This blog is essentially my answer to the constant comments made to people that I complain because I'm bitter etc about the sale of the yard in 2005, and essentially anything I say can't be believed because it is vindictive.
What I believe is that a lot of the companies who bought into this yard believed that because it is in the middle of the countryside they could get away with things like burning all of their waste which they could not do in industrial estates in populated areas. So add this to pre-existing bad feeling on SMC's part, and it was inevitable that the family company's prior ownership of the yard would be used against me.
My personal feeling is that why should we have our home life made miserable by these companies.
Why should we have a permanent stench of plastics burning in our home; why should we have dust inside our house, all over the freezers in the garage and coating everything outside. Why should I have to constantly clean our house soakaway out to prevent waste from the main driveway blocking the soakaway pipes? Why should my wildlife area be destroyed by flooding and powerful floodlights angled over it?
How would the occupants like it if this was how they had to live.
Firstly SMC and Darwin Group in particular spin the tale that I am bitter because Parry's yard was sold. Absolute rubbish. Parry's was a Limited Company. The Company owned the land, individual members of the family were shareholders. Directors run the company, not shareholders, so even if I had been a shareholder I would have had no say in what happened on the land and no rights to dividends. So why would I be bitter about losing precisely nothing.
My attitude is that I didn't start Parry's and I didn't develop it into the company it was. I have never believed being a Parry made me any better than anyone else. No-one is any better or should be given less respect than anyone else as long as they treat other people with respect.
If people treat other people with contempt; bully others; and only care about grabbing every penny they can whilst ruining the environment and endangering everyones health, then they deserve no respect at all.
SMC have stated in writing that they believe I have a grievance because dad sold the shares instead of offering them to me. This is a despicable comment, quite frankly. It shows SMC don't have any comprehension of what a close family actually is. My family have always looked after one another. We don't back stab one another, and I think this comment says more about SMC than it does us.
Also why would I want to own this yard? I didn't want a huge pile of infilled land which could never be any use to me. I left Parry's in 1997, and my association ended there. I have never had any interest in the yard or anyone in there as long as our property and the natural environment are respected, and they are not.
Has my attitude to activities here changed since the yard changed hands? No.
Parry's stopped burning plastics after I pointed out the dangers. Two skips were put in the yard. One was for plastics etc and the other for wood. The plastics skip when full was taken to landfill. At this stage, with no internet, I didn't know how dangerous treated wood was when burnt. Now I do know and there are laws regarding this which companies in this industrial estate ignore.
So I acted against the burning of plastics BEFORE this yard changed hands, not afterwards.
Now lets look at how this animosity began.
Under Parry's Shropshire Mini Mix deposited waste concrete in a bunded area at the back of the yard. They never emptied this bund which meant they had to be told to empty it when it started overflowing into what was then woodland. This was EVERY TIME. I told dad, he told them to empty it. Again this was BEFORE dad left the company.
At this stage SMCs yard area was covered in sloppy cementitious waste which went straight into the ditches. By this stage we had internet and I became aware of the serious environmental damage releasing this waste into the ditch was having. SMC were provided with information on this 12 MONTHS before I contacted the Environment Agency.
I remember standing in sloppy waste trying to get something done and a Director of SMC saying it wasn't coming from them. There is no way of dealing with someone who makes such a ludicrous statement. Look at what you walked through
This is the state of the ditches:-
No-one has the right to destroy the natural environment in this way without being challenged. This may not be a National Park, but these ditches were dead zones and as SMC had done nothing to reduce the run off there was no option but to involve the Environment Agency.
To discharge to a water course the Environment Agency have to give consent. Despite SMC being in the yard for 16 years by this stage the Environment Agency didn't even know they were here i.e. they hadn't applied for consent.
After the drainage system failed these ditches recovered. This is the difference.
You now had life in these ditches.
I checked these ditches the other day and they look good. It should not have taken the Environment Agency to force change , should it?
After the Environment Agency had been out SMC told Parry's that I had reported PARRY'S to the Environment Agency, which wasn't the case because Parry's weren't dumping waste into the drains, SMC were, so this was totally malicious.
But the hostility towards me goes back far further than this. They first operated here without planning consent and were reported. SMC said I had done that. I hadn't, another ready mix company had, but did I get an apology? No chance.
When I opposed the expansion of the yard one of SMC's employees stated I was trying to put them out of a job. How? The cost of this woodland would have been a tiny proportion of the cost of the land as a whole because it had no value. Who gave him this impression?
Now SMC have to keep their yard area clean, but they never sweep the area in front of our house, which is another reason why our gully has failed. Why have SMC never cleaned the waste from against the kerb without being told to by the Council?
SMC caused the failure of the soakaway because of the waste which they wouldn't clean up off the drive. Why has the drive then been raised the other side of this soakaway to try to force the water onto our land? Why also has the drainage channel I put in to drain this water back onto the drive so it can go to the next drain down been deliberately blocked twice to try to force the water over our bund?
Remember firstly that this is the soakaway that I had been cleaning out and stopped because I was threatened for putting their waste on their drive. We also have no drainage to the ditch in this orchard because there is an old underground petrol tank in this area. So again the occupants of this industrial estate are trying to flood us.
Who really has the axe to grind here?
This tactic of discrediting me is also very popular with Darwin Group. When they altered the pipework the other side of our fence, altering the drainage run we had been connected into, our drainage consultant wrote to them to ask what they were doing. I quote:-
'We understand that your company are proposing to undertake some drainage works in this vicinity, and our clients are very concerned about these works...As we believe that these works may seriously affect our clients current position with regard to the existing land drainage at their property, we should be pleased if you would advise us of your intentions...In addition if these works affect our clients existing drainage rights then they will take action to preserve their current and future position'.
The response from Darwin Group:-
'We have no obligation to provide either you or your client with any details or information in relation to these works'.
We respectfully suggest that you establish the true nature of your clients intentions as it is well documented that Ms Parry has a long history of disputing any proposed works on the whole of the Shawbury Industrial Park, which was formerly owned by her family'.
This gets tiresome after 10 years, which is partly why the blog has been written. The other reason is the behaviour here is out of control, and because of this I have no option but to ensure what is happening here is in the public domain.
What I believe is that a lot of the companies who bought into this yard believed that because it is in the middle of the countryside they could get away with things like burning all of their waste which they could not do in industrial estates in populated areas. So add this to pre-existing bad feeling on SMC's part, and it was inevitable that the family company's prior ownership of the yard would be used against me.
My personal feeling is that why should we have our home life made miserable by these companies.
Why should we have a permanent stench of plastics burning in our home; why should we have dust inside our house, all over the freezers in the garage and coating everything outside. Why should I have to constantly clean our house soakaway out to prevent waste from the main driveway blocking the soakaway pipes? Why should my wildlife area be destroyed by flooding and powerful floodlights angled over it?
How would the occupants like it if this was how they had to live.
Firstly SMC and Darwin Group in particular spin the tale that I am bitter because Parry's yard was sold. Absolute rubbish. Parry's was a Limited Company. The Company owned the land, individual members of the family were shareholders. Directors run the company, not shareholders, so even if I had been a shareholder I would have had no say in what happened on the land and no rights to dividends. So why would I be bitter about losing precisely nothing.
My attitude is that I didn't start Parry's and I didn't develop it into the company it was. I have never believed being a Parry made me any better than anyone else. No-one is any better or should be given less respect than anyone else as long as they treat other people with respect.
If people treat other people with contempt; bully others; and only care about grabbing every penny they can whilst ruining the environment and endangering everyones health, then they deserve no respect at all.
SMC have stated in writing that they believe I have a grievance because dad sold the shares instead of offering them to me. This is a despicable comment, quite frankly. It shows SMC don't have any comprehension of what a close family actually is. My family have always looked after one another. We don't back stab one another, and I think this comment says more about SMC than it does us.
Also why would I want to own this yard? I didn't want a huge pile of infilled land which could never be any use to me. I left Parry's in 1997, and my association ended there. I have never had any interest in the yard or anyone in there as long as our property and the natural environment are respected, and they are not.
Has my attitude to activities here changed since the yard changed hands? No.
Parry's stopped burning plastics after I pointed out the dangers. Two skips were put in the yard. One was for plastics etc and the other for wood. The plastics skip when full was taken to landfill. At this stage, with no internet, I didn't know how dangerous treated wood was when burnt. Now I do know and there are laws regarding this which companies in this industrial estate ignore.
So I acted against the burning of plastics BEFORE this yard changed hands, not afterwards.
Now lets look at how this animosity began.
Under Parry's Shropshire Mini Mix deposited waste concrete in a bunded area at the back of the yard. They never emptied this bund which meant they had to be told to empty it when it started overflowing into what was then woodland. This was EVERY TIME. I told dad, he told them to empty it. Again this was BEFORE dad left the company.
At this stage SMCs yard area was covered in sloppy cementitious waste which went straight into the ditches. By this stage we had internet and I became aware of the serious environmental damage releasing this waste into the ditch was having. SMC were provided with information on this 12 MONTHS before I contacted the Environment Agency.
I remember standing in sloppy waste trying to get something done and a Director of SMC saying it wasn't coming from them. There is no way of dealing with someone who makes such a ludicrous statement. Look at what you walked through
This is the state of the ditches:-
No-one has the right to destroy the natural environment in this way without being challenged. This may not be a National Park, but these ditches were dead zones and as SMC had done nothing to reduce the run off there was no option but to involve the Environment Agency.
To discharge to a water course the Environment Agency have to give consent. Despite SMC being in the yard for 16 years by this stage the Environment Agency didn't even know they were here i.e. they hadn't applied for consent.
After the drainage system failed these ditches recovered. This is the difference.
I checked these ditches the other day and they look good. It should not have taken the Environment Agency to force change , should it?
After the Environment Agency had been out SMC told Parry's that I had reported PARRY'S to the Environment Agency, which wasn't the case because Parry's weren't dumping waste into the drains, SMC were, so this was totally malicious.
But the hostility towards me goes back far further than this. They first operated here without planning consent and were reported. SMC said I had done that. I hadn't, another ready mix company had, but did I get an apology? No chance.
When I opposed the expansion of the yard one of SMC's employees stated I was trying to put them out of a job. How? The cost of this woodland would have been a tiny proportion of the cost of the land as a whole because it had no value. Who gave him this impression?
Now SMC have to keep their yard area clean, but they never sweep the area in front of our house, which is another reason why our gully has failed. Why have SMC never cleaned the waste from against the kerb without being told to by the Council?
SMC caused the failure of the soakaway because of the waste which they wouldn't clean up off the drive. Why has the drive then been raised the other side of this soakaway to try to force the water onto our land? Why also has the drainage channel I put in to drain this water back onto the drive so it can go to the next drain down been deliberately blocked twice to try to force the water over our bund?
Remember firstly that this is the soakaway that I had been cleaning out and stopped because I was threatened for putting their waste on their drive. We also have no drainage to the ditch in this orchard because there is an old underground petrol tank in this area. So again the occupants of this industrial estate are trying to flood us.
Who really has the axe to grind here?
This tactic of discrediting me is also very popular with Darwin Group. When they altered the pipework the other side of our fence, altering the drainage run we had been connected into, our drainage consultant wrote to them to ask what they were doing. I quote:-
'We understand that your company are proposing to undertake some drainage works in this vicinity, and our clients are very concerned about these works...As we believe that these works may seriously affect our clients current position with regard to the existing land drainage at their property, we should be pleased if you would advise us of your intentions...In addition if these works affect our clients existing drainage rights then they will take action to preserve their current and future position'.
The response from Darwin Group:-
'We have no obligation to provide either you or your client with any details or information in relation to these works'.
We respectfully suggest that you establish the true nature of your clients intentions as it is well documented that Ms Parry has a long history of disputing any proposed works on the whole of the Shawbury Industrial Park, which was formerly owned by her family'.
This gets tiresome after 10 years, which is partly why the blog has been written. The other reason is the behaviour here is out of control, and because of this I have no option but to ensure what is happening here is in the public domain.
Comments