THE Chief Executive of Mid Devon District Council (MDDC), Mr Stephen Walford, is to investigate the complaint a number of local residents have made to the council regarding its proposed sale of the council offices it owns in Crediton to a private buyer.

Four individuals from the town, Paul Tucker, Judith Tucker, Jonathan Ward and Margaret Haydon, wrote to Mr Walford, to lodge an official complaint about the proposed sale of the building to a private buyer rather than Crediton Town Council.

DISCRIMINATION

They wrote, as reported in the “Crediton Courier” on July 13: “As citizens of Crediton and council tax-payers of Mid Devon District Council we feel that we have suffered adverse discrimination by the District Council in that we have supported the advantageous sale to Tiverton Town Council of its offices but have been denied the same advantage here.

“We also question the fact that we are being deprived of a valuable community asset without any public consultation whatsoever and the apparent democratic deficit in the District Council’s proceedings by which the sale decision was made.

“We would be grateful if you would give us details of your complaints procedure without delay. We would like to resolve the matter as soon as possible so as to avoid having to report these issues formally to the Ombudsman.”

Andrew Busby, Group Manager for Corporate Property and Commercial Assets, Mid Devon District Council, wrote a reply to the four town residents, which was dated July 16 and printed in the “Crediton Courier” on August 3.

The four then replied to Mr Busby, responding to and asking questions about the proposed sale and asking “that the District Council immediately reverses its decision to sell Crediton Council Offices to a commercial buyer and instead returns the building to the people of Crediton on the same terms as Tiverton.”

CREDITON OFFER DECLINED

Tiverton Town Council was able to purchase its Council Offices at a 50 per cent rate whereas this offer was declined to Crediton Town Council for the Crediton Council Offices by MDDC’s Cabinet.

Mr Walford wrote to the four residents on August 2, stating that he will investigate the matter under stage two of the council’s complaints procedure.

He wrote: “Under the terms of the council’s complaints procedure, a stage two investigation is undertaken by a senior officer of the council, normally a Director.

“However, in this instance, and bearing in mind the suggestions of a failure in democratic governance, your complaint will be investigated by the council’s Chief Executive.

“This letter provides our initial formal response to your complaint and, as per the procedure, you will receive a final response after a full investigation has been carried out, with this being no later than one week after the date of receipt.

“In addition, it has been brought to my attention that many aspects of your complaint have appeared in the local press - with the council also being approached directly to give their response.

“The council does not routinely provide commentary to the press relating to ongoing individual complaints, so while you may wish to forward any correspondence (as is your prerogative), the council will not be providing separate comments to the press on your case.”

PREJUDICE LOCAL DEMOCRACY

On August 9, the four residents replied to Mr Walford: “Thank you for your letter of August 2, and we are pleased that you are taking our letter as a Stage Two complaint. This was definitely our intention.

“We are, however, perplexed as to why you are unable to deal with our complaint within the 10 working days allowed in your Stage Two Complaint Process Map.

“The principal issue in our complaint, the proposed sale of our Council Offices, is clearly urgent and your Council has had ample time already to be totally familiar with all aspects of the matter. We must accordingly ask for an undertaking that contracts will not be exchanged for the proposed sale until you are able to respond to our complaint and that you let us have the timescale for your response, again as mentioned in your Complaint Process Map.

“With regard to the apparent failure in democratic governance at Mid Devon District Council, we understand your Council has been operating this unfortunate cabinet system for some time now so, again, you should be sufficiently familiar with it to be able to respond immediately.

“We would point out that the loss of the Council Offices in Crediton will, of course, prejudice the exercise of local democracy for the citizens of Crediton Town Council and Crediton Hamlets Parish Council.

“Perhaps democracy in general needs to be higher up Mid Devon’s list of priorities.

“Unfortunately, we feel it is essential to inform the media of our activities at every opportunity in order to warn our fellow citizens of the misfortune that your Council is planning to inflict upon us all. If you do not wish to respond publically, that of course is your prerogative.

“Any unreasonable delay on your part in dealing with these matters will of course feature in our complaint if, unfortunately, we do have to refer the matter to the Local Government Ombudsman.”

It is understood that a further Crediton resident has also lodged an official complaint with Mid Devon District Council regarding the same situation.