Deputy submits further questions over Fort sale

Documents seen by the Guernsey Press suggest that the Allez family wrote to the States on 20 May 2019 agreeing terms for a boundary exchange and confirming they were ‘lined up to attend court tomorrow’ to formalise both parties’ understanding over many years that the family were the rightful owners of their home, Maison de la Guerre, next to Fort Richmond, then owned by the States.

But that exchange did not go ahead. Just 17 days later, on 6 June, the States sold Fort Richmond and a large portion of Maison de la Guerre at the knockdown price of £1m., using a boundary map from 1922 which was known to be incomplete. This forced the family into a five-year fight to secure full ownership of their home at a cost of tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees.

Earlier this year, Policy & Resources claimed that the fort was sold to Bembridge Ltd only after the States received ‘formal assurances’ that neighbouring landowners were ‘willing and capable’ of sorting out boundary issues between themselves. But it recently admitted that it relied on assurances provided only from Bembridge and that no assurances were received from the Allez family.

Deputy Andrew Taylor, who has been assisting the family, has submitted another round of Rule 14 written questions.

‘From the limited response to my last questions, it is now known that the Bembridge Ltd assurances came just three days prior to the conveyance to sell the fort, but 14 days after the Allez family indicated they were ready to complete on the boundary exchange with the States.

‘What happened in that two-week period is key to understanding how the States came to sell a portion of a family’s home without their knowledge,’ said Deputy Taylor.

He has asked P&R for more details about the States’ unexplained actions in May and June 2019, including why it did not attend court to conclude the boundary exchange with the Allez family, and its alleged failure to tell the family it was pulling out of the exchange and going back to court to conclude the Fort sale.

Deputy Taylor has asked 12 questions in total and sent them to the States’ Trading Supervisory Board as well as P&R, after the senior committee recently claimed it could not provide further information because property issues were still the responsibility of the board at the time the fort was sold.

‘Although I don’t believe P&R can abdicate its responsibilities as defined in the rules of procedure and committees’ mandates, my latest questions have been submitted to the two committees concurrently, and I will let them decide among themselves where the responsibility sits.

‘My interest is in the answers,’ said Deputy Taylor.

P&R has claimed that the Allez family was legally represented when part of their home was sold by the States.

However, a letter written recently the Allez family’s lawyer at that time, and subsequently seen by the Guernsey Press, has categorically denied that the States informed him of the deal before or after it was completed in June 2019.

The committees have until 18 December to reply to Deputy Taylor’s latest written questions.