Is Cllr David Wimble a Liar? – You decide.
What the FCUK does it take to get Folkestone & Hythe District Council’s monitoring officer – Amandeep Khroud- to take any action against a Cllr for not disclosing a discosable pecuniary interest.
A disclosable pecuniary interest is broadly defined as including:
• Business interests (for example employment, trade, profession, contracts or any company with which a person is associated)
• Wider financial interests (for example trust funds, investments and. assets including land and property)
You may recall on the 25th August we wrote about the planning application for Sandbanks New Romney.
To give a brief overview Cllr Jackie Meade (Lab) reminded the Cabinet Member for Planning, Cllr David Wimble, to declare his disclosable pecuniary interests in Sandbanks – Littlestone – New Romney. Cllr Georgina Treloar (Green) also raised Cllr Wimble “reluctance” to declare his interests in knowing the developer personally. She also doubted his ability to be able to vote on the Sandbank planning application, as he was conflicted in her view. She also made clear she wanted her remarks noted in the minutes. If having two Cllrs remind Cllr Wimble of his failure to declare a pecuniary interest, Cllr Gary Fuller (Lib Dem) also raised the issue, asking for clarification from the monitoring officer at the next meeting
Cllr Wimble, under duress at the Aug 25th Planning meeting disclosed the fact Leo Griggs the developer of Sandbanks, advertises in Cllr Wimble’s “community paper“ but forget to mention than Belmont Healthcare – owners of Sandbanks according to the Land Registry, also advertised in his fortnightly rag.
At last nights Planning Committee 21/09/21, Cllr Georgina Treloar (Green Party) raised the fact that what she’d asked to be minuted had not be minuted (quelle surprise). Then in weighed Cllr Wimble (Ind), to be followed by Cllr Fuller (Lib Dem), as can be seen in the short video below.
Cllr Wimble is no stranger to controversy.
We reported on his failure to pay his Council tax, not once but twice. Then there is the issue with driving his then Mercedes with no MOT, tax or insurance and committing fraud while doing it.
How could we forget that he was interviewed under caution for alleged Electoral violations by Kent Police. The Police sent Cllr Wimble a formal letter advising him that if he were to come to police notice again, in respect of Representation of People Act 1983 offences, then the likelihood would be that he would be formally prosecuted.
Then of course we asked you the residents of the district if Wimble was a fantasist, not once but twice
We also gave you a run down of his companies which more often than not ended in failure.
Then there are historic issues with Wimble’s behaviour as published by the Folkestone Herald.
Cllr Wimble’s response shows exactly what is wrong. They really do believe that they are totally unanswerable to anyone, and that personal gain from their position should not be questioned or challenged.
Mr Wimble can seek all the legal advice he wants. However, if the statements that have been made about him and his past actions are true there is nothing that he (or any lawyer acting on his behalf) can do about them.
I would be surprised if the Council were to act for him in this matter and Kent Police would only be interested if a criminal offence has been committed.
It seems to me that this councillor along with others get on the council and think they can lie and do as they wish with the backing of the council. I have experienced the lies from other councillors and even doing it on sworn oaths.
Why aren’t FHDC doing anything about these issues? Is it because they are implicated in some way? Is it because they condone it? Or are they just too lazy to bother? We, the public need answers…..But I wouldn’t hold your breath!
Wimble is a liar . He gained the votes that got him elected on being an Independent but as soon as he was in he jumped straight into bed with Monk and his cronies . Enjoy your time snuggling up to Monk because at the next elections you’ll be out .