase route

So it probably is possible, but not in this instance. Given that they've come to agreement before it would be hard to argue that it is impractical.