Former Southend Council leader's daughter prefered bidder for lease of Leas Sun Shelter

Antonia Waite

Antonia Waite

First published in News
Last updated
Exclusive by

A RUNDOWN seafront sun shelter is set to undergo a £300,000 makeover to be turned into a modern bar and eatery.

Antonia Waite, 28, from Leigh, expects to sign a lease on the locally-listed landmark in The Leas after Southend Council selected her as preferred bidder for the revamp.

It is a first venture into running a restaurant for Antonia, who works in her father’s accountancy firm.

However, Antonia comes from good stock from the trade: Her grandparents opened Tomassi’s in Southend High Street in the Thirties.

Antonia, who is the daughter of former council leader Anna Waite, hopes to start building work in late summer, if a planning application and the lease are finalised.

Provisionally called Seaside Rock, she hopes the venue will open from 8am to 10pm, and plans to preserve the majority of the original building.

Southend Standard:

New Leas of life: Computer image of venue at night

Southend Standard:

Iconic: Proposed cafe by day

She said: “I have waited tables in my grandparents’ restaurant and have the experience of seeing them run the business, but have never run my own catering establishment.

“We are looking at a lighttouch design to preserve and enhance the locally-listed building.

“New doors will go in, but we will keep the original windows and frames. There will be no dramatic changes. Inside there will be a kitchen and bar in the mid section, it will be an open kitchen.”

The front of the venue will include open-air seating, with the possibility of music, such as violin performances, while people eat. The shelter would serve cafe food and brunches throughout the day, with a different menu in the evening.

Antonia also hopes to make ice cream there and serve a range of sundaes.

Southend Standard:

Preferred bidder: Antonia with Gerard Biagioni of Dedman Grey who marketed the site

She added: “This is always something I have wanted to do and it is a lovely building.

“If we get the planning permission and start building in late summer, we aim to be open for spring 2015.”

The shelter has been unused for a number of years and fell into disrepair after years of use by drunks and homeless people.

Alan Richards, Southend Council’s group asset manager, said: “The council received some excellent expressions of interest for the redevelopment of the shelter and has now selected a preferred bidder with whom, subject to contract negotiations, we are progressing with positively.”

Cafe owner Ray Holden fears the new eatery could signal the end of the popular Arches eateries.

Mr Holden, who runs the Fountain cafe in Palmeira Arches, Western Esplanade, said: “I feel another food outlet in our area will see the end to these iconic cafes.

“Even though our summer last year was the best in recent years, the whole year to date has been very bad.

“Obviously the weather pays a big part in our trade, but in recent years we have seen the toilet block, Toulouse restaurant, and the new Beach hut open, these along with other restaurants in the area affects, the trade at the Arches.

“I would say most seafront traders are struggling to make ends meet again due to the bad weather and to the extortionate rents we are asked to pay by our council, which own the Arches leases.

“I find it unfair that we are not allowed to have permanent structures so we can operate properly in the winter months and other businesses are popping up all around us with permanent structures, toilets and peppercorn rents.

“Before too long there will be 13 empty arches the council will have on its books to sell.”

Comments (37)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:09pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Broadwaywatch says...

Why did this not stay in the main stream longer........it would seem because of the nature of the Artical that it is being perposely hidden
Why did this not stay in the main stream longer........it would seem because of the nature of the Artical that it is being perposely hidden Broadwaywatch
  • Score: 1

9:10pm Tue 1 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Broadwaywatch wrote:
Why did this not stay in the main stream longer........it would seem because of the nature of the Artical that it is being perposely hidden
You seem jealous, you people seem to love to point the finger, yet never actually get off your own ar5e, to do anything yourself, apart from to moan about the dreams of others.
[quote][p][bold]Broadwaywatch[/bold] wrote: Why did this not stay in the main stream longer........it would seem because of the nature of the Artical that it is being perposely hidden[/p][/quote]You seem jealous, you people seem to love to point the finger, yet never actually get off your own ar5e, to do anything yourself, apart from to moan about the dreams of others. carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: 0

9:50pm Tue 1 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

i think it looks and sounds great, not sure why the arches are moaning already, they are open rain or shine in their canopys thats just how it is when you rent a tiny unit under a road, of course this new place will pull people in..its at least 10 times the size of 1 arch unit, sure anyone of them could have put an offer in.
i think it looks and sounds great, not sure why the arches are moaning already, they are open rain or shine in their canopys thats just how it is when you rent a tiny unit under a road, of course this new place will pull people in..its at least 10 times the size of 1 arch unit, sure anyone of them could have put an offer in. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 12

9:53pm Tue 1 Apr 14

jaguarxxv says...

The Arches cafe owners do ok, but they aways moan about something, this is highly unlikely to affect their business.

"Seaside Rock" !!?? what a ridiculously inappropriate name for such a lovely buliding.

I thought part of the shelter had to be retained for public use as a shelter, the artistic impressions don't show that.
The Arches cafe owners do ok, but they aways moan about something, this is highly unlikely to affect their business. "Seaside Rock" !!?? what a ridiculously inappropriate name for such a lovely buliding. I thought part of the shelter had to be retained for public use as a shelter, the artistic impressions don't show that. jaguarxxv
  • Score: 8

11:52pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Cliff West says...

It will be great to see this building have a new lease of life. Good luck.
It will be great to see this building have a new lease of life. Good luck. Cliff West
  • Score: 7

12:10am Wed 2 Apr 14

Broadwaywatch says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
Broadwaywatch wrote:
Why did this not stay in the main stream longer........it would seem because of the nature of the Artical that it is being perposely hidden
You seem jealous, you people seem to love to point the finger, yet never actually get off your own ar5e, to do anything yourself, apart from to moan about the dreams of others.
Not at all jealous.......just a polite question without resulting to the use of bad language
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Broadwaywatch[/bold] wrote: Why did this not stay in the main stream longer........it would seem because of the nature of the Artical that it is being perposely hidden[/p][/quote]You seem jealous, you people seem to love to point the finger, yet never actually get off your own ar5e, to do anything yourself, apart from to moan about the dreams of others.[/p][/quote]Not at all jealous.......just a polite question without resulting to the use of bad language Broadwaywatch
  • Score: 1

12:52am Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection. jayman
  • Score: 11

6:54am Wed 2 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area. carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: 5

7:33am Wed 2 Apr 14

CaptainBlackadder says...

Quite agree,some people are happy to watch these buildings crumble away ,they'd rather worry that someone might be making a profit along the line - and the Arches would moan as they have had a nice monopoly on that area for years.....
Quite agree,some people are happy to watch these buildings crumble away ,they'd rather worry that someone might be making a profit along the line - and the Arches would moan as they have had a nice monopoly on that area for years..... CaptainBlackadder
  • Score: 7

8:06am Wed 2 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

CaptainBlackadder wrote:
Quite agree,some people are happy to watch these buildings crumble away ,they'd rather worry that someone might be making a profit along the line - and the Arches would moan as they have had a nice monopoly on that area for years.....
Im looking forward to those ripp offeries called the arches, going down the pan...
[quote][p][bold]CaptainBlackadder[/bold] wrote: Quite agree,some people are happy to watch these buildings crumble away ,they'd rather worry that someone might be making a profit along the line - and the Arches would moan as they have had a nice monopoly on that area for years.....[/p][/quote]Im looking forward to those ripp offeries called the arches, going down the pan... carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -3

8:45am Wed 2 Apr 14

Britanniaman says...

ooh iv looked at this building a few times i did once ask the council would it ever be put in auctions. Anyway good to see that it will now be used but yeah i'm jealous would of made a lovely little holiday let for summer.Then in time a retirement bungalow for my self:)
ooh iv looked at this building a few times i did once ask the council would it ever be put in auctions. Anyway good to see that it will now be used but yeah i'm jealous would of made a lovely little holiday let for summer.Then in time a retirement bungalow for my self:) Britanniaman
  • Score: 0

9:28am Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space. jayman
  • Score: 5

9:45am Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
oh almost forgot.

"All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter"

replace the word dross with 'highly educated and astute'. and i think you will find the the fact that this 'valuable' public asset's intentionally mismanaged condition is nothing more the a damning indication of Southend Tory councils inability to protect and maintain Southend's heritage on our behalf.

in other words. Southend council can't even manage an empty building that's 'sole' purpose is for the entry of sunshine..
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]oh almost forgot. "All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter" replace the word dross with 'highly educated and astute'. and i think you will find the the fact that this 'valuable' public asset's intentionally mismanaged condition is nothing more the a damning indication of Southend Tory councils inability to protect and maintain Southend's heritage on our behalf. in other words. Southend council can't even manage an empty building that's 'sole' purpose is for the entry of sunshine.. jayman
  • Score: 9

10:09am Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

i also notice with interest that the link headline has been changed to include the amount of money that is 'supposedly' going into this project,

even if this is accurate. its still not a good return for the public who have not had a say on the matter..
i also notice with interest that the link headline has been changed to include the amount of money that is 'supposedly' going into this project, even if this is accurate. its still not a good return for the public who have not had a say on the matter.. jayman
  • Score: 5

10:15am Wed 2 Apr 14

Spoonicus says...

'Seaside Rock' is a terrible name. Why not just call it 'The Sun Shelter' or something?

She seems a bit more cheerful and lively then her mother, at least. Best of luck to her.
'Seaside Rock' is a terrible name. Why not just call it 'The Sun Shelter' or something? She seems a bit more cheerful and lively then her mother, at least. Best of luck to her. Spoonicus
  • Score: 1

10:28am Wed 2 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

jayman wrote:
i also notice with interest that the link headline has been changed to include the amount of money that is 'supposedly' going into this project,

even if this is accurate. its still not a good return for the public who have not had a say on the matter..
SHUT IT...Got nothing to do with you, you'd complain if a bus shelter was renovated..
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: i also notice with interest that the link headline has been changed to include the amount of money that is 'supposedly' going into this project, even if this is accurate. its still not a good return for the public who have not had a say on the matter..[/p][/quote]SHUT IT...Got nothing to do with you, you'd complain if a bus shelter was renovated.. carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -3

11:45am Wed 2 Apr 14

jantone says...

Brilliant venture!! I wish the new developer all the luck in the world, & i for one cannot wait for this lovely new eaterie to open!! I hope she ignores any negative views. These people are just jealous that they never thought of the idea first!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can we expect the proposed "floating Restaurant" near the Genting Casino to be approved very soon, & contruction work begin very soon, & lets all bring life to our seafront!!
I'm just watiing for more negative comments to be printed!!
Brilliant venture!! I wish the new developer all the luck in the world, & i for one cannot wait for this lovely new eaterie to open!! I hope she ignores any negative views. These people are just jealous that they never thought of the idea first!!!!!!!!!!!! Can we expect the proposed "floating Restaurant" near the Genting Casino to be approved very soon, & contruction work begin very soon, & lets all bring life to our seafront!! I'm just watiing for more negative comments to be printed!! jantone
  • Score: -2

12:47pm Wed 2 Apr 14

MilesBond says...

That is a truly terrible name for this venture.
That is a truly terrible name for this venture. MilesBond
  • Score: 2

12:54pm Wed 2 Apr 14

DannyK86 says...

Great idea. If the Arches operators were proper entrepreneurs and innovators, they would welcome new bars and restaurants springing up along the seafront. It gives much more life to the area, and in time will hopefully guarantee the seafront develops as a destination for a nice evening. The Arches need to move with the times and be part of that - if a business owner can't handle competition, why are they in business?
Great idea. If the Arches operators were proper entrepreneurs and innovators, they would welcome new bars and restaurants springing up along the seafront. It gives much more life to the area, and in time will hopefully guarantee the seafront develops as a destination for a nice evening. The Arches need to move with the times and be part of that - if a business owner can't handle competition, why are they in business? DannyK86
  • Score: 4

1:00pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Joe Clark says...

jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma

kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news
.co.uk/news/10547859
.Westcliff_seafront_
shelter_to_be_turned
_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done. Joe Clark
  • Score: -2

2:53pm Wed 2 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma


kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news

.co.uk/news/10547859

.Westcliff_seafront_

shelter_to_be_turned

_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
Jayman is a complete D1ck, with low intelligence
[quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.[/p][/quote]Jayman is a complete D1ck, with low intelligence carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -3

3:02pm Wed 2 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

MilesBond wrote:
That is a truly terrible name for this venture.
No worse than your user name...
[quote][p][bold]MilesBond[/bold] wrote: That is a truly terrible name for this venture.[/p][/quote]No worse than your user name... carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: 0

3:04pm Wed 2 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Spoonicus wrote:
'Seaside Rock' is a terrible name. Why not just call it 'The Sun Shelter' or something?

She seems a bit more cheerful and lively then her mother, at least. Best of luck to her.
Why not mind your own nose...
[quote][p][bold]Spoonicus[/bold] wrote: 'Seaside Rock' is a terrible name. Why not just call it 'The Sun Shelter' or something? She seems a bit more cheerful and lively then her mother, at least. Best of luck to her.[/p][/quote]Why not mind your own nose... carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -3

4:25pm Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma



kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news


.co.uk/news/10547859


.Westcliff_seafront_


shelter_to_be_turned


_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
Jayman is a complete D1ck, with low intelligence
Oh my dear madam.I take it that that's the Swan song of your argument.
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.[/p][/quote]Jayman is a complete D1ck, with low intelligence[/p][/quote]Oh my dear madam.I take it that that's the Swan song of your argument. jayman
  • Score: 0

4:39pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Chymes81 says...

Good, hopefully it'll smell more like good food and less like urine.
Good, hopefully it'll smell more like good food and less like urine. Chymes81
  • Score: 5

5:04pm Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma


kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news

.co.uk/news/10547859

.Westcliff_seafront_

shelter_to_be_turned

_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
i did...

"jayman says...
i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

1st comment on the article.... above your one.

Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.
[quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.[/p][/quote]i did... "jayman says... i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" 1st comment on the article.... above your one. Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family. jayman
  • Score: 0

6:51pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Joe Clark says...

jayman wrote:
Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma



kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news


.co.uk/news/10547859


.Westcliff_seafront_


shelter_to_be_turned


_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
i did...

"jayman says...
i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

1st comment on the article.... above your one.

Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.
Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease.

The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her.

You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here:

http://propertylink.
estatesgazette.com/p
roperty-details/5517
583-the-leas-sun-she
lter-western-esplana
de-southend-on-sea-e
ssex

or here:

http://www.sorrellpr
operty.co.uk/news/Th
e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O
n-The-Market!

You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased

Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent

Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too.

Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available.

I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement.

Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you?
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.[/p][/quote]i did... "jayman says... i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" 1st comment on the article.... above your one. Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.[/p][/quote]Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease. The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her. You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here: http://propertylink. estatesgazette.com/p roperty-details/5517 583-the-leas-sun-she lter-western-esplana de-southend-on-sea-e ssex or here: http://www.sorrellpr operty.co.uk/news/Th e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O n-The-Market! You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too. Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available. I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement. Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you? Joe Clark
  • Score: 2

7:36pm Wed 2 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

this one got snapped up fast enough, shame they can't do the same with that empty one under the viewing tower/pier entrance, and when the lease is up on this one it gets renewed or the council have a nicely fitted out building that was once unused.
this one got snapped up fast enough, shame they can't do the same with that empty one under the viewing tower/pier entrance, and when the lease is up on this one it gets renewed or the council have a nicely fitted out building that was once unused. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 4

9:12pm Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma




kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news



.co.uk/news/10547859



.Westcliff_seafront_



shelter_to_be_turned



_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
i did...

"jayman says...
i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

1st comment on the article.... above your one.

Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.
Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease.

The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her.

You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here:

http://propertylink.

estatesgazette.com/p

roperty-details/5517

583-the-leas-sun-she

lter-western-esplana

de-southend-on-sea-e

ssex

or here:

http://www.sorrellpr

operty.co.uk/news/Th

e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O

n-The-Market!

You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased

Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent

Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too.

Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available.

I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement.

Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you?
oh the bit about

"Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family."

was myself in reflection about my comment " welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

and come off it Joe, once the building becomes another cafe. I can hardly see the council returning it back to its previous use should the tenant leave! AKA its been sold.

Has Southend council collected its rent from stobart yet. Tell the Waite family not to bother. There is another cafe in warrior square going. there is also (as stated above) one going for next to nothing by pier hill.

Southend's Tory council cant manage sunlight or retail spaces.
[quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.[/p][/quote]i did... "jayman says... i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" 1st comment on the article.... above your one. Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.[/p][/quote]Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease. The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her. You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here: http://propertylink. estatesgazette.com/p roperty-details/5517 583-the-leas-sun-she lter-western-esplana de-southend-on-sea-e ssex or here: http://www.sorrellpr operty.co.uk/news/Th e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O n-The-Market! You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too. Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available. I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement. Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you?[/p][/quote]oh the bit about "Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family." was myself in reflection about my comment " welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" and come off it Joe, once the building becomes another cafe. I can hardly see the council returning it back to its previous use should the tenant leave! AKA its been sold. Has Southend council collected its rent from stobart yet. Tell the Waite family not to bother. There is another cafe in warrior square going. there is also (as stated above) one going for next to nothing by pier hill. Southend's Tory council cant manage sunlight or retail spaces. jayman
  • Score: 0

10:49pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Norfolk and Chance says...

jayman should be banned for posting really boring comments. zzzzzz
jayman should be banned for posting really boring comments. zzzzzz Norfolk and Chance
  • Score: 4

11:02pm Wed 2 Apr 14

Joe Clark says...

jayman wrote:
Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma





kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news




.co.uk/news/10547859




.Westcliff_seafront_




shelter_to_be_turned




_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
i did...

"jayman says...
i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

1st comment on the article.... above your one.

Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.
Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease.

The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her.

You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here:

http://propertylink.


estatesgazette.com/p


roperty-details/5517


583-the-leas-sun-she


lter-western-esplana


de-southend-on-sea-e


ssex

or here:

http://www.sorrellpr


operty.co.uk/news/Th


e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O


n-The-Market!

You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased

Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent

Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too.

Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available.

I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement.

Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you?
oh the bit about

"Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family."

was myself in reflection about my comment " welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

and come off it Joe, once the building becomes another cafe. I can hardly see the council returning it back to its previous use should the tenant leave! AKA its been sold.

Has Southend council collected its rent from stobart yet. Tell the Waite family not to bother. There is another cafe in warrior square going. there is also (as stated above) one going for next to nothing by pier hill.

Southend's Tory council cant manage sunlight or retail spaces.
The original story (published 16th July 2013 http://www.echo-news
.co.uk/news/10547859
.Westcliff_seafront_
shelter_to_be_turned
_into_eatery/) did not name anyone who was intruded as that was the first time it was announced it was available to rent.

As for this story, you clearly can not grasp the fact that the only people who choose what is printed in the physical version of the echo and what is placed upon the web based version is the echo people themselves.

if they publish a story and then update it with more information that's their prerogative.

Do you get the paper version of the echo? if so the story in full was in Mondays paper, normally they appear on the website later that evening in a shorted version and then added too the next day, do you not think that this is what happened, most newspaper that have free to view website only put up part of what appears in the physical newspaper, this is done to make you go out and buy the paper to get the whole story.

You never seem to be able to answer a question with a straight answer, so once more:

I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.[/p][/quote]i did... "jayman says... i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" 1st comment on the article.... above your one. Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.[/p][/quote]Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease. The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her. You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here: http://propertylink. estatesgazette.com/p roperty-details/5517 583-the-leas-sun-she lter-western-esplana de-southend-on-sea-e ssex or here: http://www.sorrellpr operty.co.uk/news/Th e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O n-The-Market! You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too. Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available. I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement. Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you?[/p][/quote]oh the bit about "Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family." was myself in reflection about my comment " welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" and come off it Joe, once the building becomes another cafe. I can hardly see the council returning it back to its previous use should the tenant leave! AKA its been sold. Has Southend council collected its rent from stobart yet. Tell the Waite family not to bother. There is another cafe in warrior square going. there is also (as stated above) one going for next to nothing by pier hill. Southend's Tory council cant manage sunlight or retail spaces.[/p][/quote]The original story (published 16th July 2013 http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/) did not name anyone who was intruded as that was the first time it was announced it was available to rent. As for this story, you clearly can not grasp the fact that the only people who choose what is printed in the physical version of the echo and what is placed upon the web based version is the echo people themselves. if they publish a story and then update it with more information that's their prerogative. Do you get the paper version of the echo? if so the story in full was in Mondays paper, normally they appear on the website later that evening in a shorted version and then added too the next day, do you not think that this is what happened, most newspaper that have free to view website only put up part of what appears in the physical newspaper, this is done to make you go out and buy the paper to get the whole story. You never seem to be able to answer a question with a straight answer, so once more: I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement. Joe Clark
  • Score: 2

11:58pm Wed 2 Apr 14

jayman says...

Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
Joe Clark wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma






kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage."

- how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend?

"Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream"

I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party.

"in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area"

This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.
Jayman:

Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article:

http://www.echo-news





.co.uk/news/10547859





.Westcliff_seafront_





shelter_to_be_turned





_into_eatery/

If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out.

There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery.

If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met.

How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children?

I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.
i did...

"jayman says...
i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

1st comment on the article.... above your one.

Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.
Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease.

The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her.

You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here:

http://propertylink.



estatesgazette.com/p



roperty-details/5517



583-the-leas-sun-she



lter-western-esplana



de-southend-on-sea-e



ssex

or here:

http://www.sorrellpr



operty.co.uk/news/Th



e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O



n-The-Market!

You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased

Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent

Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too.

Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available.

I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement.

Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you?
oh the bit about

"Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family."

was myself in reflection about my comment " welcome to Tory plc-on-sea"

and come off it Joe, once the building becomes another cafe. I can hardly see the council returning it back to its previous use should the tenant leave! AKA its been sold.

Has Southend council collected its rent from stobart yet. Tell the Waite family not to bother. There is another cafe in warrior square going. there is also (as stated above) one going for next to nothing by pier hill.

Southend's Tory council cant manage sunlight or retail spaces.
The original story (published 16th July 2013 http://www.echo-news

.co.uk/news/10547859

.Westcliff_seafront_

shelter_to_be_turned

_into_eatery/) did not name anyone who was intruded as that was the first time it was announced it was available to rent.

As for this story, you clearly can not grasp the fact that the only people who choose what is printed in the physical version of the echo and what is placed upon the web based version is the echo people themselves.

if they publish a story and then update it with more information that's their prerogative.

Do you get the paper version of the echo? if so the story in full was in Mondays paper, normally they appear on the website later that evening in a shorted version and then added too the next day, do you not think that this is what happened, most newspaper that have free to view website only put up part of what appears in the physical newspaper, this is done to make you go out and buy the paper to get the whole story.

You never seem to be able to answer a question with a straight answer, so once more:

I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement.
i suggest you should obtain a full list from Southend council which shows offers of interest in this as yet publicly owned, locally listed building and publish it. other then that, stop making demands of me in your pious-aggressive attempt to distract or distort what from I have clearly said already in comments on this thread.

I cant prove a private conversation between two parties.
I cant prove a document locked away in a filing cabinet.
and i sure as biscuits, cant make you follow a series of narratives and definitions based firmly within the realms of common understanding without you going all 'corporate communication' on me...
[quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joe Clark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]"Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage." - how did Southend council tender the lease? how much time was allocated to the tendering process? what was the criteria for use? was/is SBC entitled to sell a lease without consultation. How did Southend council get ownership of this land, as is often the case, was It gifted to the people of Southend? "Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream" I care not for the fortunes of restaurateurs. I do however care for public assets being sold without legitimate context to an influential family that has formal connections to southends Tory party. "in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area" This is a matter of individual opinion. personally, I see an attempt to take ownership of and harvest profit from a public space.[/p][/quote]Jayman: Once again you show your arrogance to facts and research a two second search of this very website has this article: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/ If you actually take the time to read it you will see that the plan is NOT to sell the site but to lease it out. There was a large board outside for a good few months advertising it was up for lease, I admit I did not do an internet search for details of it since it has been advertised but that was simply because I do not have the funds, time or interest in running a café or any other sort of eatery. If it is still a case of leasing I fully expect to admit you failed once again to actually carry out any research and just commented, you also loose face by making nasty remarks about a young lady who I guess you have never met. How would you like it if people made such remarks about your children? I naturally expect your normal remarks towards me, but look at it this way I actually done a search for the FACTS that were available which is much more than you ever done.[/p][/quote]i did... "jayman says... i guess the people of Southend had no say in this matter, Again! another public asset sold off. welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" 1st comment on the article.... above your one. Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family.[/p][/quote]Why would the original article (the one I posted a link for) mention anyone as it was the first time it was announced that the building was going to be put up for lease. The story here (above comments) first appeared in the printed version of the Echo with the young lady named, how can she or the Council be responsible if the echo ran the same article on here (the web version) without naming her. You did not mention the previous article in the posting you made, where as I did and I provided the link, you keep saying "sold off" this is clearly not what it states in the article nor after another quick search here: http://propertylink. estatesgazette.com/p roperty-details/5517 583-the-leas-sun-she lter-western-esplana de-southend-on-sea-e ssex or here: http://www.sorrellpr operty.co.uk/news/Th e-Leas-Sun-Shelter-O n-The-Market! You are aware of the difference between "sold off" and leased Leased: A contract granting use or occupation of property during a specified period in exchange for a specified rent Sold: To exchange ownership for money and relinquish all right too. Everything I have seen on the articles I have supplied links for clearly state leased, so unless you have proof to counter this (you have not provided any links to this effect) then you seem to have an issue over understanding the facts that are currently available. I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement. Anyone who saw the sign or the original article in the paper and on this website could have submitted bits or made statements to the council, did you?[/p][/quote]oh the bit about "Yet the original article said nothing about the Waite family." was myself in reflection about my comment " welcome to Tory plc-on-sea" and come off it Joe, once the building becomes another cafe. I can hardly see the council returning it back to its previous use should the tenant leave! AKA its been sold. Has Southend council collected its rent from stobart yet. Tell the Waite family not to bother. There is another cafe in warrior square going. there is also (as stated above) one going for next to nothing by pier hill. Southend's Tory council cant manage sunlight or retail spaces.[/p][/quote]The original story (published 16th July 2013 http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/10547859 .Westcliff_seafront_ shelter_to_be_turned _into_eatery/) did not name anyone who was intruded as that was the first time it was announced it was available to rent. As for this story, you clearly can not grasp the fact that the only people who choose what is printed in the physical version of the echo and what is placed upon the web based version is the echo people themselves. if they publish a story and then update it with more information that's their prerogative. Do you get the paper version of the echo? if so the story in full was in Mondays paper, normally they appear on the website later that evening in a shorted version and then added too the next day, do you not think that this is what happened, most newspaper that have free to view website only put up part of what appears in the physical newspaper, this is done to make you go out and buy the paper to get the whole story. You never seem to be able to answer a question with a straight answer, so once more: I challenge you to provide evidence to back up your claims that it has been "sold off" if you are unable to do so then please say so, and explain why you are persisting to use the term "sold off" when at present there is nothing to back up your statement.[/p][/quote]i suggest you should obtain a full list from Southend council which shows offers of interest in this as yet publicly owned, locally listed building and publish it. other then that, stop making demands of me in your pious-aggressive attempt to distract or distort what from I have clearly said already in comments on this thread. I cant prove a private conversation between two parties. I cant prove a document locked away in a filing cabinet. and i sure as biscuits, cant make you follow a series of narratives and definitions based firmly within the realms of common understanding without you going all 'corporate communication' on me... jayman
  • Score: 1

11:53am Thu 3 Apr 14

RichardAC says...

A good use of an historical building that no longer has a use because of changing trends. The fact that she is a Tomassi I see as good given their experience in catering. The fact that her mother is an ex Tory councillor is of no interest to anyone but Jayman. There is clearly no malpractice.
A good use of an historical building that no longer has a use because of changing trends. The fact that she is a Tomassi I see as good given their experience in catering. The fact that her mother is an ex Tory councillor is of no interest to anyone but Jayman. There is clearly no malpractice. RichardAC
  • Score: -1

12:39pm Thu 3 Apr 14

DannyK86 says...

Norfolk and Chance wrote:
jayman should be banned for posting really boring comments. zzzzzz
Must be such a bore in real life!
[quote][p][bold]Norfolk and Chance[/bold] wrote: jayman should be banned for posting really boring comments. zzzzzz[/p][/quote]Must be such a bore in real life! DannyK86
  • Score: 0

9:16am Fri 4 Apr 14

openspace says...

jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma

kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
oh almost forgot.

"All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter"

replace the word dross with 'highly educated and astute'. and i think you will find the the fact that this 'valuable' public asset's intentionally mismanaged condition is nothing more the a damning indication of Southend Tory councils inability to protect and maintain Southend's heritage on our behalf.

in other words. Southend council can't even manage an empty building that's 'sole' purpose is for the entry of sunshine..
" Highly educated and astute". I love that, really funny.
How about this instead "politically biased in the extreme and regarded by most as a bit of a joke that no-one really takes seriously". However, as I have said many times, the comments from this source do brighten our days with humour so keep them coming.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]oh almost forgot. "All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter" replace the word dross with 'highly educated and astute'. and i think you will find the the fact that this 'valuable' public asset's intentionally mismanaged condition is nothing more the a damning indication of Southend Tory councils inability to protect and maintain Southend's heritage on our behalf. in other words. Southend council can't even manage an empty building that's 'sole' purpose is for the entry of sunshine..[/p][/quote]" Highly educated and astute". I love that, really funny. How about this instead "politically biased in the extreme and regarded by most as a bit of a joke that no-one really takes seriously". However, as I have said many times, the comments from this source do brighten our days with humour so keep them coming. openspace
  • Score: -1

9:36am Fri 4 Apr 14

jayman says...

openspace wrote:
jayman wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma


kessense
wrote:
jayman wrote:
article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long!

how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away'

was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.
All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either....
Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage.
Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream.
The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.
oh almost forgot.

"All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter"

replace the word dross with 'highly educated and astute'. and i think you will find the the fact that this 'valuable' public asset's intentionally mismanaged condition is nothing more the a damning indication of Southend Tory councils inability to protect and maintain Southend's heritage on our behalf.

in other words. Southend council can't even manage an empty building that's 'sole' purpose is for the entry of sunshine..
" Highly educated and astute". I love that, really funny.
How about this instead "politically biased in the extreme and regarded by most as a bit of a joke that no-one really takes seriously". However, as I have said many times, the comments from this source do brighten our days with humour so keep them coming.
You see, when a commentator such as yourself retreats to the bastion of right-wing of petty insults I know I am onto something, I see such attempts by yourself as a litmus test for 'Making the right argument'

and do stop trying to appeal to my inferiority complex, as you see. I don't have one. You however have an inescapable ego and a painful sense of entitlement which are not valuable personal assets to have in argument making.

enjoy the sunshine...
[quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: article headline should read... 'Southend's publicly owned and poorly maintained sun shelter sold for a song to southends political right-wing influential dynasty'... perhaps too long! how about. 'shelter sent to dogs prior to give-away' was there a consultation prior to this public asset sell off. In my view this is a unique structure that is part of our seaside heritage. It should have been adequately maintained. Not sold. I think legitimate questions should be asked in light of the Waite family connection.[/p][/quote]All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter. I f they had had their way, the casino built on the run down baths, would not have been built either.... Funny how nobody else bothered to step forward, offering this wonderfully iconic summer palace a futuristic change of popular usage. Once up and running, see the present trade, enjoyed currently by the over priced "Arches" drop off like melting ice cream. The potential for this splendid building is awesome, and I wish the new owner every success in her quest to offer a unique and class venue, to the area.[/p][/quote]oh almost forgot. "All of a sudden the dross are keen to remind themselves, of the ownership of this run down and under used shelter" replace the word dross with 'highly educated and astute'. and i think you will find the the fact that this 'valuable' public asset's intentionally mismanaged condition is nothing more the a damning indication of Southend Tory councils inability to protect and maintain Southend's heritage on our behalf. in other words. Southend council can't even manage an empty building that's 'sole' purpose is for the entry of sunshine..[/p][/quote]" Highly educated and astute". I love that, really funny. How about this instead "politically biased in the extreme and regarded by most as a bit of a joke that no-one really takes seriously". However, as I have said many times, the comments from this source do brighten our days with humour so keep them coming.[/p][/quote]You see, when a commentator such as yourself retreats to the bastion of right-wing of petty insults I know I am onto something, I see such attempts by yourself as a litmus test for 'Making the right argument' and do stop trying to appeal to my inferiority complex, as you see. I don't have one. You however have an inescapable ego and a painful sense of entitlement which are not valuable personal assets to have in argument making. enjoy the sunshine... jayman
  • Score: -3

10:44am Fri 4 Apr 14

jayman says...

http://www.companies
list.co.uk/08696788-
seaside-rocks-southe
nd-limited

have a gander at the company directors of seaside rocks..
http://www.companies list.co.uk/08696788- seaside-rocks-southe nd-limited have a gander at the company directors of seaside rocks.. jayman
  • Score: -5

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree