Bovis/Linden could leave the village unfinished. Read on…….

32 thoughts on “Bovis/Linden could leave the village unfinished. Read on…….

  1. Couldn’t the post do with a better heading?

    Bovis/Linden plans to leave village unfinished

    Developers go back on their promises

    Developers chop village amenities

  2. Have I understood the flyer correctly; that the CDC approval process is effectively the only thing between us and Bovis / Linden back tracking on the public spaces?

    1. That is correct, CDC are our Planning authority who permit or not permit all planning submissions.

      Our Parish Council can only advise CDC on what they think, much like the residents of the village. This is why you need everyone to get involved and put their thoughts forward when the new revised plans are submitted, as the more people object, the more CDC have to take note.

      1. Not quite correct David, CDC is beneath the GCC so that is the authority that holds CDC to account.

  3. Hi guys. I moved to Victory Fields last year and love it here, I’m very much looking forward to the landscaping being finished so we can all enjoy the village without the building works going on. I would be happy if the open spaces are landscaped with grass and trees whilst other facilities like the trim trail and bowling green etc are not installed. I feel that the bowling green is likely to see little use and once the facilities like the trim trail and play equipment start to break in use or be vandalised, the bills will of course fall to us to pay for their repair and replacement. I can see the maintenance charge sky rocketing quite quickly to pay for maintenance of all these facilities. I have lived on developments before that have maintenance fees and the charge here of £380 per annum for all the facilities that are proposed, seems very reasonable compared to what I have paid before. In addition, I see that some people have started proposing to involve the press in the issue of Linbo not completing the facilities that were initially proposed. I think it would be wise to at least take a consensus from all residents on how they feel about this, because if the press do become involved which leads to us living on an estate that becomes notorious through the press in some way, how will people feel if they are unable to sell their houses in the future because they are on “that” development that was in the press? Some people may be aggrieved and seek to recover their losses by suing the people who chose to involve the press. Just some food for thought, I don’t have strong feelings either way about the facilities being installed or not, but people need to think things through fully before campaigning in the belief that they represent all residents, as I and at least a few others I know of do not feel the same way. (Yes I do live in Victory Fields, no I don’t work for Linbo 🙂 )

    1. These facilities were promised to our village before a single house on victory fields was built, not only promised but included in the S106 legal agreement so the developers have to provide them.

      The Victory Fields development has already featured several times in the local press, radio and on BBC TV because of problems caused by Bovis and Linden. I can’t believe that anyone would actually sue their fellow neighbours for involving the press in their fight to get what was promised?

      If anyone gets sued it will be the developers for mis-selling.

      It’s no good people moving in and then saying they don’t want the facilities because they have got to pay for them. That’s as bad as moving into a village next to the church and getting the bells removed because they are noisy.

    2. Sue, if you don’t work for Linden or Bovis I’ll eat my hat.

      “Some people may be aggrieved and seek to recover their losses by suing the people who chose to involve the press” – thinly veiled and ridiculous threat that would have no basis whatsoever.

      1. Get the tomato ketchup out then Stephen and enjoy your breakfast. What I said is not thinly veiled or a threat of any kind. It is common sense to conclude that if someone causes other people to potentially lose tens of thousands of pounds by their action, then those other people may seek redress. I understand it can be upsetting to find someone may not share your point of view, but what I have said is not ridiculous or with no basis whatsoever either. Why not check it out with a lawyer who is familiar with property disputes?

        1. The thing is, people will not be asking for something that wasn’t known about when people bought their homes. So if all the amenities are put in place that were promised, there has been no change from what purchasers already knew about at time of purchase; therefore, no case.

          Taking this a stage further, you could say that people who blocked the promised amenities and were successful, would be depriving those people of amenities that they expected when they bought their property. Is there a case?

          1. I don’t think anybody has said anyone is going to try to block the amenities or that there would be any change from what purchasers already knew about (the amenities) at the time of purchase if they are put into place. What I said earlier was this: “I see that some people have started proposing to involve the press in the issue of Linbo not completing the facilities that were initially proposed. I think it would be wise to at least take a consensus from all residents on how they feel about this, because if the press do become involved which leads to us living on an estate that becomes notorious through the press in some way, how will people feel if they are unable to sell their houses in the future because they are on “that” development that was in the press? Some people may be aggrieved and seek to recover their losses by suing the people who chose to involve the press.”
            Do you feel then that there shouldn’t be a consensus from all residents on the decision to take action (or not)? It should just be down to a few people to decide on behalf of all of us how to proceed, whether we all agree with the action being taken or not? The rest of us get no say in it, no say in whether the press are involved in an issue that will affect us, particularly if we have a different view point?

            1. The mountains of building spoil from the development were contaminated with asbestos fibres, this soil has been re-used to make the public open space.

              The formal children’s play areas have been removed from the landscape plan on the areas that this soil has been deposited.

              coincidence?

              And people are worried about the price of their houses dropping if the press get involved.

              1. Karen, do not forget the benzo compounds as they re far more toxic than the asbestos fibres!! People who have children are here for different reasons to those buying the houses as investments and as the housing market is diving in London those investors are hoping to avoid the downturn here but that is not so likely anyway so lets focus on getting what we have all paid for!

        2. Thinking that residents publicising developer shortcomings would affect house prices is quite ludicrous, and a legal route for redress even more so.

          Eager to see the CDC submission from Bovis / Linden and under starter’s order to provide feedback against the original proposals and with a view to legal advice around misselling if they’re not.

          1. You could say that prices of the houses could be affected because people will not want to buy them as there are no amenities to attract buyers. This will have a lot longer effect than some old news stories in the press that people have long forgotten about but you’ll still see no amenities years down the road.

            Lets see what the new plans have or not have and where, for those who want to get involved, it leads the village.

  4. I would like to see the bowling green and know a few residents who seem keen on it being here.

    We need the play areas as there are so many children in the village.

    The Developers will pay for the first 5 years of maintenance as part of their contract so at the moment that should not effect the maintenance charge.

    We need the footpaths and cycle paths all around.

    I really think we have to pull together on this as one Village.

  5. Wow, that is the first time I’ve heard someone who doesn’t want the promised amenities – everyone to their own.

    There is a whole raft of things promised: allotments, tennis courts, more paths, etc which I feel should be put in place but lets see what is on, or should that be what’s missing on the new plans when they get published.

    1. David, Sue claims she is not alone????? Wow lets get a lobby going to stop the developers from putting in the amenities and then maybe we will see some real emotion around here and not just from a few moaners.

  6. Ever since development first started and even before the village had a name, developers have continually broken promises and failed to complete the facilities that were listed in the initial brochures. This is the first time there has been a S106 agreement in place and it is up to the CDC to enforce that agreement. Planning permission was won on appeal following a rejection by CDC, does the Govt Dept granting the appeal not have any jurisdiction over seeing that it is completed in accordance with the permission granted?

    1. That is the concern, there is a real possibility that CDC does not have the resources or the inclination to hold the Developers to account. We are expecting that GCC will step in and support the homeowners in their claim for the promised amenities as it appears that LINBO were planning to leave the site with little more than 50% of the amenities delivered and many of those to a much lower standard that the original S106 commitments. In case many had not already noticed the Maintenance Management Company as entered on your TP1 is a Bovis subsidiary so it does not take much imagination to understand where their intentions are heading?

      1. Mike, hasn’t the Parish Council got first refusal on taking on the green spaces before it can then be offered to other parties?

  7. David you are absolutely correct but we have a problem as our PC is not competent and Bovis know they will decline! Bovis expect the CDC to decline also as will the GCC and then it defaults to Bovis themselves unless we the residents take actions to stop this! That’s when we all start paying exorbitant maintenance charges! We need to follow the lead of the VH but we can only do that is the Homeowners want it to happen!

  8. I totally agree with David and Mike, the community need to pull together on this one, it should be at the highest priority for the development to be finished to the standards on the original plans.
    Afterall, the residents have been sold their properties with reference to these plans.

    I cannot believe they are up to phase 6 and the other 5 phases haven’t even been completed! It is completely ludricous that there is not a single play park on the development, take a look at Swinbrook Park (David Wilson) in Carterton, Phase 1 fully complete with playpark, they seem to be finishing each phase along with the landscaping as they move along on that development.

    As for Sues comment “Some people may be aggrieved and seek to recover their losses by suing the people who chose to involve the press.”

    The only reason the press would be involved is because you will have disgruntled residents that have spent a fortune on their properties without the amenties they were promised! How a legal case would hold for residents trying to seek their losses due to media coverage is beyond me! It just would not stand and it would be difficult to determine the amount lost, if any.
    Houses will still sell, it’s just down to receiving what we were promised.

    1. Absolutely, Violet Rose, but just remember the value of our homes will go up if all the amenities are completed as per the S106, even if they do not go up in value they will be worth more relatively to the amenities not being completed! Perhaps Sue is just a tenant who does not want her rent to go up? She obviously does not have any teenage kids to concern herself with either!

  9. VioletRose do not let these faceless less keyboard warriors wind you up! Whether she is linked to Bovis or Linden is not an issue but why should any of us forego the value of the amenities promised and included in the purchase price of our properties! If we live here why would we not want these amenities, its a very simple question!

    1. Very simple answer too, that I’ve already given in my initial comment – because they are going to cost us a packet to maintain in the future. If it is not an issue whether I am linked to Bovis or Linden, then why mention it at all? As I have already stated, I am a resident of VF. If you need to comfort yourself with the belief I must be linked to LinBo because you are upset that I (and others) have a different point of view to you, well there will be little that I or anyone else can say to dissuade you. I guess it is a convenient excuse for you to only represent your own point of view and others who agree with it to the council, rather than taking into account ALL home owners points of view. Faceless keyboard warrior hey? At least I haven’t resorted to childish name calling.

      1. Hi all; when is the village hall meeting taking place? I see one at start July to discuss new village plan, but there was talk of one to agree actions RE developer obligations at end June as well??

        Also -idea that complaining will affect future house prices is total rubbish.. I publicised the lack of fibre broadband when I led campaign to get that installed, and there were similar worries. Had that negatively affected house prices?? Err NO.

  10. Yes Mike, we are awaiting the meeting taking place tomorrow at CDC! The meeting on Monday is definitely worth attending as Andrew McLean is driving that to ensure our open spaces remain green! The other issue is miss selling by LinBo to those who purchased on VF as LinBo is attempting to complete about 55% of what was committed in the 2013 S106 LEGAL Document and associated landscaping plan! We are concerned that the materials used are contaminated so we will not let Sue and her pals settle for less than the safe standards. Trouble is the LinBo appointed Environmental consultants are yet to prove to us they are competent yo deal with Asbestos so we are seeking third party opinion! This is just one of the many issues being raised at CDC tomorrow and we have county support asking the questions that need to be answered! Watch this space and we will share the answers as we get them!

Make a change, make a comment?