Kentish Gazette Canterbury & District
Lawyers make more from council land sale than taxpayers
Oval chalet legal bill eclipses purchase price
A lengthy legal battle over the controversial sale of a plot of council land has cost taxpayers more than the authority actually received for the site.
Council chiefs apologised this week for selling the Oval Chalet in Whitstable too cheaply, before revealing it had spent £200,000 fighting campaigners who wanted to overturn the sale.
The site was sold for £160,000 in 2015, sparking a long-running row with campaigners who claim it was valued far too low.
But defending the legal challenge has seen the authority run up a huge bill in legal costs and officer time.
Sea Street Developments snapped up the land at a seemingly bargain price and plans to build beach-front holiday homes for the Whitstable Oyster Fishery.
The sale was regarded by critics as “reprehensible in the extreme”, with an official challenge going before the High Court in February.
Judge Mr Justice Dove accepted the best price for the land was not secured by the council, but still ruled the sale could go ahead – a decision which the Whitstable Society has applied to appeal.
With a decision expected soon, city council chief executive Colin Carmichael said: “The cost to the taxpayer can only increase if this case continues to be pursued.
“The legal arguments have already been examined fully by a senior judge who, in a very clear ruling, concluded it was lawful to continue our contract with the developer.
“Naturally, we hope the application for permission to appeal will be refused and that this will be the end of the legal process.
“Once it is delivered, this development will allow the people of Whitstable to benefit from an area of open space they have not been able to use for a number of years.”
In an unexpected turn, Mr Carmichael apologised for selling the site too cheaply.
“The Oval Chalet case has been long and complex,” he said.
“We accept the judge’s findings that we did not get the best price we could have got for the land and apologise to residents for that.
“We had, in advance of the February judgment, already examined the process we followed in selling the land, and I can reassure residents our land disposal procedures have now been thoroughly reviewed.”
Cllr Neil Baker earlier questioned the Whitstable Society’s decision to appeal.
“This is an unsightly bit of wasteland which people are claiming is an important piece of open space,” he said.
“From what I hear, most of the town either doesn’t care about this bit of wasteland or thinks the continual legal route is a waste of time.
“I’m not saying what is planned to be built there is necessarily the best option, but the Oval has been a tip for decades.”