Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Non-Believer

Manxonia House

Recommended Posts

Just reading through the Indy's Page 3 account of the FOI request pertaining to the background of the purchase of PSM's Manxonia House by the village's Commissioners.

A Board seemingly misled as to the state of what they were purchasing, emails and concerns from those Board members not responded to, results of a structural report ignored, including, apparently, the likely need to replace the roof of the building, a purchase decision pushed through on the basis of a valuation (made clear that it was only that) but no proper survey carried out although the Board were told that one had been.

Discuss...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Port St Mary commissioners are a joke and have been for years. No one knows why they bought that place and almost everyone suspects something dodgy went on. How many people live in PSM? 1000? Why do they even have commissioners? Just become part of Rushen and stop being dicks.

Edited by TheTeapot
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Just reading through the Indy's Page 3 account of the FOI request pertaining to the background of the purchase of PSM's Manxonia House by the village's Commissioners.

A Board seemingly misled as to the state of what they were purchasing, emails and concerns from those Board members not responded to, results of a structural report ignored, including, apparently, the likely need to replace the roof of the building, a purchase decision pushed through on the basis of a valuation (made clear that it was only that) but no proper survey carried out although the Board were told that one had been.

Discuss...?

Compare & contrast with Ramsey and the courthouse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this report is accurate though, the Board's own concerns and communications were ignored and the sale pushed through, with further concerns about the financing also disregarded. The now departed Clerk doesn't appear to come out of this looking very good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

Just reading through the Indy's Page 3 account of the FOI request pertaining to the background of the purchase of PSM's Manxonia House by the village's Commissioners.

A Board seemingly misled as to the state of what they were purchasing, emails and concerns from those Board members not responded to, results of a structural report ignored, including, apparently, the likely need to replace the roof of the building, a purchase decision pushed through on the basis of a valuation (made clear that it was only that) but no proper survey carried out although the Board were told that one had been.

Discuss...?

I think you can pretty much assume something dodgy probably went on. The fact it wasn’t surveyed I’m amazed doesn’t breach some sort of investment code of conduct rules as when they’re spending other people’s money you’d expect they’d have to justify fully the actual value of the asset they’re buying as well as the potential cost to the ratepayers of putting it right. I wonder what the auditors will have to say about it all as I assume the “asset” is now on their balance sheet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be noted that the now Ex Clerk claims he acted on the wishes of the commissioners.

The FoI does not address the ongoing dispute between him and the commissioners on who said what, when and with what information!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s not forget how the ‘mayor’ of PSM commissioners  “nephew”, who worked for a German  Muck Cart manufacturer managed to acquire a Muck Cart that was forever ‘out of service’. 

And “they” wonder why “WE” are so cynical. 

Edited by Gizo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

I think you can pretty much assume something dodgy probably went on. The fact it wasn’t surveyed I’m amazed doesn’t breach some sort of investment code of conduct rules as when they’re spending other people’s money you’d expect they’d have to justify fully the actual value of the asset they’re buying as well as the potential cost to the ratepayers of putting it right. I wonder what the auditors will have to say about it all as I assume the “asset” is now on their balance sheet. 

It concerns me that the Clerk, on the face of this reporting, made various claims to the Board and supplied false information that the Board used and acted on in good faith in making this purchase, using ratepayer's best to do so. A valuation was claimed as a survey. Even Joe Average knows it's no such thing. Even when concerns from some members of the Board over the financing and condition of the building were raised, apparently they were disregarded.

IF this is all as it seems, who the hell did the Clerk think he was and why was he settled with/compensated at all? He should be reimbursing the ratepayers. Clearly Gross Misconduct.

Edited by Non-Believer
Extra bit
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. No sign yet of the inevitable "it would be FAR cheaper and WAY more efficient to scrap all commissioners and hand it all over to the government" bollox post. I don't suppose it will be much longer in coming now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, woolley said:

Hmmm. No sign yet of the inevitable "it would be FAR cheaper and WAY more efficient to scrap all commissioners and hand it all over to the government" bollox post. I don't suppose it will be much longer in coming now.

You just did...pretty much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, yootalkin2me said:

You just did...pretty much!

Just trying to get the denial in first.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a snapshot of a wider problem.

Residents have effectively been robbed and are paying directly by reduced service and increased costs, but rates could double tomorrow and would anyone resist? Unlikely. Makes me wonder how much would be too much. How much would trigger a response. 

Seems likely central government have realised this and LAs are now being lined up as handy scapegoats to carry the burden of cost being offloaded by central government via the rates ‘modernisation’ 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, woolley said:

Hmmm. No sign yet of the inevitable "it would be FAR cheaper and WAY more efficient to scrap all commissioners and hand it all over to the government" bollox post. I don't suppose it will be much longer in coming now.

I don't think it's a case of that (this time :lol: ).

But surely, if the reporting is accurate, there is an investigation warranted into how a Commissioner's Clerk misled a Board, misrepresented information to them and failed to acknowledge or even respond to their concerns when they were transmitted vis email? What did he think he was doing? And was then compensated when he resigned? WTF?

This has left PSM ratepayers saddled with a quarter of a £M eyesore. The Board, or individuals from it, would have appeared to have tried to do the right thing and raise concerns which were simply disregarded. On whose authority?

Another Town Clerk who seems to have forgotten that he's only a glorified fucking secretary.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, woolley said:

Hmmm. No sign yet of the inevitable "it would be FAR cheaper and WAY more efficient to scrap all commissioners and hand it all over to the government" bollox post. I don't suppose it will be much longer in coming now.

Don't worry Woolley, the The Cabinet Office are ready and waiting to subsume them all.

It's easy peasy when you know how.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...