I have decided that this one has gone on long enough. As far as I know the matter is now over and Vassie paid up.

Put simply, he disputes some of the details of the boundary dispute.

Mr Vassey does not deny accepting an out of court settlement. He claims the Rawlinsons have agreed not to pursue alleged claims of harassment or criminal damage against him as part of that settlement. However I do not think he is immune from action as any decision to prosecute such criminal matters would not be their decision. If the police do decide to take action, I do not see how the Rawlinsons could refuse to give evidence.

I will not detail his accusation concerning the sincerity of those who have posted comments here, but he ends by saying, “God will judge who has told the truth.”

He makes no mention of the comments of the judge presiding over this case who described Vassie as an “arrogant and aggressive” man who deliberately “dragged his feet” over legal correspondence.

If he has dug up someone else’s plants and flowers (even if they are on disputed land) knowing that they belong to another, and with the intention of not returning them, then hasn’t he committed theft?

If he has been found to be in the wrong by the courts, then surely the letters he has sent were not asserting his lawful rights, but were closer to attempts at harassment?

What worried me most of all was that if the Judge’s assessment was accurate, and Mr Vassie really was dragging his feet, incurring more costs for the other side, then what was his purpose in this? Was he hoping that he would eventually bankrupt them so that he could buy their property at a reduced price?

What I would like to know is, did the Rawlinson’s end up with more land than they started with? It sounded to me as though they had lost land, and had very generously offered to give it up, before they even went to court.

This makes me very angry. If the courts have found Mr Vassie at fault, then surely he should have to pay the full legal costs, and compensation?

It begs the question, if Mr & Mrs Rawlinson had not offered the compromise before they went to court, would the judge have offered the same settlement? Or would Mr Vassie have ended up with a much smaller back garden?

I can see that Mr Vassie is left with a very difficult choice to make, pay up, and try to brazen it off, or go bankrupt and lose his chance at becoming an MP.

I’ve been voting Lib Dem for years, but I won’t again. If the party cannot deal with a rogue Councillor quickly and effectively, then they cannot run the country.

I tried to add my comments to the article on the Evening Press website, but the option was not there. Never mind, word of mouth is spreading fast on this one. I think I might even add it to my facebook.

Could it be this site Cllr Vassie means when he is quoted as saying,
“We are also aware that there have been some scurrilous blogs posted on the internet…”?

Surely not! Scurrilous means ‘grossly or obscenely abusive’ and nowhere in the post or the comments has anyone stooped to that.

I had not been aware that Mr Vassie is the Liberal Democrat’s parliamentary candidate for York at the next general election. That horrifies me.

From the political point of view, the real scandal is the fact that Council resources (funded by tax payers that include Mr and Mrs Rawlinson) were used to aid the bullying. Why for example did the head of legal services write a threatening letter to Mr and Mrs Rawlinson about, what they later admitted, was a private matter? Why did they not take a look at the CCTV Camera before writing the letter? If they had it should have been obvious the claims they were making about its abilities were untrue. How did the Head of Legal Service come to misquote the Law? I found the personal comments she made particularly disturbing and I suspect libellous. I hope now that Mr Vassie has been found out they they will be offering an unreserved apology.

Finally, I’d also like to point out that a document Mr Vassie submitted to the court in his defence makes it clear that the Lib Dem party (both at national and local level) knew what was going on at least two years ago. In particular it was pointed out to them that Mr Vassie appeared to be deliberately running up Mr Rawlinson’s legal costs. (I now see that Graham independently came to exactly the same conclusion.) Rather then try and resolve the situation the Lib Dems have made him their candidate for the next general election! We’ve seen how he’s used the resources of the council against people who disagree with him. Can you image what mischief he could inflict if he were an MP?

Prior to these ‘incidents’ I’d always voted Lib Dem, but after what I’ve seen I do not trust trust Mr Vassie. I will not voting for him or his party again and I’ll be strongly encouraging others to do the same.

One of the things that disturbs me the most is the fact that he was able to use council resources (specifically that of the legal department but others may well have been involved) as part disagreement with the Rawlinsons.

It may be of interest to people to read the York City Council Members Code of Conduct document at this location:
http://democracy.york.gov.uk/Published/StdDataDocs/1/2/3/0/SD00000321/$NewMembersCodeofConductfrom010807.doc.pdf

It does state (in brief) that this document only applies when conducting council business, however part b in the excerpt quoted below should surely apply with regards to the letters from the councils legal department?

“2. (1) Subject to sub-paragraphs (2) to (5), you must comply with this Code
whenever you—
(a) conduct the business of your authority (which, in this Code,
includes the business of the office to which you are elected or
appointed); or
(b) act, claim to act or give the impression you are acting as a
representative of your authority,”

Further, I have noticed that, apart from in this blog entry, nothing seems to have been reported as to the fact that the boundary dispute was apparently only the latest action in a series of problems between the 2 parties. What is also noticeable is that a boundary dispute can be a very costly and time-consuming court case. Taken from the following site:
http://www.boundary-problems.co.uk/

“There is no authority that can step in and tell you and your neighbour – quickly, cheaply and unequivocally – exactly where your boundary is. There is one authority, the County Court or the High Court, than can work out for you – at great cost of both time and money – where your boundary is.”

The advice given on the site is:

“If you want to resolve your dispute without unnecessary expenditure of time and money it is essential that you and your neighbour:

* remain on amicable terms throughout;
* accept that neither of you actually knows precisely where the boundary is;
* work together to understand (with the help of this web site) how the system of general boundaries operates;
* ascertain from each other the factors that have led to the dispute;
* negotiate with each other a settlement that mitigates those factors, and if necessary
* have Land Registry record in an appropriate manner the position of the boundary that you have agreed upon.
”

It would appear from this blog that the Rawlinsons tried to do this to no avail.

They do not address the comments in the judge’s pronouncent regarding his letters or that he dragged his feet so adding to costs.