Ciarra
The petition to stop this housing is development in the crusher site is most welcome.
I was unaware that the stands were already on the market for sale and I would not be interested in one for investment or otherwise. A few years ago I read a Geotech report on the crusher site which plainly stated that the ground is "unstable". I'm willing to bet that this is not being told to prospective buyers or any of the other problems and I can understand why . But it does lack ethics on the part of the seller.
I was one of the first to buy into the Eco Estate about a year after the initial major sale and was totally in love with the concept. My wife and I drove around the area with the estate agent and saw the size of the area within the fence. What a shock to us that we NOW only discover that the estate is far from the size that we thought it was. There is a large area in the North of the estate but is still within the fenced area that DOES not belong to our Eco Estate and therefor us members. Why then was or is the estate's true size marked with a fence or at the very least told to us in the first place? This is intentional deception to give an untrue sales pitch of what we have all bought into. Effectively our estate has shrunk by about 1 500 000 square metres and we thought that the estate was ALL the area within the fence. Were we foolish to believe them in the first place or should we have gone to the council offices and studied the plans of the area demanding to know who owns what size of ground. NO, the trouble is 99.99% of us trust in human integrity-----foolishly obviously.
Show a man a car for sale and when his payment is made and the ownership is changed, then give him the vehicle without the wheels and seats --- a poor comparison but you get the idea.
Mr Owl
