Foreshore: Minister's rejection described as "nonsense"

Tuesday 07 August 2018

A senior Minister's comments have been slammed as "clearly nonsense" in an increasingly bitter land dispute which could have implications for hundreds of Jersey property owners who live close to the foreshore.

Today the Infrastructure Minister, Deputy Kevin Lewis, has responded to the findings of an official States Complaints Board, which said his department had failed to act "fairly, prompting and transparently" in the cases of two local men - Alan Luce and Julian Mallinson - who were forced to pay more than £50,000 in total to the States in order to sell their coastal properties.

In his response, the Minister refuses to pay compensation to the two men, despite being told to do so by the Board.

Since Express published the stories of Mr Luce and Mr Mallinson, it's emerged that other islanders with 'foreshore properties' have also fallen into the same situation, meaning the States has now earned more than £70,000.

There was no States policy on the issue in place at the time of the Luce and Mallinson cases, but the men say they were "bullied" by Jersey Property Holdings into paying compensation when they tried to sell their homes, because parts of the properties encroached onto the publicly-owned foreshore.

During the original hearing, the Board heard how the duo were provided with valuations of how much they owed for encroachments on the Foreshore – a vaguely-defined area between high and low tide with no agreed map to show its exact boundaries – but were unable to negotiate this. In Mr Mallinson’s case, JPH chose to charge several thousand more than the official valuation.  

This “‘take it or leave it’ stance” was blasted by the Board, who later argued that it was “inappropriate…to seek to maximize profit” from the public.

Pictured: Mr Luce's former property, Roche de la Mer.

There was also dispute over how long the encroachments had been in place. Jersey Property Holdings (JPH) officials have admitted that they are working to a five-year deadline due to the law of ‘possession quadragénaire’, which affords title to the land after undisturbed residence of 40 years. The foreshore was gifted to the public of the island by the Queen in 2015. 

The Board were equally critical of the time taken to resolve the issues – 16 months in Mr Luce’s case and 19 in Mr Mallinson’s. “JPH was aware of the stress and anxiety being caused to the Complainants by the continuing delay, yet it appears to have done nothing to bring matters to a timely conclusion,” they wrote.

But today the Minister has rejected many of the Panel's findings, denying that Mr Luce and Mr Mallinson were "vulnerable," that transaction advice should have been shared with both parties, that the time taken to conclude the transactions was too long, and that any compensation should be paid:

"Having reviewed the chronology in relation to each matter, the Minister is satisfied that officers provided information and responded in an appropriate timescale to the various parties involved. The time taken to conclude a transaction will vary depending on the nature of the matter, and in this case the nature of the transaction and the number of parties involved contributed to the length of time taken to conclude the matter."

Pictured: Julian Mallinson, and his former property, Brise de la Mer.

The Minister does say that the new Foreshore policy will be "reviewed" in the light of some of the Panel's comments. 

But Panel Chairman Geoffrey Crill has hit back at the Minister, commenting: 

“In his reply to the Board’s findings, the Minister appears to consider that all property owned by the Public should be dealt with on the same basis. That is clearly nonsense. Some property may be held for entirely commercial purposes, some for the provision of public services and some for more esoteric public benefit, like monuments and sites of special interest. The Board does not consider it to have been appropriate that JPH approached negotiations on an exclusively commercial basis.”

"The Board is also very surprised that the Minister maintains that 16 months was an appropriate period within which to conclude negotiations with the Complainants. Whether it was due to workloads, or commercial transactions being given priority, we feel that the negotiations in these cases were unnecessarily protracted and resulted in a great deal of stress to the Complainants. We hope that once a clear policy regarding the fixing of the boundary of the foreshore and the payment of compensation in relation to any encroachments has been adopted, the Minister will review the terms concluded with Messrs. Luce and Mallinson and refund them any difference between the compensation each of them paid and the amount of compensation that would be payable had the new policy been in place at the time.”

The Panel members who took part in the hearing were the Chairman of the Complaints Panel, Geoffrey Crill, John Moulin and Gavin Fraser.

Tomorrow: Alan Luce and Julian Mallinson respond to the Minister's comments. 

READ MORE:

Coastal homeowner accuses States of £30k "extortion"

Q&A: Everything you need to know about the Foreshore issue

Room with a view? We're watching you

Chief Minister 'ignored' Foreshore warnings