The Replies One Didn't Send

Over the past couple of weeks, we've had the great pleasure of reading through almost a hundred letters of objection. These are some of the replies we decided not to put in our letters.

"Such a development, set against the hostility from all the existing residents of this delightful road, would be quite inappropriate and as such will support any steps that are felt necessary to resist this application"

A road with hostile residents that will use any means necessary. How, errr, Delightful!

"The emotive and otious reference to "injured relatives" in their description of the development contained in the application also seems designed to further cloud the issue at hand"

I'm not sure if this is meant to question whether the patients at HC are really injured (by use of quotes), or whether SSAFA should have kept the issue clear by refusing to say who they wanted the house for?

"The local unadopted roads with no lighting would be dangerous at night for people not knowing the area"

Why? Does one also have a better quality of darkness in Ashtead than we do in rural Wales?

"... the number of people likely to be resident in the house which now overlooks our property"

"Now overlooks"? What exactly was it doing before?

"Please note that we object to any contravening of the covenants concerning the roads in this area" --entire content of letter--

Since the covenant (as registered at the Land Registry) is in no way contravened by this application, can we count you as a supporter then? You may wish to have a word with any of your neighbours who have a "caravan on wheels" on their land though.

"My five visits to your counter have not resulted in any clear understanding of the Council's position" --written on 26th June, planning meeting due 1st Aug--

Perhaps they were following due democratic process? No, silly me, you said "jump" didn't you.