tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6371203489316363738.post6391488876386519722..comments2024-01-30T07:41:20.885+00:00Comments on Broken Barnet: The Best of Our Knowledge, or: the outsourcing of trust, in Broken BarnetMrs Angryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00586223909475832791noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6371203489316363738.post-30856387561470096292015-06-22T19:14:40.128+01:002015-06-22T19:14:40.128+01:00Yes indeed, Anonymous: you have identified the mos...Yes indeed, Anonymous: you have identified the most interesting part of Cllr Thomas's comments - a very interesting claim for him to make. Were they connected? First I've heard of it. Mrs Angryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00586223909475832791noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6371203489316363738.post-88094742900460827112015-06-22T15:01:35.030+01:002015-06-22T15:01:35.030+01:00excellently written, as anormal, and truly touchin...excellently written, as anormal, and truly touching the subjects that matter/hurt. it needs to be open, transparanet and not kept secret. too many decisions are left to the officer (now capita employees.) there are conflicts of interest everywhere now, more so than ever before. as soon as the first conflict is caught and challenged, and it will be, the flood gates will open, and the whole capita csg and re contracts will start to crumble faster than savings in an icelandic bank. people are more aware nowadays, and challenge issues correctly, and keep their dignity, unlike the tory administration here, who just see the pound signs for quick gain, and go for advice that has been given to them via their "partners"insideknowledgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15518020650041403089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6371203489316363738.post-91524927485459134212015-06-22T14:39:04.584+01:002015-06-22T14:39:04.584+01:00"The previous ‘£750k transaction’ does not re..."The previous ‘£750k transaction’ does not represent open market value which is obvious given the size, scarcity and availability of such plots. It is also the case that the parties involved in that transaction were connected and so further demonstrates it was not an ‘open market’ purchase and cannot be reliably used as an indicator of value." <br />What does this mean? Why would a company sell an asset to another company at below market value (even if they needed to realise the asset quickly the normal route is to go to auction). If this land transacted at below 'open market value' it would be of interest to HMRC to know the circumstances wouldn't it?<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com