The Barnet Eye saves council tax payers from yet another expensive legal cock up over Church Farmhouse Museum

 As you know, this blog has been following the sad story of the destruction of the heritage of our Borough and the failure to protect important buildings. It came to our attention that Barnet Council had listed Church Farmhouse Museum for sale by auction. We reviewed the paperwork and also visited the building to see what state it was in. We were horrified by what we saw. This is a grade two listed building. Here is what we found, when we inspected with a retired expert.

We also found defects in the legal papers that would have potentially opened the council up to lawsuits, for non disclosure of important legal details. I wrote to the council leader and the CEO to express my concerns.

Dear  Cllr Rawlings, Cllr Clarke and Ms Shaw

 

I am writing to you on behalf of an urgent legal matter that could incur a large financial penalty for Barnet Council. I have reveiwed the papers for the sale by auction of CHurch Farmhouse museum. I believe that the paperwork is materially incorrect and misleading to potential buyers and the council may be at risk should the property be sold on the basis of information the council has provided.

 

I refer specifically to the paperwork concerning the public right of way through the grounds. The law states, in relation to a legal right of way

 

A de facto public right of way in England is a route that is legally considered a public right of way (a highway) due to a presumption of dedication by the landowner, which arises from long, continuous use by the public. This is established under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 and requires the following conditions to be met: 

• Public Use: The path must have been used by the public generally, not just a specific group of people (like friends or employees of the landowner).
• Duration: The use must have been continuous and without interruption for a full period of at least 20 years. The 20-year period is calculated retrospectively from the date the public's right to use the way is challenged (e.g., by the landowner putting up a locked gate or a clear notice).
• "As of Right": The public must use the way "as of right" (a term meaning "as if by right"). This means the use must be:
  • Without force (e.g., not breaking down fences or gates).
  • Without secrecy (e.g., not using it only at night).
  • Without permission (i.e., the landowner did not give express permission, or there was no clear indication of 'permissive access', which would defeat the claim).

It is clear and documented that this right has been exercised for long in excess of the 20 year period legally required. The paperwork suggests that Barnet Council are not aware of a public right of way through the property. This is clearly incorrect.

Any buyer who attempts to block this will face legal action and may claim remedy from Barnet Council. I would strongly suggest that Barnet Council removes the building from sale at this time. 

 

My personal view is that Barnet Council should not be selling off the heritage of the Borough. However if this folly is to be persued, at least ensure that the paperwork is in order and the council is not likely to face future lawsuits. I am concerned that due diligence does not appear to have been done. In the event that Coucil was previously genuinely unaware of the right of way, you have now been informed. I can obtain testomony from numerous locals who have used this over the last 35 years and are willing to confirm this in writing.

 

I have cc'd the opposition leader as a courtesy for visibility

 

Regards 

Roger Tichborne

 

I have to say that the response from Barnet Council's head of property asks more questions than it answers. I won't comment, as I am sure readers of this blog are more than clever enough to make up their own mind.

Dear Mr. Tichborne,

 

Thank you very much for your email last week to Cath Shaw, the Leader Barry and councillors regarding the proposed sale of Church Farmhouse.  I want to assure you that we are already aware of the potential issue you raised and have been working with our legal team to ensure that an appropriate response is included within the Commercial Property Standard Enquiries (CPSE).

 

The information you have seen was therefore incomplete, rather than incorrect, because the associated CPSE had not yet been uploaded. However, as the legal pack is still being finalised and the auction date is now just over a week away, we have decided to pull the property out of the upcoming auction. Rest assured, the property will be entered into a future auction once the full marketing details are available.

 

Thank you once again for taking the time to write to us about this.

 

 

Kind Regards,

 

Sal Waheed MRICS

Head of Property and Portfolio Management I Growth Directorate

(Property Services, Facilities Management, Print and Mail Services)

 

London Borough of Barnet, 2 Bristol Avenue, Colindale, NW9 4EW

I will simply draw attention to the previous blog I wrote about the subject on 4th November and the letter sent to Barnet, which I received no response to - barneteye.blogspot.com/2025/11/breathtaking-dishonesty-and-hypocisy.html

It is clear to me though that the intervention of this blog has potentially saved Barnet Council taxpayers a fortune in legal bills. This is one reason I still write a blog. Of course I doubt any Labour Councillors will thank me for doing their job of scrutinising what the Council officers are doing. The only difference is I don't get a ten grand allowance for doing this. 

Barnet Council - The land where everything is opaque

 I have just reviewed the minutes of the Barnet Council Cabinet meeting on the 17th June.

I asked the following question

In the paperwork, the following comments appears "The new Culture Strategy was launched as part of the ‘Art in Barnet’ campaign and a prestigious public art trail ‘Barnet Legends’ was commissioned with specialist public art agency Create London. The trail unveiled 20 commemorative artworks recognising historical figures who made an impact on the borough. 140 45 events were hosted across our libraries team as part of the UKSPF funded Creative Communities Programme. Activities included intergenerational events for ‘Grandparents Week’, green activities, a creative writing course, dance, crafts and an improvisation show for children." As the owner of Mill Hill Music Complex, London’s oldest independent music studios, which has hosted artists such as Amy Winehouse, Kate Nash, Flo and Raye, seeing all win prestigious Brit Awards, can I ask why local arts providers have not been contacted with regards to this initiative. Surely the musical history of Barnet should be properly celebrated and the contributions of these amazing artists, with strong Barnet links should have been recognised. I am also interested as to whether local artists were engaged to produce the art works. 

Dr Aashish Bansal also asked a public question. I received the following response from Barnet Council.

Further to the email below, you are welcome to attend the Cabinet meeting this evening. At the meeting, the Chair will provide a response in relation to your question. Following which, you may if you wish ask a supplementary question in respect of the response given. Further details about the meeting can be found here: https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=1010&MId=11718&Ver=4

I hadn't realised but this was the first time I have asked a question of the Labour administration, elected in 2022 and the first question to Cabinet since Richard Cornelius, former Tory Leader abolished the Cabinet system over a decade ago, in an attempt to improve transparency at Barnet Council. The Tories, for all their faults, would always provide a written answer, and you could decide whether to ask a follow up question. You also had time to compose it. I was shocked to learn that if I wanted to know the answer, I had to turn up in person. I also had no time to compose a thought out response. 

When I approached the chair, I specifically requested that responses from the committee be properly minuted and recorded. I was under the impression that this was agreed. However, when I reviewed the link above, there was no mention of what the member (Councillor Anne Clarke) who responded said. 

I have long been critical of the Cabinet system in local government. It means that decisions are made behind closed doors, without proper scrutiny from councillors. It makes councillors who are not in the cabinet largely redundant (not that their allowances reflect this). When Labour were elected, I suspected that they would have a few faults and make a few mistakes, but I did not anticipate that the would make the previous Tory regime look like a model of transparency and accountability.

It is clear to me that the reason that we no longer get proper responses and what we do get are not properly minuted is because the Barnet Labour Party have no interest in public accountability. To me it reeks of contempt for the public. I am most disappointed that my fellow Barnet Bloggers have seemingly lost interest in holding the council to account. All I can say is that I will continue to do the job that has fallen on my shoulders. If we want good governance in Barnet, we need citizens who are engaged in the process. The reason Councillors of both Tory and Labour persuasions don't want engagement is because it is nice and comfy for them if we take no interest. Ten years ago, the Barnet bloggers were setting the pace in the UK in terms of public accountability. The requirement for this is stronger than ever, but no one seems interested (apart from me) in doing it. If I wasn't so bloody minded I'd give up, but sadly for our councillors, in Barnet, the land where everything is opaque, I will make the case for transparency until they listen or I can't anymore. Barnet residents deserve better, but they won't get it unless they get off their arses and put some work in. 

What has happened to Mill Hill's missing councillor?

 Back in 2022, three councillors were elected for Mill Hill ward. All three were elected as Conservative councillors. Between then and now, something rather strange has happened. If you check the Barnet Council website you will see this.

It appears that one of our councillors, Laithe Jajeh is now standing as an independent coucillor. He has not turned up to any of the meetings which he is required to attend, although he did make it along for a Planning committee. This is his attendence record.

Councillors are normally required to attend two full council meetings a year, or they are booted out. His councillor surgeries have been cancelled until further notice.

When I first noticed that Mr Jajeh, who I have always got on well with on a personal level, had left the Conservative group, I rang him. He told me he was busy and would call me back in the evening. He rescheduled three times and then I heard no more. One of his former Conservative colleagues, who I get on well with, informed me that he was asked to leave the group as he'd stopped attending meetings. 

All Barnet Councillors get paid an allowance. Here is what they get.

London Borough of Barnet

Members Allowances 2023/24

A statement of the total amount paid to each Member of the Council in respect of allowances in the financial year 2023/24 is set out below:

Name		Total Payment (Gross) 2023/24
Ernest	Ambe	£10,809.00
Richard	Barnes	£10,809.00
Zahra	Beg	£10,809.00
Andrea	Bilbow	£10,809.00
Rishikesh	Chakraborty	£10,809.00
Anne	Clarke	£23,793.00
Pauline	Coakley Webb	£25,978.00
Dean	Cohen	£10,809.00
Philip	Cohen	£17,990.00
Joshua	Conway	£10,809.00
Sara	Conway	£25,978.00
Geoffrey	Cooke	£10,809.00
Alison	Cornelius	£10,809.00
Richard	Cornelius	£10,809.00
Edith	David	£10,809.00
Valerie	Duschinsky	£10,809.00
Paul	Edwards	£25,978.00
Claire	Farrier	£19,567.00
Shuey	Gordon	£10,809.00
Eva	Greenspan	£10,809.00
Jennifer	Grocock	£10,809.00
Rohit	Grover	£10,809.00
Kamal Bahadur	Gurung	£10,809.00
Lachhya Bahadur	Gurung	£10,809.00
Marianne	Haylett	£10,809.00
Ross	Houston	£37,453.00
Anne	Hutton	£12,071.00
Giulia	Innocenti	£10,809.00
Andreas	Ioannidis	£10,809.00
Laithe	Jajeh	£10,809.00
Humayune	Khalick	£10,809.00
Paul	Lemon	£10,809.00
David	Longstaff	£10,809.00
Linda	Lusingu	£10,809.00
Nick	Mearing-Smith	£10,809.00
Katherine	McGuirk	£10,809.00
Michael	Mire	£10,809.00
Arjun	Mittra	£19,567.00
Giulia	Monasterio	£15,805.00
Alison	Moore	£25,978.00
Ammar	Naqvi	£23,793.00
Nagus	Narenthira	£19,567.00
Matthew	Perlberg	£10,809.00
Alex	Prager	£10,809.00
Simon	Radford	£15,805.00
Barry	Rawlings	£44,445.00
Danny	Rich	£19,567.00
Timothy	Roberts	£19,567.00
Ella	Rose	£18,305.00
Gillian	Sargeant	£10,809.00
Alan	Schneiderman	£25,978.00
Mark	Shooter	£10,809.00
Elliot	Simberg	£10,809.00
Caroline	Stock	£10,809.00
Daniel	Thomas	£25,978.00
Liron	Velleman-Woodcock	£10,809.00
Antonakis	Vourou	£10,809.00
Lucy	Wakeley	£10,809.00
Sarah	Wardle	£10,809.00
Emma	Whysall	£15,805.00
Nigel	Young	£19,567.00
Peter	Zinkin	£10,809.00
Zakia	Zubairi	£10,809.00

 The ones who get more than the basic £10,809 have jobs with additional responsibiliities, such as committee chairs etc. I've highlighted Mr Jajeh's allowance. It was pretty clear that neither Mr Jajeh or his former colleagues wanted to talk too much about what was going on? Why? I've no idea although, I suspect that no one in Barnet Council wants a by election in an opposition ward. For Labour it would be a needless distraction as they run the council and for the Tories, it would be a potential banana skin and they'd have to explain what happened. 

It is all very well to have a cosy conspiracy of silence, however the reality is that the Mill Hill Taxpayers are paying £10,809 a year for a disengaged councillor.  It all seemed rather puzzling. Yesterday, when I was walking down Mill Hill Broadway, I noticed something that may explain the mystery of Mr Jajeh's disappearance. Barnet Council have supported the installation of a Succah, a small hut which forms part of the celebrations of the feast of Sameach. 

I small sign from Barnet Council, on headed paper had the inscription 

"Cllr Val Duschinsky and Cllr Elliot Simberg together will Barnet Council wish the Mill Hill Community a chag succot sameach.

We are delighted to support another first for Mill Hill. The Mill Hill Succah. We look forward to seeing the succah in the square as a permanent fixture in the community calendar. Kind Regards Barnet London Borough"

I immediately noticed that Mr Jajeh had not signed up to wish the community well for the season. One has to presume that  before the Council put an official notice on the hut, they would have sought permission from the local coucillor to add his name to to the best wishes. Is this an oversight or has Mr Jajeh deliberately snubbed the local community? If it is an oversight, I would expect an apology and a clarification from Barnet Council and Cllr Jajeh respectively. If it reflects Mr Jajeh's position on the erection of the hut, surely the people of Mill Hill are entitled to know what his views are.

Some sort of clarification from the local Conservatives should be issued. After all, they sponsored Mr Jajeh and he was elected under their banner. There will not be another council election until 2026. I do not think any Mill Hill resident will be happy to see over £21,000 of taxpayers money be paid to a councillor who doesn't attend meetings or sugeries. That is enough to fund a teaching assistant for one year at a special school. If nothing else we are owed a proper explanation. There is nothing on the Hendon Tories website to explain this strange sequence of events.