Owner of Coombe allotments responds to latest move from tenants to hold onto land

Susan Ballinger, of Coombe, gave her allotment holders a year's notice to quit the site on March 25, 2015. 

It was later revealed that Ms Ballinger intended to dispose of the land for redevelopment. 

But shortly after the notice to quit Ms Ballinger's tenants, some of whom have gardened on the allotment site for more than 40 years, launched a campaign to hold on to the land.

Today (Thursday 14) The Gazette revealed the tenants' "final throw of the dice" - urging the town council to initiate the process of compulsory purchase. 

Compulsory purchase would involve Wotton Town Council, along with a parent council (Stroud District Council or Gloucestershire County Council), valuing the land before forcefully purchasing it from the landowner.

This action would be possible thanks to the Allotments Act of 1908, which says a council must supply allotment land to residents if six or more people make the request.

With the group believing Coombe allotments is now the only viable and sustainable site, CALGS hopes the council will evaluate and purchase the land from its owner Susan Ballinger.

After the paper went to print yesterday Ms Ballinger responded to the Gazette's request for comment. 

Here is the response received by the Gazette in full:

I confirm that I received an offer to purchase the land from Coombe Allotment and Leisure Gardeners Society (CALGS) last month.  That offer was wholly inadequate and I have rejected it.

You tell me that CALGS currently aspires to persuade Wotton-under-Edge Town Council (WTC) to use its powers of compulsory acquisition (CPO) to acquire the land.  Despite the fact that the Small Holdings and Allotments Act 1908 (as amended) does on its face authorise the use by Councils of CPO to provide allotments to meet a need, and despite the aspirations of CALGS, this process may not be quite as straightforward as CALGS would like it to be.  Some of the hurdles standing in the way of the use of CPO include:
 

• WTC is a local authority and thus it can only act in accordance with its constitution.  Further, it must always act fairly and reasonably in accordance with the interests of natural justice and in the interests of all of its residents, not just in the interests of a group of people who currently enjoy a right to occupy and work certain specific allotments.  The right to occupy and work those allotments will in any event terminate in March 2016, at which time the land will cease to be allotments.
   
• WTC will have to consider the costs of not just the acquisition of the land  but the costs going forward of managing and supervising the allotments.  WTC will have to instruct Stroud District Council (SDC) to prepare and promote the Order, but of course WTC will have to pay all of SDC’s costs incurred in pursuing the CPO.  Lawyers and surveyors will be involved (which will be costly) and I will raise strong objections to any CPO, meaning that it will be adversarial – and thus even more expensive.  And that is without considering the actual purchase price for the land as it is a principle of CPO that the landowner receives full market value for their land.
   
• All of the costs of promoting the use of CPO will fall to the residents of Wotton (including my own costs if my objections are upheld) and it will be interesting to see how WTC seeks to justify that to the residents who pay the Town Council precept from their Council Tax.  Residents may also be interested to know that by seeking to persuade WTC to use CPO, the entire costs of acquisition, and of defending the CPO against my legitimate objections, will also have to be paid out of the precept.  If CPO is pursued (and if, against my expectations, it succeeds) members of CALGS will be the only beneficiaries  and yet they will have had no responsibility for the costs beyond payment of their share of WTC precept from their Council Tax.
   
• If the land were to be acquired by CPO, then anyone on the current waiting list for an allotment should, arguably, be given priority over the members of CALGS in the allocation of the allotments.
   
• If WTC does use CPO to acquire this land, it will have to provide a full justification for acquiring this land.  To do that, it will need to conduct a comprehensive exercise considering whether other land is available, whether other land is more suitable, and whether other land could be acquired without resorting to the use of CPO.  Merely targeting my land at Coombe would be unlawful.
   
• As a matter of principle, CPO is a power of last resort and an interference with the human rights of the landowner, which is not to be used lightly (see the publication at the link below which was published by the Department for Communities and Local Government in October 2015).  A full and transparent justification must be prepared, which will be subject to scrutiny at a public inquiry and possibly in the courts, which is sufficient to justify the use of this power of last resort to override my right to the peaceful enjoyment of my possessions.  The guidance below is clear that WTC will need to demonstrate a “compelling case in the public interest” before use of CPO could be justified:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/472726/151027_Updated_guidance_for_publication_FINAL2.pdf
 

• WTC needs to be aware that if it uses CPO in this instance, it will be setting a precedent such that anyone on the allotment waiting list at any time will have a legitimate expectation that the Council will from time to time as necessary use CPO to cater for their allotment needs.
   
• It is certainly not the case that a request for allotments to WTC by at least 6 Council Tax payers will trigger the use of CPO by WTC; that is simply a misunderstanding of the law.  I am sure that WTC will seek suitable legal advice before embarking on the use of CPO.

I take this opportunity, through you, to remind members of CALGS, WTC and anyone else who is interested that the Coombe allotments are privately owned and as the landowner I am lawfully entitled to recover possession of the land.  Twelve month’s notice was served on the allotment holders and will expire in March, after which the use of the land as allotments will cease.