Hidden Facts about Otterpool Park

Today marks the beginning of Shepway District Council’s (SDC) consultation about the Otterpool Park Development. At  Sellindge Sports & Social Club between 2pm & 5pm you can have your say in shaping the Otterpool Park masterplan. The SDC roadshow will move onto Hythe Town Hall between 6.30pm – 8.30pm (Dec 8th 2016).

However, the information SDC have given the public thus far about Otterpool Park is not the whole truth. SDC in short are being more than a little disingenuous,they are trying to deceive us, pull the wool over our eyes.

In a consultation to give ones comments, one needs ALL the facts, not just some of them.

img_25205564976761_resized

So how are SDC being disingenuous? SDC have told us the following,(bottom of page 2): “A collaboration agreement has been signed between SDC and Cozumel Estates, owners of Folkestone Racecourse (wholly owned by the Reuben Brothers) to set out the principle of working together on a comprehensive masterplan for Otterpool Park. It includes the principle of equalisation for the whole area of search (ie land value will be the same across the whole site, irrespective of where housing is located).

Jeremy Chambers (pictured) and Julia Wallace would be happy to provide further information and can be contacted by email.

The statement above, put out by SDC is not the whole truth. They have missed out the fact that the Initial Collaboration Agreement is between (see top of page 3) sdc-cozumel-estates-ltd-and-investors-in-private-capital-ltd.

british-virgin-islands-beach-and-palms

Now little did you know that Investors in Private Capital Ltd is owned by wellington-estates-ltd which is registered in the low tax jurisdiction of the British Virgin Islands (pictured), as is Cozumel Estates Ltd. Nor, no doubt did you know that Investors In Private Capital Ltd have donated the princely sum of £479,400 to Conservative coffers (MP’s & Central Party)

donations

(All information comes from the Electoral Commission datasets)

Do donations buy influence or access?  It would it appear they they might as on the 5th February 2014  at the Tory annual winter fund-raiser the former Prime Minister David Cameron sat down for dinner, according to the table plan, with Simon Reuben among others. So what do you think?

Offshore entities, such as Cozumel Estates & Wellington Estates can potentially enable tax avoidance as they encompass the establishment of multiple opaque firms. Simply put, it is a very real possibility that we are looking at a classic case of big business using the tried and tested method of layering to avoid paying taxes.

tax-avoidance-518px-touchstone

Tax avoidance is legal whilst tax evasion is not. However, the net is closing on such tax schemes, new rules introduced by HMRC in July 2016 seek to impose tax on profit from dealing in or developing property (such as Otterpool Park) in the UK. Although not yet in force, they are retrospective in effect, and of notable significance is the ‘anti-fragmentation rule’ which is ‘intended to preserve the UK tax base by consolidating the position of the relevant connected entities insofar as their activities amount in substance to a UK property trade and are not otherwise charged to UK tax.’ (HMRC March 2016).

This means that in the future, it should be increasingly difficult for property companies registered abroad to avoid UK tax. At the moment, companies which are not wholly UK based are able to arrange their financial affairs so that profits generated through UK property trading and development, escape UK taxes and charges. As demonstrated by the affairs of the Reuben Brothers, setting up multiple subsidiaries in secrecy jurisdictions and tax havens is one of the ways to do this.

david-simon-reuben_416x416

It has been said of Simon Reuben (pictured) that  “Simon loves the complexity,” says one Trans World insider. “He’d set up three companies just to pay his rent.”

Anyway, when you visit the consultation please do ask SDC why they have been disingenuous and not told you the people of Shepway the whole truth about that initial collaboration agreement as the cat is out of the bag

There are legitimate uses for offshore companies and trusts. We do not intend to suggest or imply that any persons, companies or other entities included in this blog post have broken the law or otherwise acted improperly.

Shepwayvox

Advertisements

5 Comments on Hidden Facts about Otterpool Park

  1. So did these companies pay for the land or did SDC. If SDC where did the money come from?

    Hi LN, SDC bought the land from their reserves see: https://shepwayvox.org/2016/01/08/the-cat-is-out-of-the-bag/

    and https://shepwayvox.org/2016/07/03/otterpool-manor-farmland-purchase-receipts/

    Like

  2. If they have reserves why aren’t they using it to repair derelict buildings instead of building new ones on land that we will need to grow our food on in the future !!!!

    Like

  3. SDC bought this land, ok, they said it was to be retained for agricultural rents but surely none of us believed this. Nonetheless, the land was purchased with our ( Council Taxpayers ) money. I think that we have a modicum of input to decide where the money should go and surely that should be within our Country as opposed to offshore..

    I would like to hope that SDC reject their dishonest ethic and do what they are elected to do, which is to serve their electorate. Unfortunately, although Councillors are elected, officers are not.

    I leave you to consider where the fault lies.

    Like

  4. Contributors above might find it of interest to read the now closed thread on Streetlife ‘Otterpool Garden City’.

    Like

  5. I attended the preliminary presentation, and have read the many statements spouting from SDC. Where, in any of this, is any credence given to those who would resist any development of any kind? Seems none, only to ask them to comment on the pictorial lovelyness on what may be imposed upon them.

    With two exceptions, (Planning Options), Princes Parade could be ghettoised within minutes. Always assuming that the contamination issue is properly discovered and addressed. Not at this time it seems.. Should we have a sweepstake as to what date SDC will claim that their project is ‘Going over Bubget’, due to unforseen difficulties?.

    I fully appreciate that any Council is duty-bound to provide housing to a defined level over a specified term. What I dispute is that SDC have not properly identified the sites which are ripe for development before casting their eyes to ‘Green-field’ sites which, more likely, would not have come under their net before a few decades. had not some sort of ‘Arse’ led them to this.

    Perhaps you ( they will not ), should ask what plans are under consideration for the’Brownfield’ sites and what impact they would have regarding the development of ‘Greeffield’ sites.

    It is not a case of electing your Council, it is a case of controlling their officers via your Councillor.

    SDC, as a body, seem to think they have your say. It is up to you to advise them otherwise.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: