Tuesday, 14 June 2016



An explanation-WHY –I continue my Campaign- and WHY I have reported my Concerns to Cleveland Police-
PLEASE SHARE - remember just liking the post doesn't help spread it.

I don’t get a great deal of pleasure from exposing the Corruption in Hartlepool-but I believe it is necessary and in the public interest- when you discover some Councillors and Council officials not all I agree- are morally unfit to hold positions of authority in public office- they all get very well paid by the public to do a job- unfortunately-a few- start to believe their own publicity- they think they can do and say what they like- they even begin to think they are better than the average local- they also think they are above the law- they become big headed- supercilious –and arrogant- these scoundrels should be exposed- unfortunately some -Local authorities particularly Hartlepool-will in my opinion- always try and pass the buck but I think you will find that it is not possible when push comes to shove-particularly when you possess-as we do- the legal documents of Title- CE74844 “Absolute including the receipt for the purchase-of-the ex-council house-freehold-property- pursuant to the Housing Act 1980!  The best class of title to have is absolute.

This means that the proprietor’s right to the land is absolute and cannot be Challenged?-
I believe Peter Devlin Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council- should know the law-we are led to believe -he is -after all a Solicitor- particularly the Law regarding Purchase of Land & Property-sold by Hartlepool Borough Council-and bought by local citizens-consequently his silence- indicates-he is NOT taking my allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice & financial fraud-including abuse of Public Office-- by some of his Council Colleagues regarding our legal ownership of the registered freehold land and property-Title CE74844 “Absolute”- Seriously Enough - part of which was unlawfully given to our immediate next door neighbour-In my view- this Conduct in failing to pursue serious criminal offences reported to him-and I believe-Misconduct in a Public Office-Particularly his clear breach of  the Fraud Act 2006- Chapter 35-section 4-fraud by abuse of position-in which he is expected to Safeguard-or NOT act against-the financial interests of another person ? a breach of his standards professional behaviour in the areas of Honesty and Integrity-

Does he need to be reminded once again-that Hartlepool Borough Council- were the original sellers and mortgage holders-of the land and property that we originally purchased in all good faith from Hartlepool Borough Council in February 1984-Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980-in Consideration of Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds £5,759.00-the RECEIPT on the Land Registry-Official Copy- of the Document of Purchase.-is hereby acknowledged-by HARTLEPOOL BOROUGH COUNCIL-of the CIVIC CENTRE-HARTLEPOOL-
It was my understanding- has explained by our Solicitors-Levinson-Walker & Lister-that a Title Deed is a Legal Document by which Real Property is Owned, Sold and transferred-once the Land and Property is Purchased-Conveyed- transferred -recorded and registered by the Solicitor as was ours-by J Anthony Brown- Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council on the 29th /3/1984.with Land Registry- Durham- the Property Deed is Proof that the person named in it- owns the land described-edged in RED on the Deed Title Plan- and all of the buildings attached to it!  It was also my belief these entitlements are legally enforceable

This unfortunately does’nt appear to be the opinion of the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council-Peter Devlin- nor the Opinion of the LABOUR Member of Parliament – for Hartlepool- Iain Wright M.P. who was informed of the facts BUT remains SILENT- 
My continued research of the some Legal site on the Internet- has expose some interesting data-that I believe supports my allegation- that Alan H Smith-assistant Land Registrar-and Anthony- Lowes-both Officials -of Land Registry Durham- Colluded and Conspired -with Officials of Hartlepool Borough Council- namely--Alyson Carman-Solicitor and Complaints reviewer; Hilary Martin- Solicitor and Freedom of Information Officer- Richard Trow Project Planning Officer-Mr-Reece- Planning Development Manager-Paul Burgon-Enforcement Officer- to Pervert the Course of Justice-in Public Office- Particularly their  clear breach of  the Fraud Act 2006- Chapter 35-section 4-fraud by abuse of position-in which they-are- expected to Safeguard-or NOT act against-the financial interests of another person?
Here is Information readily available in the Public Domain-
Land Registry Proprietorship Register
The Land Registry’s register of land is made up of three sections, or registers, called the Property Register, Proprietorship Register and Charges Register. These three registers contain information as to the ownership of a particular piece of land, its extent, and any third party interests which affect it, such as mortgages, rights or covenants.

The proprietorship register tells us the legal owner(s) of the land and various other important pieces of information.  Proprietorship Register & Class of Title
1.       Firstly, the proprietorship register tells us the “class of title” which the land is registered with. There are six classes of title, three relating to freehold land and three to leasehold land. The freehold classes are absolute, qualified or possessory and the leasehold classes are absolute, good leasehold and qualified.

2.     The best class of title to have is absolute. This means that the proprietor’s right to the land is absolute and cannot be challenged.

3.      Possessory title is at the other end of the scale. This usually happens where the person who originally applied to register the land could not prove his ownership, either because he had lost the title deeds or he was claiming ownership through adverse possession (often termed “squatters’ rights”).

4.      Possessory title can be challenged by someone with a better claim to the land.

Next we have the name(s) of the Registered Proprietor(s). These are the legal owners of the land and except in exceptional circumstances (such as if a sole owner is bankrupt, the property has been repossessed or all owners are deceased) these are the people with power to transfer the property to a new owner.
There can be a maximum of four registered proprietors and a minimum of one. The date in brackets is the date on which the property was registered in the name of the current owners.
This will generally be several weeks after the date on which they actually completed their purchase.the Proprietorship Register may state the price paid by the current proprietors when they acquired the property. Any personal covenants; they are covenants which are only binding on the current proprietor, will be detailed here. The most common personal covenant found here is an indemnity covenant.The Proprietorship Register goes on to list any restrictions (entries which limit the way in which the proprietors can deal with the title) and bankruptcy notices.

If anything I have Written or Published is NOT TRUE why have NONE repeat NONE of the named Hartlepool Council Individuals Disputed any of my allegations-NOR Commenced ANY Legal Proceeding against ME for Slander-or whatever other crimes they can think of-?
If anyone named wishes to refute any of the allegations made against them-in a Court of law-they are of course-free to do so- indeed-I would welcome such action- I am led to believe from my internet research- a Council cannot sue for libel-(Derbyshire vs Sunday Times-House of Lords 1993) nor can it indemnify a Councillor or Council Officer who wished to sue an individual-(local authorities indemnity for members and officers) order 2004!
 If that is correct-they should be reminded-before deciding on such a Hazardous-Course of action-they will have to pay their own legal costs-and prove-in a Court of law-our Documents of purchase & Registration-to be fraudulent-? 10 years for Perjury- I think is the going rate at the moment!

Yours Sincerely
Alan Harvey Flounders

Tuesday, 14 June 2016


Wednesday, 01 June 2016
Surprise Surprise- I -Have just received -would you believe an   acknowledgement –at last- from Iain Wright –M.P. for Hartlepool- to a recent critical letter I sent to him on Sunday 8th May-2016. In which he says the contents have been noted- that’s it- noted-
To avoid any further misunderstanding I wish-to publish the contents of my letter I sent to Iain Wright M.P.– on here to-day- and wait and  see if any action--is taken against me for telling the truth-and criticising his conduct- he has known about my allegations of misconduct by officials of both Land Registry Durham and Planning Officials of Hartlepool Borough Council-including the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council-Peter Devlin- for a number of years- and has done nothing- absolutely nothing-  both of these people- can never say- they didn't know who was the Legal owner of the Ex-Council House property
This letter was I believe both courteous and truthful-but like all the others I have sent -will be completely ignored-
Sunday 8th May 2016
Dear Sir,
Corruption –still festering away-in Hartlepool Labour Dominated Borough Council –

At last -the oxygen of publicity has put a spotlight on the Corruption--in Hartlepool Labour Dominated Borough Council –
Ask yourself this -How can a Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough
Council-Peter Devlin- despite having a copy of the legal conveyance and a copy of a receipt-from Hartlepool Borough Council- acknowledging- the price paid -Pursuant to the Housing Act-1980- in “Consideration of “Five Thousand Seven Hundred & Fifty Pounds-£5,750” for the ex-council house Land & Property- highlighted on the Title Plan in RED- is still trying-would you believe- to hide the fact that a number of his colleague-Richard Trow-Paul Burgon & Mr Reece- in the Hartlepool Council- Planning Department- & -Alyson Carman-& Hilary Martin- of the Legal- Departments –acted Dishonestly in Public Office- when Granting-a Certificate of Lawfulness & Retrospect Planning Permission to a Planning Applicant H/2009/0568 -knowing-as they were the original owners and Sellers of the Council House Property- the retrospective planning application contained fraudulent & misleading claims of Freehold Property Purchase &  ownership-
a Statutory Requirement- of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990- sections 65(5) & 65(6) for- part of a Kitchen Extension erected-without seeking- Hartlepool- council planning-permission- and attached-it-to the immediate neighboursPrivate -property-causing severe structural damage if that doesn’t STINK of CORRUPTION- and the FAVOURABLE and PREFERENTIAL Treatment Previously given to these Retrospective Planning applicants- then we are all going to HELL in a WHEEL-BARROW -

We want the public to know that this isn’t about money, I have already returned to Land Registry-London- the sum of £300.pounds awarded to us until this disgraceful theft of freehold property is rectified- the truth is we scrimped and saved to buy our 3 bedroomed ex- council house-and have no intension of allowing a few dishonest despicable un-elected Hartlepool Council Officials-& a few Government Officials employed at Land Registry-Durham- namely the assistant Land Registrar-  Alan H Smith- and Anthony Lowes- to conspire with the others particularly the Retrospective Planning applicant and Officials of Hartlepool Borough Council- to pervert the Course of Justice- to commit fraud-,in Public Office-& rob us of part of our legally purchased -Freehold Land & Property purchased in all good faith- on the 1st February 1984- pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 and in Consideration of “Five Thousand Seven Hundred And Fifty Pounds-£5,750.00”- registered-Land Title CE74844 “Absolute”
Yours Sincerely
Alan Harvey Flounders

My reference above to preferential treatment for example are these-
(a) to avoid the horrendous financial costs incurred by the Retrospective Planning applicants H/2009/0568 to demolish their illegal kitchen extension would have been astronomical-?

Does any level headed normal person still doubt that my allegations that the Retrospective Planning Applicant H/2009/0568 was again- shown Special Preferential and Privileged Treatment- don’t forget –they were allowed if not  encouraged to run and  operate a successful profit making taxi business from their Council House-strictly prohibited by their council house tenancy agreement and the covenants of the property- and what inducement other than money -you might well ask- was employed to receive that extra Special Treatment ? -

Just imagine- if some arrogant-I’ve got- more money than you-and have some-very-important-influential friends on Hartlepool  Council-so none of the planning rules or property laws apply to us- built- a un-safe- ugly monstrosity next door to you.-and attached to the rear wall of your detached outside wash-house-preventing your family the safe use of the -Wash House facilities-which- remember- you had  bought and paid-for-from Hartlepool Council in February 1984 !  Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980 in Consideration of Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds-£5,750.00.  
What do you do-about it-Do you lay down and accept it! –I don't think that would be your real honest- response, would it?

If anything I have Written or Published is NOT TRUE why have NONE repeat NONE of the named Hartlepool Council Individuals Disputed any of my allegations-NOR Commenced ANY Legal Proceeding against ME for Slander, or whatever other crimes they can think of-?
If anyone named wishes to refute any of the allegations made against them-in a Court of law-they are of course-free to do so- indeed-I would welcome such action-they should be reminded- they will have to pay the own legal costs-

Wednesday, 8 June 2016


Wednesday, 08 June 2016

I have been watching on T.V. as no doubt many thousands of other Hartlepool voters have- the amazing theatrical performance of our local M.P. Iain Wright- attempting to look intelligent when interrogating-Yesterday- Sports Direct  and Newcastle Football Club owner- Mike Ashley about the working conditions endured by his employees, No doubt- some of these allegations may possibly be found to be true- and-if so-I am convinced they will be rectified in the near future-what I personally find very difficult and distasteful-to understand-is how can this very insignificant Member of the Palace of Westminster- Iain Wright- be a member of the Business Committee let alone be the Chairman- he is-in my view-totally unfit to hold any Parliamentary Office-this is the man-it must be remembered- who has numerous other very serious local financial issues t0 address-here in Hartlepool-one court case in particular- involves–I believe- an ex-female Hartlepool labour councillor-accused of Financial misconduct- and includes - four employees –still awaiting to receive the compensation they were justifiably awarded by the court.

He must know- Hartlepool-Labour Party-Dominated-Borough Council-is totally Corrupt- even the Chief Solicitor- Peter Devlin- must be part of the band- he  has tried to hide and sweep under the carpet our Irrefutable evidence of the-Purchase in all good faith-of our Ex-Council House - Pursuant to the Housing Act 1980-in Consideration of “Five Thousand- Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds-£5,750.00.the Receipt-which we have- whereon is hereby acknowledged by J ANTHONY BROWN Chief Solicitor-of Hartlepool Borough Council- we also have the Mortgage redemption statement from the-chief Financial Officer- of Hartlepool Council- J.D. WALTON Confirming that the Land Certificate had been passed to Land Registry for DISCHARGE of the MORTGAGE –this Mortgage Redemption Statement is binding on the entity to whom it is issued, and stands as the lender's Hartlepool Borough Councils Official Word on the progress of the mortgage.
This legally means that once WE as the borrower have finished repaying the mortgage the property is ours and the lender -Hartlepool Borough Council-has no further claim on it.

The Chief Solicitor-of Hartlepool Borough Council- Peter Devlin-in refusing to answer my Reasonable and legitimate questions as we are entitled to do- as the legal registered Property owner- is doubting the veracity and integrity of J ANTHONY BROWN his predecessor- in the position- of Chief Solicitor-of Hartlepool Borough Council simply to allow his colleagues -Hilary Martin-Solicitor and F.O.I officer-Alyson Carman- Solicitor and Complaint Reviewer-in the Legal departments-and Richard Trow-Planning Officer- Paul Burgon- Enforcement Office and Mr Reece- Development Manager of the Planning departments-to flout the Law- and ride roughshod over the concerns of the legal property owners- simply to award Certificates of Lawfulness and Retrospective planning -to personal friends!  No surprises there then!

Iain Wright M.P. in NOT taking our complaints seriously- is now eligible-in my view-to apply for full membership of that-other exclusive group of new Labour Party  Scoundrels-consisting of Jack Straw-Tony Blair-Gordon Brown-and who can possibly forget- our-very own-previous member of Parliament for Hartlepool-Peter Mandelson-who after years of skulduggery-filling their own pockets- in Public Office- have all got one thing in common-they are all very wealth men- and without doubt- Premier League Liars-

We are long past you-can’t-do-that-or you can’t say that-. Have the balls to Stand up and tell the truth-if you are frightened of being sued- don’t play in the big boy’s school yard-

-BOB CROW-1961-2014- - love him or hate him- his quote-His words NOT - mine-I believe was spot on the money- and it fits all occasions-of life- and can never be challenged-be honest-isn’t what–BOB CROW-said-the TRUTH.

“If you fight you might lose-BUT if you don’t fight -you will always lose”-
Very sound and true advice

Please Note
If anything I have Written or Published is NOT TRUE why have NONE repeat NONE of the named Hartlepool Council Individuals Officials- Disputed any of my allegations-NOR Commenced ANY Legal Proceeding against ME for Slander, or whatever other crimes they can think of-?

If anyone named wishes to refute any of the allegations made against them-in a Court of law-they are of course-free to do so- indeed-I would welcome such action-they should be reminded- they will have to pay the own legal costs-and produce the documents of Purchase & Registration  of the Land and Property- to refute  our claims!

A deed is a formal written document that has force in law to alter the rights and duties of the parties to it. To be effective a deed has to be signed, sealed and delivered.
      When someone applies to Land Registry to register their title to a piece of land then they have to show at least some of the pre-registration title deeds to Land Registry to prove that they have title to that land-if you are going to Court in a litigation against your neighbour, and if your neighbour's case relies upon information contained in a title deed, then the law requires him to disclose that title deed to you (in fact, he is required to disclose to you any evidence on which he seeks to rely in his case against you). The right thereto shall be deemed absolute and indefeasible,

I am still awaiting a reply or an acknowledgement to the following e-mail I recently sent to Cleveland Police- as a law abiding full council tax payer- I will send a polite reminders.

Could you please advise me on the correct procedure- to follow- and clarify for me- the  following situation- having exhausted all the know avenues of complaint- available to me- without success -I wish to formally lodge an official complaint of criminal misconduct in Public Office involving– Alan H Smith –assistant Land Registrar- and Anthony Lowes-both officials of Land Registry Durham and Officials in Public Office of Hartlepool Borough Council-namely-Richard Trow-Planning Officer-Hilary Martin-Solicitor and F.O.I. officer-Alyson Carman- Solicitor and Complaint Reviewer-Paul Burgon- Enforcement Officer- my question is- do I submit my documentary evidence in person- requesting a full police investigation into my criminal allegation to Cleveland Police only-or am I obliged to send my documentary evidence in support of my allegation of misconduct and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in Public Office concerning Officials of Land Registry –Durham Office-to Durham Police- “separately” -although they are closely linked-?  Thank you

Yours Sincerely

Alan Harvey Flounders