Is Sheffield Council about to sell off bits of Graves Park YET AGAIN?

[robertathome]

I live on Southey ave we have graves trust flats which was for the old people its got 4 greens in front of them thay have used on of greens to build a center most of the old people has gone as cannot live there as thay have moved young people in drunks drug addics these was left for old people but thay do what thay want with them and not used for what thay was ment for

[barpen]

I live on Southey ave we have graves trust flats which was for the old people its got 4 greens in front of them thay have used on of greens to build a center most of the old people has gone as cannot live there as thay have moved young people in drunks drug addics these was left for old people but thay do what thay want with them and not used for what thay was ment for

 

That's the problem when people take their eye off the ball. They will keep trying but I don't think people are fast asleep up around Graves Park, and after recent attempts to sell off park land neither are the Chaity Commission who are fully aware of the legal requirements of the trustees and their attemps to circumnavigate them.

[Agent Orange]

The building is part of Graves Park and was part of the land given to the people of Sheffield by JG Graves. It is also part of the Graves Park Charity and has a covenant accepted by the city council that it cannot be sold. Apart from that the council are on pretty solid ground.

 

Lets hope folk remember who it was cost them tens of thousands of pound the last 2 or 3 times the council attempted this type of land grab, and who to blame for the tens of thousand pounds it will cost if they attempt it again.

 

So, what is your solution then?

[barpen]

So, what is your solution then?

 

That's pretty simple. The trustees of the Graves Park Charity abide by the requirement that they act in the best interest of the chairity. They also abide by the agreement that they cannot sell off any buildings within the park.

 

Intestingly there are 2 charities for the disabled who operate out of shared premises within the park. They are always on the look out for a building from which they could operate.

 

If the council once again try to act outside the charitable deeds they will fall foul of the Chaity Commission and get an expensive slap.

[Agent Orange]

That's pretty simple. The trustees of the Graves Park Charity abide by the requirement that they act in the best interest of the chairity. They also abide by the agreement that they cannot sell off any buildings within the park.

 

Intestingly there are 2 charities for the disabled who operate out of shared premises within the park. They are always on the look out for a building from which they could operate.

 

If the council once again try to act outside the charitable deeds they will fall foul of the Chaity Commission and get an expensive slap.

 

So, where is the money going to come from to sort this building out? It's one thing saying they should abide by the requirements, but when the money isn't there, then what?

[barpen]

So, where is the money going to come from to sort this building out? It's one thing saying they should abide by the requirements, but when the money isn't there, then what?

 

I would prefer to ask the question. Why is it when someone makes you the gift of a house in good order. They give it you for free and don't ask for rent. They just ask that in return you maintain it. So why has the council as trustee neglected it?

 

Rather than indulge in irrelevant aspects why not consider the possible alternatives.

 

1. Council as trustee abide by their obligation and get on with the job.

2. Council as trustee attempt to sell the cottage and run up a large bill before Charity Commission force them to abide by their obligation and get on with the job.

3. Councillors step down as trustees for the Graves Park Charity and hand over to folk who will act in the interests of the charity.

 

Which would you prefer?

Edited August 3, 2013 by barpen

[Agent Orange]

I would prefer to ask the question. Why is it when someone makes you the gift of a house in good order. They give it you for free and don't ask for rent. They just ask that in return you maintain it. So why has the council as trustee neglected it?

 

Money or there lack of. Simple really. So, what is the solution, if you feel the house should not be sold off?

[barpen]

Money or there lack of. Simple really. So, what is the solution, if you feel the house should not be sold off?

 

Read post 84.

 

Like I said before the house cannot be sold off. So once you & council accept that we might actually make progress.

Edited August 3, 2013 by barpen

[Agent Orange]

Read post 84.

 

Like I said before the house cannot be sold off. So once you & council accept that we might actually make progress.

 

So, again, where's the money coming from to do up this house?

Edited August 3, 2013 by Agent Orange

[Cyclone]

The charitable trust is in a hard position. Nobody is disputing that.

 

Does that justify breaking the rules and selling off capital assets that were gifted along with instructions that they never be sold?