BJP Residential Ltd. Chartered Surveyors, Estate Agents, Auctioneers & Valuers

104 Lammas Street, Carmarthen. SA31 3AP Tel: 01267 236363 Email:[email protected] Website: www.bjpco.com

Registered Head Office: 104 Lammas Street, Carmarthen SA31 3AP. Registered in England NO. 6783306

I A R Jones BSc M.R.I.C.S., F.A.A.V J W Morgan J E Davies M.R.I.C.S.

Company Secretary Please Reply To: Carmarthen Office JW Morgan

9th November 2015

The Planning Inspectorate National Infrastructure Directorate Temple Quay House Bristol BS1 6PN

Notice of Landowners Objection to Brechfa Forest Connection Project Re: - Application for a Development Consent Order for the Brechfa Forest Connection Project Section 56(2) Planning Act 2008 and Regulation 8 Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Ref: - BFC/AH/100 EN020016

Our Reference - BFC-OP0001/

The majority of BJP clients have confirmed that they have no objection to the line being installed underground but have a continuing and ongoing objection to the line being constructed over ground in accordance to the outlined proposals.

We would confirm that all the following landowners object to the scheme on the following grounds: -

All BJP clients object to the method of delivery employed by WPD to gain a consent order to develop the scheme via CPO procedure without entering into full negotiations with retained BJP clients.

The proposed scheme causes significant diminution in Market value to the properties and landowners referred to below. There has been no discussion between the parties to discuss landowners overall losses including injurious affection and/or land reinstatement and disturbance payments. The rights that WPD wish to acquire to access maintain and repair/replace overhead line apparatus and shift and lift apparatus on clients retained land all needs to be discussed with appropriate clauses placed in easement/deed of grant legislation entered into between the parties in full and meaningful dialogue between the parties. The current situation with BJP having no meaningful dialogue with WPD has caused BJP clients to be seriously disenfranchisement. BJP are concerned that the procedures adopted by WPD will cause BJP retained clients to suffer significant diminution in Market Value of the retained property and the process adopted by WPD appears to be designed to avoid open and transparent negotiations between the parties and an overt reliance on the Inspector to rubber stamp the scheme with no requirement for WPD to adhere to the principles of compensation as set out in accordance to CPO procedure and recognised heads of terms set out in legislation.

We ask the Inspector to delay the process or seriously consider abandoning the whole process in accordance to our concerns in the way WPD have conducted themselves in the process to date.

More detailed landowner concerns are noted below. Forgive us but there is repetition in the objection letter but it is important that all landowners represented by BJP are fully set out. Appendix A and B are integral to the objection process and set out the frustration of BJP and Landowners when dealing with WPD and their paid representatives.

We would confirm that the objectors comprise: -

1. Mr and Mrs B Patten, Tiffany Lodge, Llwyn yr Eos, Rhydargaeau, Carmarthen SA33 6BL

Our Client has confirmed their continuing objection to the scheme. Our client has confirmed their property sits in close proximity to the preferred route and have confirmed that their property will be subject to depreciation in Market Value on the basis of a before and after assessment of the property’s Market Value, subject to the construction of the 132KW overhead transmission line in respect to the Brechfa Wind Farm Development. Our clients have confirmed that they have no objection to the line being installed underground but have a continuing and ongoing objection to the line being constructed over ground in accordance to the outlined proposals.

Our clients have confirmed their continual objection to the scheme in accordance to the general objections noted below and also with specific reference to their own property and in particular the visual intrusion the new power line will cause to their retained property, in addition to rights and easements which are proposed by Western Power Distribution to access and maintain the line.

In addition, by procedurally failing to agree times and dates for negotiations and by only agreeing to the payment of professional fees on a conditional basis, when signature of Deeds of Easement / Grant are attained that disallows objective professional representation, we again respectfully opinion that Western Power Distribution and its representatives are acting ultra vires, are Wednesbury unreasonable and in not allowing landowners to have the right to be heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

2 BFC-OP0001 2. Messrs Evans, Nant y Boncath, Alltwalis Road, Alltwalis, Carmarthen SA32 7DX

Our Clients have confirmed their continuing objection to the scheme. Our clients have confirmed their property sits in close proximity to the preferred route and have confirmed that their property will be subject to depreciation in Market Value on the basis of a before and after assessment of the property’s Market Value, subject to the construction of the 132KW overhead transmission line in respect to the Brechfa Wind Farm Development. Our clients have confirmed that they have no objection to the line being installed underground but have a continuing and ongoing objection to the line being constructed over ground in accordance to the outlined proposals.

Our clients have confirmed their continual objection to the scheme in accordance to the general objections noted above and also with specific reference to their own property and in particular the visual intrusion the new power line will cause to their retained property, in addition to rights and easements which are proposed by Western Power Distribution to access and maintain the line.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

In addition, our client’s farming practices will be much affected by the scheme as it is proposed. Our clients have confirmed that some of their best silage/grazing fields will be affected by the scheme and that the compensation schedule proposed by Western Power Distribution is not sufficient to cater for the losses caused by the scheme on our clients retained property.

3 BFC-OP0001 3. Mrs DA Davies, Llwyn-Newydd, Alltwalis Road, Carmarthen SA32 7DZ

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property. WPD have failed to negotiate with BJP in respect to land interest acquisition and the procedure adopted by WPD is not commensurate with guidance statements issued by DECC. The process recommended by the DECC has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD. In most cases the use of compulsory powers to install a new electric line requires the acquiring authority/electricity companies to try to negotiate a voluntary wayleave or an easement with landowners and/or occupiers of land before invoking more formal processes. This has not occurred and WPD have not abided to the guidance as proposed in their own documentation. In addition, by procedurally failing to agree times and dates for negotiations and by only agreeing to the payment of professional fees on a conditional basis, when signature of Deeds of Easement / Grant are attained that disallows objective professional representation, we again respectfully opinion that Western Power Distribution and its representatives are acting ultra vires, are Wednesbury unreasonable and in not allowing landowners to have the right to be heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

4. Mrs F Morris and Messrs HW & EH Davies, Pant-y-Gof, Alltwalis Road, Alltwalis, Carmarthen SA32 7DY

4 BFC-OP0001 Our clients have confirmed their continual objection to the scheme in accordance to the general objections noted above and also with specific reference to their own property and in particular the visual intrusion the new power line will cause to their retained property, in addition to rights and easements which are proposed by Western Power Distribution to access and maintain the line.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

5. Mr & Mrs H V & KI Miles, Gwili Vale, Pontarsais, Carmarthen SA32 7DU

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

5 BFC-OP0001 to install a new electric line requires the acquiring authority/electricity companies to try to negotiate a voluntary wayleave or an easement with landowners and/or occupiers of land before invoking more formal processes. This has not occurred and WPD have not abided to the guidance as proposed in their own documentation.

6. Mr and Mrs LET Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, Alltwalis Road, Alltwalis, Carmarthen SA32 7DZ

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

6 BFC-OP0001 7. Mr W & O Bowen, Lan Cottage, Carmarthen, Carmarthenshire SA32 8DE

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

8. DJP Davies & Sons, Crugan Fawr, Llandyfaelog, Kidwelly SA17 5RE

7 BFC-OP0001 Our clients have confirmed their continual objection to the scheme in accordance to the general objections noted above and also with specific reference to their own property and in particular the visual intrusion the new power line will cause to their retained property, in addition to rights and easements which are proposed by Western Power Distribution to access and maintain the line.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

9. Mr and Mrs R Eagle, 33 Parc Starling, Johnston, Carmarthen SA31 3HX

Our clients have confirmed their continuing objection to the scheme. Our clients have confirmed that they have no objection to the line being installed underground but have a continuing and ongoing objection to the line being constructed over ground in accordance to your proposals.

The development as proposed will also create rights of way across our client’s retained property which will also have a negative influence on the value of our clients retained property.

8 BFC-OP0001 before invoking more formal processes. This has not occurred and WPD have not abided to the guidance as proposed in their own documentation.

10. Mr CO Evans, Capel Farm, Bancycapel, Carmarthen SA32 8EB

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD. In addition, our client’s farming practices will be much affected by the scheme as it is proposed. Our clients have confirmed that some of their best silage/grazing fields will be affected by the scheme and that the compensation schedule proposed by Western Power Distribution is not sufficient to cater for the losses caused by the scheme on our clients retained property.

9 BFC-OP0001 In addition, by procedurally failing to agree times and dates for negotiations and by only agreeing to the payment of professional fees on a conditional basis, when signature of Deeds of Easement / Grant are attained that disallows objective professional representation, we again respectfully opinion that Western Power Distribution and its representatives are acting ultra vires, are Wednesbury unreasonable and in not allowing landowners to have the right to be heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

11. Mr and Mrs RHW & BL Howells, Pentremawr, Rhydargaeau, Carmarthen SA33 6BH

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

In addition, by procedurally failing to agree times and dates for negotiations and by only agreeing to the payment of professional fees on a conditional basis, when signature of Deeds

10 BFC-OP0001 of Easement / Grant are attained that disallows objective professional representation, we again respectfully opinion that Western Power Distribution and its representatives are acting ultra vires, are Wednesbury unreasonable and in not allowing landowners to have the right to be heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

12. Mr and Mrs RC & PD Jones, Penyfedw Farm, Llandyfaelog, Kidwelly SA17 5RD

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

11 BFC-OP0001 vires, are Wednesbury unreasonable and in not allowing landowners to have the right to be heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

13. Messrs DA & WG Jones, Tyllwyd Mawr Farm, Llangunnor, Carmarthen SA32 8EL

Our Clients have confirmed their continuing objection to the scheme. Our clients have confirmed their property sits in close proximity to the preferred route and have confirmed that their property will be subject to depreciation in Market Value on the basis of a before and after assessment of the property’s Market Value, subject to the construction of the 132KW overhead transmission line in respect to the Brechfa Wind Farm Development. Our clients have confirmed that they have no objection to the line being installed over ground but have a continuing and ongoing objection to the line being constructed until WPD have discussed fully the injurious affection and diminution in market valve caused to the value of the farming unit.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

12 BFC-OP0001 heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

14. Mr P Morris, Beaulah Fawr, Llangunnor Carmarthen SA31 2LS

Our Clients have confirmed their continuing objection to the scheme. Our clients have confirmed their property sits in close proximity to the preferred route and have confirmed that their property will be subject to depreciation in Market Value on the basis of a before and after assessment of the property’s Market Value, subject to the construction of the 132KW overhead transmission line in respect to the Brechfa Wind Farm Development. Our clients have confirmed that they have no objection to the line being installed over ground but have a continuing and ongoing objection to the line being constructed until WPD have discussed fully the injurious affection and diminution in market valve caused to the value of the farming unit.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

13 BFC-OP0001

15. Messrs DA, AJ & Mr MP Reed, Glyncaredig, Rhydargaeau, Carmarthen SA32 7DR

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

16. Mr and Mrs HD & SM Walters, Nantygoetre Uchaf, Ferryside, Carmarthenshire SA17 5YA

14 BFC-OP0001 The development as proposed will also create easements and rights of way across our client’s retained property which will have a further negative influence on the value of our clients retained property.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

17. Mr and Mrs RDH & M Bowen, Lan House Farm, Idole, Carmarthen SA32 8DE

15 BFC-OP0001 Our clients have confirmed their continual objection to the scheme in accordance to the general objections noted above and also with specific reference to their own property and in particular the visual intrusion the new power line will cause to their retained property, in addition to rights and easements which are proposed by Western Power Distribution to access and maintain the line.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

18. Mr DJB Thomas, Gwillionen, Bolahaul Road, Cwmffrwd, Carmarthen SA32 8EB

Our clients have confirmed their continual objection to the scheme in accordance to the general objections noted above and also with specific reference to their own property and in

16 BFC-OP0001 particular the visual intrusion the new power line will cause to their retained property, in addition to rights and easements which are proposed by Western Power Distribution to access and maintain the line.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

Our clients have recently commissioned wind turbine on his land and part of the planning process was that all cables should be placed underground in order not to form a visual intrusion.

19. Mr Alun Thomas, Nantcwmgwili Farm, Llanllawddog, Carmarthen SA33 6JP

Our clients retained property is situated some distance from their main holding. We would therefore consider there to be no injurious affection to the main holding at this time but reserve our rights in respect to the visual intrusion as and when the line has been constructed.

Our client has however retains valuable grazing within the forest area for silage and aftermath cattle grazing and has confirmed that the intended use of the access tracks by Western Power Distribution and their contractors will severely affect the ongoing quiet enjoyment that our client currently enjoys in respect to the right of access across the access tracks to our clients retained property. Our clients are so concerned that they consider that during the construction phase of the wind farm, it will be nigh on impossible to utilise the land in question and would therefore consider it imperative that meetings take place between WPD and our clients to determine the best course of action to ensure that our client continues to enjoy the quiet enjoyment of the land or that there are sufficient safe guards put in place to compensate our

17 BFC-OP0001 client or ensure that there remains a continual access to the retained land farmed by Messrs Thomas of Nantcwmgwili.

20. DJP Davies & Sons, Llwynfilltir, Cwmffrwd, Carmarthen SA32 8ED

Our clients occupy the property as sitting tenants and will seek an undertaking from WPD that all losses will be compensated as a direct result of the scheme in the event that the development ensues. In the event of the scheme, our client seeks an undertaking from WPD that provides an assurance that our client will have access to the retained land farmed at all times and that all losses directly related to the scheme will be reasonably compensated.

21. Mr GA Dufty, Bryn Farm, Llanpumsaint Carmarthenshire SA33 6BY

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

We would confirm at this time that there is a continuing objection to the scheme and the planned apparatus to connect the wind farm to the electricity grid.

We would confirm that the following landowners object to the scheme on the following grounds: -

18 BFC-OP0001 The proposed scheme causes diminution in Market value to the properties referred to. In addition, access channels to the apparatus across retained land will be created, affecting Market Value.

22. James Awelfryn Peniel Carmarthenshire

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

Mr James has also confirmed that the route of the apparatus was changed without his knowledge or consent.

We would confirm at this time that there is a continuing objection to the scheme and the planned apparatus to connect the wind farm to the electricity grid.

19 BFC-OP0001 client currently enjoys in respect to the right of access across the access tracks to our clients retained property. Our clients are so concerned that they consider that during the construction phase of the wind farm, it will be nigh on impossible to utilise the land in question and would therefore consider it imperative that meetings take place between WPD and our clients to determine the best course of action to ensure that our client continues to enjoy the quiet enjoyment of the land or that there are sufficient safe guards put in place to compensate our client or ensure that there remains a continual access to the retained land farmed by Messrs Thomas of Nantcwmgwili.

23. Mr B & Mrs Y Kilkelly, Langlynadda, Alltwalis

The development as proposed will also create easements and rights of way across our client’s retained property which will have a further negative influence on the value of our clients retained property. Our clients have confirmed their continual objection to the scheme in accordance to the general objections noted above and also with specific reference to their own property and in particular the visual intrusion the new power line will cause to their retained property, in addition to rights and easements which are proposed by Western Power Distribution to access and maintain the line.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

Mr James has also confirmed that the route of the apparatus was changed without his knowledge or consent.

We would confirm at this time that there is a continuing objection to the scheme and the planned apparatus to connect the wind farm to the electricity grid.

20 BFC-OP0001

In addition or clients also reserve their position in respect to the compensation provisions acknowledged in the principles set in accordance to Stokes v. Cambridge Corporation (1961).

24. Mr & Mrs Davies of Nant Farm, Llangunnor Carmarthen Carmarthenshire. SA32 8AA.

The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property which has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD.

Mr James has also confirmed that the route of the apparatus was changed without his knowledge or consent.

We would confirm at this time that there is a continuing objection to the scheme and the planned apparatus to connect the wind farm to the electricity grid.

In addition, by procedurally failing to agree times and dates for negotiations and by only agreeing to the payment of professional fees on a conditional basis, when signature of Deeds

21 BFC-OP0001 of Easement / Grant are attained that disallows objective professional representation, we again respectfully opinion that Western Power Distribution and its representatives are acting ultra vires, are Wednesbury unreasonable and in not allowing landowners to have the right to be heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

Electricity Act DECC Guidance Consents and planning applications for national energy infrastructure projects

Most rights to install an electric line and to keep it installed, together with access to the land, are secured voluntarily between parties. However, if an agreement cannot be reached through negotiation, the electricity companies, who have a public service role to undertake, have access to compulsory procedures. The electricity companies may seek a Compulsory Purchase Order under Schedule 3 to the 1989 Act or a “necessary” wayleave under Schedule 4 to the 1989 Act.

In respect to this scheme there has been no negotiation between the parties and we have been in constant correspondence with WPD requesting an unconditional fee structure to facilitate the process. We have confirmed that we are unable to negotiate with WPD until a fee agreement is reached which is not conditional and we can relay this to landowners affected by the scheme and inform the landowners that we are able to act on their behalf in a fair and transparent manner where no party can censure the land agent with a criticism that he ‘forced’ or ‘coerced’ a land owner into signing entry agreement prior to the CPO procedure.

In most cases the use of compulsory powers to install a new electric line occurs under Schedule 4 to the Electricity Act 1989. It is usual for electricity companies to try to negotiate a voluntary wayleave or an easement with landowners and/or occupiers of land before invoking more formal processes. This has not occurred.

We understand that it would be considered reasonable for WPD to use CPO procedure to install a new electric line where an agreement cannot be reached but the negotiation has never occurred. The generic HoTs received this week also do not accord to the literature adopted by WPD at the start of the scheme. A recent meeting between WPD and BJP with WPDs solicitors present also remarked that WPD would not consider any payment to the landowner if the early entry agreements were not signed. BJP were promised copies of the proposed generic HoTs but these were only received on Friday the 6th November 2015 at 16.09 giving me no time to consider the HoTs and discussing these with landowners before the 12.00 noon deadline imposed by the Inspectorate for Monday 9th November 2015.

In respect to the literature provided by WPD there appears to be serious inconsistences. We refer the inspector to the undated ‘Guide to payments for landowners’ and the change in literature noted in the generic HoTs supplied to BJP on Friday the 6th November 2015 at 16.09 In respect to costs we would again refer the inspector to our reasonable request that all meetings to discuss HoTs and landowners concerns should be met on an open basis in accordance to a reasonable fee structure based on quantum meruit. Whilst WPD have suggested a fee structure this is not appropriate as it is conditionally based.

DECC guidance and Electricity statutes make provision for negotiation prior to the commencement of a compulsory purchase procedure. In providing incentive payment levels that reduce commensurately if no agreement by a certain date is reached to nil that are underpinned by easement payments that are well short of comparable evidence does not amount to a negotiation. We can provide evidence of negotiated payments for over ground 132kV apparatus in advance of that being provided which reflected payments for the apparatus / injurious affection. In addition it is standard practice in a negotiation to discuss the potential levels of injurious affection and the parameters for provable disturbance and land damage. By commencing a compulsory purchase procedure in May 2015 without making provision for equitable negotiation with landowners we respectfully opinion that Western

22 BFC-OP0001 Power Distribution as a statutory undertaker and its representatives are in breach of Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights as incorporated into English domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998.

In addition to the above please note the following overall objections in respect to our clients concerns and ongoing objection to this scheme.

A. Clients Concerns & Objections

• The majority of BJP landowner clients affected by the proposals referenced above have confirmed their continuing objection to the scheme in respect to the current proposals • The majority of BJP landowner clients have confirmed that they have no objection to the line being installed underground but the majority of BJP landowner clients have a continuing and ongoing objection to the line being constructed over ground in accordance to the outlined proposals.

• The majority of BJP landowner clients have confirmed their properties sit in close proximity to the preferred route and have confirmed that their properties will be subject to depreciation in Market Value on the basis of a before and after assessment of the property’s Market Value, subject to the construction of the 132KW overhead transmission line in respect to the Brechfa Wind Farm Development. • A number of BJP clients have requested route amendment. This has generally been ignored by WPD with little or no consultation. Many landowners have received no or little feedback from WPD regarding alternative routing.

• Some BJP clients have been subject to modified apparatus on their land without appropriate consultation.

• All BJP clients are very concerned there has been no negotiation between BJP and WPD in respect to compensation payments including claims for injurious affection in respect to the scheme in its current guise.

• BJP are concerned that land owners interests are being disenfranchised.

• WPD have been very selective about meeting times refusing to come to landowners meetings organised on two separate dates, refusing to meet after 7.00pm most week evenings and seemingly not wishing to conduct meetings on Friday afternoons after 2.00pm. The majority of BJP clients have day time jobs and cannot take time off work and would prefer weekend or evening meetings.

• WPD have not stated whether they will pay landowners for their time based on reasonable disturbance.

• WPD have failed to pay landowners affected by the scheme compensation in respect to their own literature in respect to ‘surreys’ to include topographical and ecological 23 BFC-OP0001 surveys. There has never been an explanation in respect what is meant by ‘walkovers’ which has caused confusion and the majority of literature in respect to access requirements state that they are required for topographical or ecological surveys. • WPD have not stated whether they will pay landowners for their time based on reasonable disturbance and WPD are not prepared to meet in the evening when most people finish work.

• Landowners have confirmed that there have been many instances when surveying appointments have been made and the surveyors employed by WPD have failed to show up with no explanation or apology given and in only one case has an ex gratia payment been made to compensate the landowner.

B. BJP Concerns & Objections

• The overhead line as planned by WPD will have significant injurious affection on our clients retained property. WPD have failed to negotiate with BJP in respect to land interest acquisition and the procedure adopted by WPD is not commensurate with guidance statements issued by DECC. The process recommended by the DECC has not been reflected in the compensation schedule proposed by WPD. In most cases the use of compulsory powers to install a new electric line requires the acquiring authority/electricity companies to try to negotiate a voluntary wayleave or an easement with landowners and/or occupiers of land before invoking more formal processes. This has not occurred and WPD have not abided to the guidance as proposed in their own documentation.

• In addition, by procedurally failing to agree times and dates for negotiations and by only agreeing to the payment of professional fees on a conditional basis, when signature of Deeds of Easement / Grant are attained that disallows objective professional representation, we again respectfully opinion that Western Power Distribution and its representatives are acting ultra vires, are Wednesbury unreasonable and in not allowing landowners to have the right to be heard in a negotiation prior to the commencement of compulsion proceedings in breach of natural justice.

• Freedom Group state that their surveyors have experience negotiating injurious affection claims on behalf of their electricity distribution (DNO) clients, including existing apparatus and as part of the overall compensation package for NSIP schemes but there has been no negotiation between Freedom acting on behalf of WPD and BJP in respect to injurious affection claims.

• BJP have dealt with three Wayleave Officers but we have no knowledge of their professional qualifications or experience in dealing with land compensation and valuation matters under CPO procedure. Can the Inspector confirm the qualifications of the individuals employed by WPD and their experiences in dealing with land compensation including injurious affection matters?

• WPD have refused to discuss payments for injurious affection. The HoTs we have managed to obtain from a third party landowner not represented by BJP on Monday evening the 2nd November 2015 makes reference to Incentive/Easement payments but there is no reference in the documentation to injurious affection. What is the reason why reference to injurious affection has intentionally been excluded from the HoTs? We believe that any reference to injurious affection should be included in the HoTs. We believe if a Landowner signs the Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line 24 BFC-OP0001 Agreement for Grant and Easement that there property interests may be disenfranchised.

• WPD have failed to explain the process of injurious affection to landowners. In WPD literature Payment Instalments WPD state ‘Balance of the payment on completion of the Easement and at the same time any additional payment for any injurious affection that has already been assessed and agreed’. The HoTs do not follow the same procedure that WPD have stated they would adhere to in their Guide to payments for landowners.

• BJP were only aware of the HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement late on Monday evening the 2nd November 2015 and we were only fortunate to see these by kindly being shown the documentation from a third party landowner not represented by BJP . The HoTs make reference to Incentive/Easement payments but there is no reference in the signed HoTs to injurious affection which have been annexed to a separate document. What is the reason why reference to injurious affection has intentionally been excluded from the HoTs? We believe that any reference to injurious affection should be included in the HoTs. We believe if a Landowner signs the HoT’s that there property interests may be disenfranchised.

• WPD have failed to explain the payment schedule in the event that no agreement has been reached between the Landowner and WPD the Acquiring Authority? Landowners represented by BJP have requested an explanation from WPD what is the situation in the event that landowners do not sign grant and easement within the prescribed time scales [not yet known or explained by WPD] and whether all payments for apparatus will be withdrawn thus effectively forcing the Landowners to apply to Lands Tribunal?

• WPD have not provided any time guidelines in respect to the prescribed time scales for the Agreement for Grant and Easement.

• WPD have provided BJP with unrealistic and unworkable timescales to organise 24 landowner meetings. Please note the trail of correspondence attached Appendix A. WPD will try to suggest that BJP and their clients have been unreasonable or obstructive but this is not the case and we have already asked that landowners and BJP be paid for their reasonable time to meet to discuss the HoTs The first request to organise meetings within a week with no understanding what the meeting were about was unreasonable. We attempted to accommodate the schedule proposed by WPD the second time around but did not fully understand what the meetings were about as we were not given a copy of a generic HoTs before the meetings and our suggested times and in the evening did not accord to the sensitives of WPD representatives.

• BJP proposed meeting to take place at weekends running forward from mid- September subject to client agreement or evening appointments starting from 7.00PM onwards or in the alternative BJP provided the second week of November to block book the whole week for WPD to arrange landowner meetings. WPD have not responded.

25 BFC-OP0001 • BJP invited WPD to a landowners meeting on the 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Centre to discuss generic terms in respect to the proposed development. WPD declined the invitation.

• BJP were only provided with an electronic copy of the HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement late on the 6th November 2015 at 16:11 after repeated attempts to have generic copy of the HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement on numerous occasions at least before landowner meetings so that legal advice could be obtained before landowner meetings.

• BJP would confirm that the unacceptable late delivery of the HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement has left his clients disenfranchised

• In a meeting held at St Peters Hall in Carmarthen on the 29th July solicitors acting for WPD threatened BJP that unless Early entry agreements were conclude to the satisfaction of WPD all payments would be withdrawn and that WPD would not be considering claims for injurious affection as wooden poles would not attract payments for injurious affection. We disagreed and a request was made for a generic copy of the HoTs which we eventually received on the 6th November 2015 at 16:11 leaving it too late for us to consider the HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement and relaying our thoughts before the deadline imposed on landowners by the procedure.

• BJP on behalf of their clients have requested an explanation whether any payment or all payments suggested by WPD in their schedule of payments will be withdrawn in the event landowners refuse early entry following the meeting at St Peters Hall in Carmarthen. No explanation has been forthcoming from WPD. My understanding of the procedure to be adopted by WPD unless clarified by WPD is that if landowners refuse early entry, all payments proposed by WPD will be withdrawn and landowners will need to apply to Lands Tribunal for any form of compensation? It is important that WPD clears up its literature on compensation procedure regarding landowner’s losses.

• BJP and their clients would appreciate an explanation in respect to the procedure WPD will adopt in respect to injurious affection in accordance to the contradictory literature issued by WPD as fully explained above.

• WPD have still not stated whether they are prepared to pay BJP unconditional fees for meeting landowners to discuss HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement as requested by WPD.

26 BFC-OP0001 C. Conclusions

The proposed scheme causes significant diminution in Market value to the properties and landowners referred to above.

There has been no discussion between the parties to discuss landowners overall losses including injurious affection and/or land reinstatement and disturbance payments in accordance to the advice from DECC.

The current situation with BJP having no meaningful dialogue with WPD has caused BJP clients to be seriously disenfranchisement. BJP received a generic copy of the HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement late on the 6th November 2015 at 16:11 after repeated attempts to have generic copy of the HoTs and Key Terms Sheet - Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement and we have been unable to discuss the landowners requirements in respect to a letter of objection due to time constraints which has prejudiced BJP clients statutory rights and caused client disenfranchisement.

BJP are concerned that the techniques adopted by WPD will cause BJP retained clients to suffer significant diminution in Market Value of the retained property and the process adopted by WPD appears to be designed to avoid open and transparent negotiations between the parties and an overt reliance on the Inspector to rubber stamp the scheme with no requirement for WPD to adhere to the principles of compensation as set out in accordance to CPO procedure and recognised heads of terms set out in legislation.

We are experienced Chartered Surveyors and have in the past 25 years we have been involved in CPO procedure in respect to land acquisition requirements to facilitate the Carmarthen Eastern Bypass and the A485 Road Realignment and St Clears to Red Roses bypass. In respect to these dealings we have dealt with experienced Chartered Surveyors employed by the Acquiring Authority and have in the part entered into transparent and rational negotiations to facilitate these developments whilst at the same time ensuring the land owners interests are safeguarded in accordance to the current CPO legislation. Such dialogue has been completely lacking with WPD and we are not aware that ‘Wayleave Officers’ are suitably qualified to deal with valuation matters.

We ask the Inspector to delay the process or seriously consider abandoning the whole process in accordance to our concerns in the way WPD have conducted themselves in the process to date causing land owner disenfranchisement.

More detailed landowner concerns are noted above.

Appendix A and B are integral to the objection process and set out the frustration of BJP and Landowners when dealing with WPD and their paid representatives and concerns in the way WPD have conducted themselves in this process.

Please acknowledge safe receipt of this letter.

Yours sincerely

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

27 BFC-OP0001

Appendix 1

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN WPD AND BJP TO ORGANISE LANDOWNERS MEETINGS TO NEGOTIATE PAYMENTS PRIOR TO CPO PROCEDURE

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 06 November 2015 16:11 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Paul Clough ; Lauren ; Matthew Bickford ; [email protected]; [email protected]; rhodri.thomas@wales.gov.uk Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Thank you for your two e-mails of today, the content of which is noted.

Western Power Distribution will be incorporating responses to the points raised in your recent communications into the letter it is preparing for your consideration.

As requested, I attach a sample overhead Heads of Terms document. In the interest of clarity for all parties we have been advised to send Heads of Terms directly to all your clients which we will be doing with copies sent to you. This is because we have been unable to arrange meetings for a prolonged period but we are still very much committed to meet with you and your clients and trust that you will assist us in this regard.

Yn ddiffuant

Nia NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 06 November 2015 13:50 To: Nia Wyn Davies Cc: Paul Clough; 'Lauren'; Matthew Bickford; ''; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market

6th November 2015

Dear Nia

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market & Letter To The Planning Inspectorate

I have just left the cattle market to check my e mails to see whether you have managed to send the HoTs across by email or deliver by hand. I have discussed these with several clients and I think it best that you send me all the HoTs; for all my clients, as I am concerned that what I have been telling clients may be factually incorrect.

As we have nearly 1,000 cattle in today, it’s going to be a very busy day and I cannot monitor my e mails.

If you send the HoTs can you also send them to [email protected] and [email protected] so Celia can monitor both computers? Please can you also phone/text me to confirm they have been sent across.

I have drafted a letter to The Inspectorate.

The letter I would like to address to The Inspectorate needs to include, amongst other things, a request for the inspector to delay/stop the procedure until the facts noted in your literature have been cleared up and fully explained by WPD. Of course I cannot do this without receipt of HoTs generic or otherwise without falling foul of the inspector.

There appears to be a significant and material difference between your original literature/brochures received in 2014 by landowners and land agents. I have been advising my clients in good faith in accordance to the original literature we all received from WPD. Two areas of disagreement/confusion surround:-

• My advice in accordance to the original literature suggested that WPD was incorrect in not paying out compensation for topographical surveys as the information contained in the literature was misleading. I will ask the inspector to consider this.

• My advice to landowners in accordance to the original literature in respect to injurious affection now appears to be incorrect. The original literature I understand reads that WPD would deal with injurious affection at the negotiation stage ‘Balance of the payment on completion of the Easement and at the same time any additional payment for any injurious affection that has already been assessed and agreed’. When I rechecked the original brochure last night this is clearly stated. Please confirm if my understanding of this statement is not correct and if I am in any way confused or have misread this statement. As I have said I may be incorrect but based on your HoTs which I have not received generically or otherwise and which I only managed to study very superficially at the end of the landowners meeting and take quick notes on, it appears that reference to this guidance has been deleted from the HoTs.

2 BFC-OP0001

I am afraid that I am very concerned about land owners retained interests and any advice I have given landowners which may be factually incorrect.

If I am wrong/confused then please correct me and explain the procedure in respect to HoTs and signature of the early entry agreement. Unless I am corrected by WPD and you tell me differently I am concerned that you have changed your own procedure without notifying land owners and their agents/solicitors in respect to a very important rule of land take being the element of injurious affection and the effect of this on landowners retained property.

If indeed my advice is incorrect then I will need to notify my clients in respect to this serious error on my behalf. Please advise as a matter of urgency?

The letter I would like to send to the inspectorate needs to accord accurately in respect to your development proposals as the acquiring authority. I need to fully reflect my clients concerns about their property interest. One area specifically of concern and importance to the landowner and their agent is the method of compensation. The principles of the CPO procedure need to be fully addressed to the landowner by the acquiring authority so that passing information from the acquiring authorities is fully transparent and clear in its guidance to the landowner. Landowners need to fully understand their rights in this procedure and be provided with clear guidance in respect to areas of compensation afforded to the landowner to ensure that the landowner is not financially penalised by the scheme or disenfranchised.

As I have not received HoTs from WPD I cannot bring this issue up with The Inspector because if my logic and reasoning is incorrect and I am considered to be unreasonable in my professional behaviour I am concerned that the inspector will consider me as being unreasonable; and in not representing the facts correctly I am concerned that Bjp could be liable for costs.

Unfortunately I will be unable to submit my letter addressing the scheme to the inspectorate outlining my clients concerns until I am in respect of HoTs and fully appreciate the proposals of WPD as the acquiring authority.

The letter needs to go by 5.00 pm tonight by recorded delivery otherwise I am going to miss the delivery date specified by the inspector.

Please respond as a matter of urgency

Regards Iwan Bjp

3 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 06 November 2015 10:24 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Cc: 'Paul Clough' ; 'Lauren' ; 'Matthew Bickford' ; '' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market

6th November 2015

Dear Nia

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market

We wrote a detailed e mail letter to you on the 9th October 2015 regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project and so far we have not received any substantive reply from WPD the Acquiring Authority.

We invited WPD to a Landowners meeting in Carmarthen Livestock Centre on Monday the 2nd of November 2015 to discuss the project in generic terms but WPD declined to attend for unknown reasons. As I have already pointed out Landowners discussed the scheme in generic terms. Concerns for landowners included questions on why the apparatus could not have been installed underground for the whole length of the scheme and landowners wanted a better understanding of the cost difference between over ground routing and underground routing. Furthermore landowners wanted to discuss with WPD the procedure to be adopted by WPD in respect to the CPO Procedure and timescales that WPD would require in respect to land take and access arrangements and how the Deed of Grant would affect landowners retained property in particular if apparatus needed to be moved. Landowners brought up many of their concerns including the following questions which WPD could have answered on the night. These included:-

• Would landowner may be obliged to inform their insurers of the intended installation of the poles and would this increase the insurance premium and who would pay for this? • Would the insurer require a landowner to ensure everyone who worked adjacent to the poles be a named person and who would pay for this administration? • Would the insurer require the landowner to ensure that all the named persons who would be using machinery near the poles be properly trained in accordance with the H&S at work Act, including themselves, their employees and contractors to ensure that should an incident occur whilst operating machinery that brought down wires and made a machine ‘live’, that the operator was fully aware of the procedures necessary to avoid their own fatality. • How does the landowner ensure contractors have been properly trained? • How many operators presently know how to exit a ‘live’ machine safely? • Would a landowner have a duty of care anyway (as in above) to discharge towards his employees, contractors and the public, hence employers/public liability insurance. 4 BFC-OP0001

• How far would his insurers go to cover losses? • Would the insurance cover need to extend to WPD personnel • Should a machine bring down a pole or wires accidentally by striking them or guy-wires (as per a recent news item in the farming press) who would be responsible for the cost of the repairs. • One landowner understand that a landowner has to look after the poles etc? How far does this responsibility go? Would WPD indemnify the landowner or would his own insurers be expected to pay up (providing the landowner has met their insurer’s conditions). • Who would pay for a death? • If there was an incident requiring WPD personnel to enter a landowner’s property unannounced, who would be responsible for their safety if there was livestock or obstacles left in the field at the time and an accident occurred? • If cattle have to be moved in an emergency requiring the landowner to be got from his bed in the middle of the night in a howling storm, would the landowner be compensated? • Many landowners expressed their concern that there was a lot to consider when poles were put onto someone’s land and, a lot of things needed to be negotiated to ensure that a landowner was not disadvantaged if a tragedy occurred for which by some small omission they could be held personally responsible. • Landowners expressed concern that you could potential be at risk and could potentially lose everything they have worked for all their lives.

I could only provide some comfort to some of these questions but these were questions that WPD could and should have answered in an open forum.

No financial discussions took part in the meeting regarding individual landowners and landowners were surprised that WPD elected not to attend the landowners meeting. In the meeting there was no discussion in respect to the financial consideration of individual landowners only the effects and impact of the scheme on the valve of retained property.

My clients asked whether the Inspector would see through this charade that WPD were unable to attend due to commercial sensitivities.

All landowners present were shocked when WPD elected not to attend and were incensed when they learnt that the excuse was on the pretext of financial confidentiality. All landowners confirmed that they would not/never have been remotely interested in discussing their financial arrangements in an open meeting with WPD and many landowners came primarily to discuss the scheme in the presence of other landowners to see what everyone thought about the scheme.

Such discussions were not unreasonable and a meeting with WPD would have been beneficial to discuss the scheme, the payment schedule and timing for this and any claims for injurious affection and how this would have worked and answer all landowner questions including the ones listed above. None of the landowner’s requests were unreasonable.

In the meeting I was fortunately provided with the Heads of Terms addressed to a landowner not represented by Bjp but who was at the landowners meeting to meet up with WPD. You promised to send a copy of the HoTs to my e mail account but forgive me, so far I am not aware that I received this important document. Can you please send me a copy of the HoTs generic or otherwise as the landowner I question did not allow me to keep or copy the document and I was only able to take brief notes from the document after the meeting which I may have got wrong. Forgive me for that.

I will also need to write to the Inspectorate before next Mondays deadline so a copy of the HoTs generic or otherwise would be helpful otherwise my clients will be disadvantaged/disenfranchised.

5 BFC-OP0001

I have now had the opportunity to consider the correspondence in brief as you have failed to provide any HoTs for me to consider in respect to all the retained clients represented by Bjp.

I understand that the HoTs make reference to Incentive/Easement payments but from my brief examination of the HoTs there appeared in the documentation to be no reference to injurious affection. As I said I only had a short time to examine the HoTs before the end of the meeting and it would have been useful to have had a copy of the HoTs prior to the meeting. Forgive me but can you please confirm whether there was an error in this literature or whether reference to injurious affection was intentionally excluded from the HoTs.

We however noted reference to injurious affection in the Overhead Electricity Line Agreement for Grant and Easement.

Forgive me but should any reference to injurious affection also be included in the HoTs. We believe that if a Landowner signs the Grant and Easement that there property interests may be disenfranchised.

You also fail to explain the process of injurious affection to landowners and the claims procedure. The literature set out in the HoTs does not include the key commitments noted in your original literature under the heading Payment Instalments. I managed to look at the payment incentive literature last night and this appears to have conflicting information.

In your literature Payment Instalments you state

• ‘Balance of the payment on completion of the Easement and at the same time any additional payment for any injurious affection that has already been assessed and agreed’.

The HoTs do not appear to follow the same procedure that you have stated in your Guide to payments for landowners.

Please can you also declare the payment schedule in the event that no agreement is reached between the Landowner and WPD the Acquiring Authority? Am I correct in my assumption that if landowners do not sign your grant and easement within your prescribed time scales that all payments for apparatus will be withdrawn thus effectively forcing the Landowners to apply to Lands Tribunal for any payments? Please clarify on this point and your attendance at the landowners meeting would have been helpful to clear this up for landowners.

As you can appreciate these are very important considerations that Landowners need to carefully consider.

My diary has been kept clear for the whole of next week as promised specifically for landowners meetings apart from Wednesday as I previously instructed you but which I have not yet received the courtesy of your response in respect to this week and whether it is convenient for WPD.

Please can you also answer the question of unconditional fee arrangement and payments to landowners for taking time off work to meet you?

Regards

IAR Jones BSc MRICS FAAV Bjp Res

6 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 29 October 2015 20:29 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Paul Clough ; Lauren ; Matthew Bickford ; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Thank you for your e-mails of 27 and 28 October 2015.

Your invitation to the Landowners' meeting scheduled for 02 November 2015 is declined on the ground as stated within my e-mail to you of 07 October 2015.

On account of the other matters set out within your aforementioned correspondence, Western Power Distribution will be writing to you separately.

Finally, I will look into the matter regarding Mr E James, Awelfryn and revert to you in due course.

Yn ddiffuant

Nia NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

Nia Wyn Davies | Senior Land Officer | Freedom Group Delta House, 10th Avenue, Zone 3, Deeside Industrial Park, Deeside, Flintshire CH5 2UA D: 01244 833 303 | M: 07769 282 325 | E-mail: [email protected]

7 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 28 October 2015 16:54 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Cc: 'Paul Clough' ; 'Lauren' ; 'Matthew Bickford' ; '' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market

28th October 2015

Dear Nia

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Monday Meeting On The 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market

Please note that we have not yet received any formal/informal response to our e mail to you of the 27nd October 2015. This is disappointing.

The Landowners meeting will take place on Monday 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market at 7.00pm. Please can you confirm if you or any of your colleagues wish to attend and speak to the landowners regarding your proposals.

Please also note I have been asked by Mr Elphin Jones of Awelfryn Farm to act on his behalf.

I understand that a meeting took place with Mr James and that the apparatus has been changed from a single pole to a H pole without his knowledge. Mr James is disappointed that the changes have taken place without any consultation with him or his family. The original proposal was for one single pole in the field and one single pole in the hedge.

Please can you explain why the apparatus was changed at the last minute.

We await your earliest response and confirmation whether you will attend the landowners meeting would be helpful.

Regards

IAR Jones BSc MRICS FAAV Bjp

8 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 27 October 2015 07:48 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Cc: 'Paul Clough' ; 'Lauren' ; '[email protected]' ; 'Matthew Bickford' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

27th October 2015

Dear Nia

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Please note that we have not yet received any formal/informal response to our e mail to you of the 22nd October 2015. This is disappointing.

In the meantime I would be grateful if you would consider the following requests:-

• My clients would appreciate an explanation as to the CPO process and the timescales you propose to adopt. • My clients would appreciate an explanation of the payment schedule suggested by WPD. • My clients would appreciate an explanation in respect to the rights you propose to acquire over their land interests and any effect this will have on their quiet enjoyment and the value of their retained property. • My clients would appreciate an explanation whether any payment or all payments suggested by WPD in their schedule of payments will be withdrawn in the event landowners refuse early entry. My understanding of the procedure adopted by WPD will be that if landowners refuse early entry, all payments suggested by WPD will be withdrawn and landowners will need to apply to Lands Tribunal for compensation. It is important that you be clear on your procedure regarding landowner’s losses. • My clients would appreciate an explanation of the procedure WPD will adopt in respect to injurious affection.

We look forward to your early reply and explanation on the various points.

Please also clarify your position on meeting landowners and paying landowners for their time including professional representation. I understand that you will be reimbursed for your time to attend such meetings so I believe it to be reasonable and fair that our clients should be placed in the same position and be afforded professional representation reasonably reimbursed by the Acquiring Authority [WPD]

Regards Iwan Bjp

9 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 22 October 2015 14:56 To: Iwan Jones Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

Diolch am eich e-bost.

Byddaf i ffwrdd o'r swyddfa Ddydd Mercher a Ddydd Iau, 21ain a'r 22ain Hydref 2015. Os yw'ch ymholiad yn destun ymateb brys, cysylltwch hefo'r swyddfa ar 01244 833 303 neu gadewch neges ar fy rhif ffon symudol 07769 282 325.

Yn ddiffuant

Thank you for your e-mail.

I will be out of the office on Wednesday and Thursday, 21st and 22nd October2015. If your enquiry is urgent please contact the office on 01244 833 303 or alternatively leave a message on my mobile 07769 282 325.

Yours sincerely

NIA WYN DAVIES

10 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 22 October 2015 14:56 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Cc: 'Paul Clough' ; 'Lauren' ; '[email protected]' ; 'Matthew Bickford' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

Dear Nia

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Please note an e mail attachment sent to landowners in respect to a Landowners meeting to take place on Monday 2nd November at Carmarthen Livestock Market.

We would like to provide you with an opportunity to attend to discuss your proposals with landowners present.

In particular landowners would like to understand the schedule for payments and in the event that they oppose the scheme what [if any] payments landowners can expect should the Compulsory Order be sanctioned by the Minister.

Landowners would also be grateful for advice on Injurious Affection and how WPD will cater for financial losses as a result of a devaluation in the value of the retained land value caused as a result of the development proposed by WPD comprising over ground cables and associated poles.

I can confirm that Landowners represented by Bjp in the main have no objection to an underground routing as I have previously stated. My client’s position is entirely reasonable.

Please can you confirm if you can attend?

Regards Iwan

Bjp

11 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 October 2015 11:45 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Lauren ; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: [External] FW: 20151009 Brechfa Forest Connection Project.docx

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Thank you for your e-mail of 16 October 2015.

I acknowledge receipt of your e-mail of 10 October 2015 and I am awaiting Western Power Distribution’s instruction before a response is issued.

As to the remainder of your e-mail I respond as follows: clients whom we are aware are represented by you are contacted through you only. By e-mail of 18 September 2015, I requested you to confirm whether you were instructed by Mr & Mrs Davies of Nant Farm, Llangunnor. By your e-mails of 18 September 2015 and 10 October 2015 there was no response to my request and I cannot trace a separate response in this regard. I spoke to Mr Davies on Friday 16 October 2015 stating that we wished to establish whether you were instructed as we had not received a response to our request and we were seeking to arrange a meeting. I explained to Mr Davies that where we were aware of representation, meeting arrangements would be made via the Agent. Mr Davies kindly informed us that he would discuss the matter with you and we would wait to hear from you.

I trust that this clarifies the position and that you may relay the content of this e-mail to Messrs Edwards and Thomas, MP and AM respectively, to prevent any further confusion.

Yn ddiffuant

Nia NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

12 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 16 October 2015 15:47 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' ; '

Cc: 'Lauren' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: FW: 20151009 Brechfa Forest Connection Project.docx

Dear Nia

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

I am disappointed no reply to my earlier e mail correspondence sent to you last week. I enclose a copy for your convenience. Can you please respond regarding payment to landowners for the time they will need to take out of their working schedule to meet with you.

In the future I would also be grateful if you would refrain from trying to contact my clients direct.

Please confirm by return if you have contacted other clients direct.

It is imperative that landowners do not feel compelled or pressurised into meetings where they have no representation otherwise their rights could be disenfranchised. To approach land owners direct is concerning and I have passed my concerns onto all my clients and J Edwards MP and RG Thomas AM who has taken an interest in the scheme

Regards Iwan

13 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 10 October 2015 14:52 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Cc: 'Paul Clough' ; 'Lauren' ; '[email protected]' ; 'Matthew Bickford' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

9th October 2015

Dear Nia

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Sorry for the delay in my response but I wanted to discuss the conditional fee proposals offered by WPD with my co directors before responding in kind.

Since we last communicated one of our young auctioneers has left the firm to return to North Wales for family reasons which adds further to our considerable and varied work load.

It is unfortunate that a meeting at the livestock market has not been considered as workable alternative as we believe this would have afforded you with the opportunity to discuss terms in a generic manner with retained clients without divulging any sensitive information. With respect whilst I understand the need for confidentiality I believe you could easily have discussed the mechanics of your proposals and the majority of the HoTs in such an environment; which I assume would involve the payments schedule specified in your published literature which is not so difficult to work out as you have already spelled all this out in your information packs. I do not believe that there is any sensitive information which would have prevented this from happening as the majority of information is generic in any case.

Forgive me but to some extent I have assumed much of the above based on realistic intuition as you continue to refuse to send me the HoTs specific or generic.

Please consider this option again as this is a viable alternative which will work with most landowners and the writer and I trust you to and will save everybody a lot of time and money. Those landowners who do not turn up we can mop up at a later stage.

I have already spoken to some landowners and they want to know what you wish to discuss with them. I have explained that they are contained in HoTs that I have not seen so cannot fully explain what the meetings are about.

Once again I would request HoTs for every client which I can discuss with my clients prior to any meeting. Please forward HoTs to my clients and a copy to me.

In respect to meetings I will happily send you my diary for next week which is already fully booked so you can fully appreciate how our time is rapidly filled up weeks in advance. The week after is filling up fast and I have booked a provisional meeting for Cardiff the following week for two evenings to agree terms for a solar and wind development. Both these parties have time constraints due to recent government announcements so they really appreciate being met outside normal business hours to get things done quickly. 14 BFC-OP0001

In all honesty Nia the timescales given to me by you and others on the team have so far been frankly unworkable.

On the first occasion you raised the question of meetings you gave me a week to organise 24 meetings and then had the tenacity to refuse to pay my additional fees or my client’s reasonable disturbance.

By the second attempt this kept on drifting through no fault of Bjp as you were still refusing to pay additional fees or my client’s reasonable disturbance.

On the second attempt I had agreed meetings for the Monday and Tuesday after the week provisional put forward by me but these were not convenient with you as you were not prepared to meet into the evenings. It was only at this point that we were informed by you of the likely timescales you needed per client which you had not originally disclosed stating that you would need up between 1 - 2 hours per client whereas I had assumed 20 -30 minutes per client. So organising 3 meetings per night was invariably not going to work.

The remainder of the week as you were aware I was already agreeing appointments for 3 evening appointments in a row for each evening starting at 7.00 pm but again these were not convenient to you [and now I understand would not have worked in any case due to 1 – 2 hours needed per client] and you still refused to pay my fees even though I explained in the event that the whole scheme was cancelled I would not be able to claim any fees for my reasonable work.

To then write on Wednesday after apologising for the delay to suggest terms which remain unacceptable after my meeting yesterday with co-directors and then today to suggest that I can organise meeting next week is extremely problematic, impractical and frankly unworkable.

To make progress I can give you weekends running forward subject to client agreement or evening appointments starting from 7.00PM onwards or in the alternative I can provide you the second week of November to block book the whole week for WPD and ask my secretary to start booking appointments next week. If you accept this proposal then I would expect WPD to pay my additional fees on an unconditional fee arrangement based on a quantum meruit basis at a fee rate of £150 per hour to include travelling time and reasonable out of pocket expenses for the whole week spent with WPD [excluding market commitments and other professional appointments].

In the event that the scheme does not take place then I have been paid for my reasonable professional time on a reasonable hourly basis on an unconditional basis. This seems fair and reasonable to me.

Correct me if I am wrong but your suggestion appears to be that WPD will provide an undertaking to pay Bjp professional fees but on a conditional arrangement vis a vis a requirement for clients being ‘required’ to sign consent orders to facilitate the development. I cannot and will not accept any professional work on a conditional fee arrangement as such a fee arrangement could be interpreted in the wrong way. I would also need to fully disclose this fee arrangement to retained clients who might feel pressurised into signing so that I could get paid or that I had pressurised clients into signing to achieve the same end.

Clients may interpret the fee arrangement as an inducement to’ persuade’ clients to sign HoTs to achieve professional fees. This is extremely invidious. I have discussed the conditional fee arrangement with my colleagues and they understand the difficult position this might put me or the company in and all directors have agreed that this would represent a conflict of interest in safeguarding our clients best interests and would be contrary to RICS code in respect to any allegation that our fee arrangement were conditional on advising or ‘persuading ’a retained client to sign HoTs.

Any retained client should be professionally represented and the Acquiring Authority should pay those reasonable fees. Fees should not be conditional. Fees should be paid to professional advisors in 15 BFC-OP0001 a completely transparent and open manner, so that advice can be provided in a transparent manner without the influence of fees in the back ground which could be interpreted in the wrong way in particular if a client felt aggrieved later on in respect to the professional advice provided. As you have request these meetings to speak to retained clients then you should pay for these meetings on an unconditional basis and pay our clients there reasonable time for meeting you.

In the event that clients freely and without pressure sigh HoTs then the fee structure noted above is right and proper and what I would expect from any acquiring authority.

I trust this provides clarity to our position

Regards Iwan Bjp Res

16 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 09 October 2015 14:20 To: [email protected] Cc: Celia ; [email protected]; Matthew Bickford ; Paul Clough Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

I refer to my e-mail dated 07 October 2015.

Within your e-mail of 18 September 2015, timed at 16.07 you confirmed that meeting dates for 12 - 15 October 2015 were acceptable subject to your cattle market demands. Can you therefore confirm whether you have arranged meeting for these dates as I am conscious we need time to prepare the required documentation?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

17 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 07 October 2015 08:42 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Paul Clough ; Lauren ; [email protected]; Matthew Bickford Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

With apologies for the delay in responding, I have been away from the office.

We responded to your request for additional fees within my colleague, Matthew Bickford’ s e-mail of 21 August 2015.

As to your second paragraph: the project as you are aware has been accepted for examination and a decision is likely in Autumn 2016. In the interim, if we are able to voluntarily agree terms with a Landowner, the instructed Agent would be paid in the same instalments as the Landowner i.e. 50% of fees on completion of the Agreement to grant an Easement; and the balance on completion of the Easement. However, should the project be refused consent by the Examiner or the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and we had agreed voluntary terms, the payment of the first 50% of your fees would be honoured. As to the balance of fees (which would in a consented project be paid upon completion of the Easement) this would be a matter assessed at Western Power Distribution’s (WPD) discretion (in the absence of any legislative provisions addressing the same) if such scenario occurred. For information, agents’ fees will be settled according to the scale-based fees (Table B) of the WPD Land Agents Fee Scale dated 01 September 2012.

The project declines your invitation to an open meeting on the ground that the content of our Heads of Terms discussions are commercially sensitive to each Landowner. Therefore, to afford Landowners with the opportunity to question and consider WPD’s offer on account of their own land, we are offering individual meetings which may I add are progressing with other Landowners and their instructed Agents.

Finally, in response to your final paragraph I will reiterate that we have been able to conduct these meetings with other Landowners and their instructed Agents during normal working hours, subject to some exceptions. In any case, we have not commenced a meeting after 7pm. However, I refer you back to the final paragraph of my e-mail to you of 22 September 2015 and would, in the case of your clients, be prepared to commence the final meeting of the day at 7pm.

Again, I look forward to receiving therefore details of arranged meetings within the dates as provided on 22 September 2015.

Yn ddiffuant

Nia NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

18 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 22 September 2015 20:35 To: Iwan Jones Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

Diolch am eich e-bost.

Byddaf i ffwrdd o'r swyddfa o ac yn cynnwys Ddydd Mercher 23ain o Fedi 2015 hyd at ac yn cynnwys Ddydd Llun 28ain o Fedi 2015. Os yw'ch ymholiad yn destun ymateb brys, cysylltwch hefo'r swyddfa ar 01244 833 303 neu gadewch neges ar fy rhif ffon symudol 07769 282 325.

Yn ddiffuant

Thank you for your e-mail.

I will be out of the office from and inclusive of Wednesday 23 September 2015 up to and inclusive of Monday 28 September 2015. If your enquiry is urgent please contact the office on 01244 833 303 or alternatively leave a message on my mobile 07769 282 325.

Yours sincerely

NIA WYN DAVIES

19 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 22 September 2015 20:11 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Paul Clough ; Lauren ; [email protected]; Matthew Bickford Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project Meetings to discuss Heads of Terms

Thank you for your e-mail.

As previously advised by my colleague, Matthew Bickford:

1. we will not be accepting your invitation to an open meeting with your clients; and 2. you will receive a sample electronic Heads of Terms when we are in receipt of confirmed meeting details (being a copy of that issued to your client).

I note that you have accepted our suggested dates of Monday – Thursday, 12 to 15th October 2015, inclusive subject to your cattle market demands. In addition to the aforementioned dates therefore we also provide the following: Monday 19 to Thursday 22 October 2015 (inclusive). As stated, the final meeting on the suggested dates we would be willing to commence at 7pm.

I look forward to hearing from you with details of arranged meetings.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

20 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 18 September 2015 16:07 To: Nia Wyn Davies Cc: Paul Clough; 'Lauren'; [email protected]; Matthew Bickford Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

18th September 2015

Hi Nia

RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

Thank you for your e mail.

Can I add that whilst I understand your frustration with the utmost respect unlike you I have a number of additional professional spheres that I need to deal with and a busy diary and so finding time exclusively for WPD within your timescales can be extremely difficult especially with recent holidays, incidentally taken looking after two young children during the summer holidays and so the end of August was out as far as meeting were concerned never mind the preposterous timescales.

Your first request with a weeks’ notice with respect was completely unworkable and the second notice with 3 weeks was replied to and I indicated sometime in the middle of September. The 21st is the middle of September as is the 22nd of September and I cannot see with your team which numbers at least 10 with lawyers and Geraint present in the background couldn’t find the time to accommodate my clients and to be fair I had no idea how rigid and inflexible you would be. I assumed that the following week would easily work for you. Obviously not.

As you rightly state meetings could take more than one hour per client so this is a minimum of 22 hours plus travelling between clients say 30 – 40 hours which equates to one week of my professional earning time being used for something which might or might not take place and for which I might or might not get paid for and the above is based on a seamless progression from one client to another.

The above puts professional people in an invidious position as you are asking us to forgo a week’s earnings to facilitate your process. I have no problem with this and incidentally I have my client’s best interests foremost in my mind but to be able to take a week out of a busy schedule is not possible especially as many clients work and evenings in many cases are the only option.

With respect you get paid, I do not and so this is up to £5,000 of professional fees that my company will not earn for this week.

In respect to this week I would confirm that Tuesday the 15th was also organised for another 3 clients again starting at 7.00pm.

Can I suggest the alternative would be for you to agree to an open meeting with my clients and generically running through what you wish to achieve by going through the Heads of Terms which incidentally you have still failed to provide us after a reasonable request at our last meeting.

Monday – Thursday 12 – 15 October 2015, inclusive is acceptable but I have cattle markets to run on Wednesday and Thursday.

I will arrange an open meeting for my clients at Carmarthen Market and we can deal with this in one hit. In respect to individual clients they can then make up their mind if they want a follow up meeting with you and we can arrange this on the night. 21 BFC-OP0001

For the open meeting I would suggest Thursday 8th October at 7.00 pm and we can specifically target individual clients thereafter in respect to the above dates.

I have spoken to a number of clients and they would be receptive to a closed meeting with WPD to discuss HoTs.

Regards Iwan Bjp

22 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 18 September 2015 15:01 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Paul Clough ; Lauren ; [email protected]; Matthew Bickford Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project Meetings to discuss Heads of Terms

I refer to your e-mail of Monday 14 September 2015 sent to my colleague, Matthew Bickford.

First, I am disappointed to note that you have been unable to arrange meetings to discuss the Heads of Terms within our suggested dates despite the first dates being issued a week in advance; and the second set of dates being issued three weeks in advance.

Secondly, I am concerned to note the times you had suggested to conduct some of the meetings. From experience, some of these meetings take up to an hour (and in some cases exceed this time) and thus allowing time for travelling also, the lateness of the day becomes an issue. For information, we have been able to conduct these meetings with other landowners and their instructed Agents during the hours of a normal working day and without in some cases the landowner being present or every landowner being present. I suggest also, that your attendance would possibly in some cases reduce the need for every landowner to be present at a particular meeting if it is inconvenient as I would assume that you would be able to fully relay the content of these meetings. On this basis, I suggest some further dates being the following, as I understand that you will be on leave at the end of September:

Thursday 01 October 2015 Friday 02 October 2015 (last available meeting at 2pm) Wednesday 07 October 2015 Thursday 08 October 2015 Friday 09 October 2015 (last available meeting at 2pm) Monday – Thursday 12 – 15 October 2015, inclusive.

The final meeting on the suggested dates, unless otherwise stated, we would be willing to commence at 7pm.

We have up to now supplied you only with a proportion of your clients that we wish to meet. However, as time is now elapsing with a lack of progress, below is a list of all your clients whom we wish to meet:

Mr S & Mrs P Medland, Mr & Mrs LET Birch, Mr GA Dufty, Mrs DA Davies, 23 BFC-OP0001

Messrs Evans, Ms F Morris & Messrs Davies, Mr & Mrs HV Miles, Mr & Mrs R Eagle, Mr & Mrs B Patten, Mr & Mrs RHW Howells, Mses DA, AJ & Mr MP Reed, Messrs DA & WG Jones, Mr P Morris, Beaulah Fawr, Daniel John Brian Thomas, Mr & Ms RDH Bowen, Mr & Mrs W Bowen, Mr CO Evans, Messrs DJP Davis & Sons, Mr & Ms RC Jones, Mr & Mrs HD Walters, Mr & Mrs WDI Gibbon,

We would also wish to meet with Mr & Mrs H Davies of Nant Farm, . I recall that you have made reference to the land at Nant Farm previously but I am uncertain if you are instructed on their behalf. Please advise.

Therefore, so that we may proceed and provide your clients with the opportunity to review Western Power Distribution’s offers on account of this project, we look forward to an early reply with details of arranged meetings.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

24 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 September 2015 15:00 To: Matthew Bickford Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; Paul Clough; 'Lauren'; [email protected] Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015 - Monday 21st September at 7.00pm.

Hi Matthew

RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015 - Monday 21st September at 7.00pm.

Thank you for your call on Friday. I note the e mail below. I have tried today to alter my diary and arrange meetings for tomorrow and to arrange suitable visits on Tuesday but this cannot be accomplished as I have a very busy day tomorrow and note that some meetings have been booked up several weeks in advance. One is a probate valuation which I cannot alter. In respect to Wednesday I am in the cattle market for most of the day.

As you are not able to arrange next week I have taken the liberty of notifying those clients I had arranged for you to meet next week that the meetings will no longer take place. I have also cancelled meetings I had provisionally arranged for Tuesday evening next week

Regards Iwan Bjp

25 BFC-OP0001

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 10 September 2015 16:37 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Nia Wyn Davies ; Paul Clough Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015 - Monday 21st September at 7.00pm.

Dear Iwan,

It would appear that you have booked the wrong day to start meeting with your clients as we are unavailable on the 21.9.2015 , could you please rearrange for the week commencing 14.9.2015.

26 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 10 September 2015 16:12 To: Iwan Jones Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015 - Monday 21st September at 7.00pm.

Diolch am eich e-bost.

Byddaf i ffwrdd o'r swyddfa o ac yn cynnwys Ddydd Mawrth hyd at ac yn cynnwys Ddydd Gwener, 08, 09, 10 a'r 11fed Medi 2015. Os yw'ch ymholiad yn destun ymateb brys, cysylltwch hefo'r swyddfa ar 01244 833 303 neu gadewch neges ar fy rhif ffon symudol 07769 282 325.

Yn ddiffuant

Thank you for your e-mail.

I will be out of the office from and inclusive of Tuesday up to and inclusive of Friday, 08, 09, 10 and 11th September 2015. If your enquiry is urgent please contact the office on 01244 833 303 or alternatively leave a message on my mobile 07769 282 325.

Yours sincerely

NIA WYN DAVIES

27 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 10 September 2015 16:11 To: Matthew Bickford Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; Paul Clough Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015 - Monday 21st September at 7.00pm.

Hi Matthew

RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015

Monday 21st September at 7.00pm.

I have arranged to meet Mrs DA Davies at Llwyn – Newydd at 7.00 pm on Monday 21st September at 7.00pm.

On the same evening we can cross to Rhodri Howells Pentre Mawr at 8.00 pm and then cross to Mr & Mrs Miles Gwili Vale at 9.00pm.

Day meetings are difficult for most clients as either one or both parties are working in the day. I will get back to you regarding the rest

Regards Iwan

28 BFC-OP0001

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 10 September 2015 12:59 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Nia Wyn Davies ; Paul Clough Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015

Dear Iwan,

I have just called and left a message on your mobile as It would be most helpful if you could confirm ,if any of the proposed meetings have been arranged as we would need to issue documents ect…

I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards

Matthew Bickford For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

Matthew Bickford | Wayleave Officer | Freedom Group Delta House, 10th Avenue, Zone 3, Deeside Industrial Park, Deeside, Flintshire, CH5 2UA M: 07920 470415 | E: [email protected] | W: www.freedom-group.co.uk

29 BFC-OP0001

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 09 September 2015 10:15 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Nia Wyn Davies ; Paul Clough Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015

Dear Iwan,

I would appreciate if you could provide me with an update regarding the proposed meetings that we have asked you to arrange next week with a percentage of your clients(listed below) regarding Heads of terms discussions?

I look forward to hearing from you shortly

Regards

Matthew Bickford For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

30 BFC-OP0001

From: Matthew Bickford Sent: 21 August 2015 10:06 To: 'Iwan Jones ' Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; Paul Clough Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 14th-16th September 2015

Dear Iwan

Thank you for confirming your availability. May I therefore propose the following dates to start conducting our meetings: Monday 14 , Tuesday 15 & Wednesday 16th September 2015?

In answer to your question on account of fees: there will be no offer of a stand-alone payment for your attendance at these meetings. However, as part of the negotiations to grant an Easement, WPD will pay agents a reasonable fee based on its Fee Scale (effective from September 2012). There will be no offer of payment to your clients on account of these meetings.

We look forward to hearing from you shortly

Regards

Matthew Bickford For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

31 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 August 2015 12:39 To: Matthew Bickford Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; Paul Clough Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 25-27th Aug

Hi Matthew

Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 25-27th Aug - Apologies

I am away from the office all next week on annual leave until the 25th August [should read 1st September] and I am in London thereafter from the 3rd September to the 8th September.

I would suggest that we provisionally agree to meet sometime mid-September.

Can you also confirm our additional fees for these meetings and whether you are prepared to pay landowners for their time and inconvenience in meeting you to discuss your development

Regards Iwan Bjp

32 BFC-OP0001

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 August 2015 12:25 To: Iwan Jones Cc: Nia Wyn Davies ; Paul Clough Subject: RE: [External] RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 25-27th Aug

Dear Iwan,

Thank you for getting back to me so soon, you have suggested below that you are available next week from the 25th? Would maybe two of the days be possible?

33 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 August 2015 11:07 To: Matthew Bickford Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; Paul Clough Subject: [External] RE: Brechfs Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 25-27th Aug

Hi Matthew

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 25-27th Aug

I am away from the office all next week on annual leave until the 25th August and I am in London thereafter from the 3rd September to the 8th September.

I would suggest that we provisionally agree to meet sometime mid-September.

Can you also confirm our additional fees for these meetings and whether you are prepared to pay landowners for their time and inconvenience in meeting you to discuss your development

Regards Iwan Bjp

Regards Iwan

34 BFC-OP0001

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 August 2015 10:34 To: [email protected] Cc: Nia Wyn Davies ; Paul Clough Subject: Brechfs Forest Connection- meetings to arrange 25-27th Aug

Dear Iwan,

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Following on from our meeting held on 27th July 2015 where it was discussed that we would be in contact to arrange meetings with your clients to discuss the heads of terms, we are proposing to start conducting these meetings next week- 25,26,27th August 2015. Therefore, would you kindly contact your clients to ascertain their availability and arrange a suitable time please. We plan to start with your following clients with your remainder clients being met, if convenient, in subsequent week (s).

We will be available from 9am-4pm 25,26th , and 9am-1pm on the 27th.. Subject to receipt of confirmation by you of dates and times for these meetings we will be sending to your clients a confirmatory letter together with the documents for perusal ahead of our meetings. We will be e- mailing you copies of the correspondence for your records.

We look forward to hearing from you shortly but please let us know should you wish to discuss further.

Regards

Matthew Bickford For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

Matthew Bickford | Wayleave Officer | Freedom Group 35 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 29 July 2015 17:00 To: Iwan Jones Subject: RE: [External] RE: Your clients: Messrs Evans, Nant y Boncath

Hi Iwan

Thank you for your e-mail and I am aware that you have spoken to Paul. I was unfortunately on another telephone call when you rang.

Regards

Nia

36 BFC-OP0001

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 29 July 2015 16:44 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Cc: 'Paul Clough' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Your clients: Messrs Evans, Nant y Boncath

Hi Nia

Your clients: Messrs Evans, Nant y Boncath, Alltwalis Road, Alltwalis, Carmarthen SA32 7DX

I have requested access for your survey. I note that you are not prepared to pay landowners in respect to the topographical survey.

Regards Iwan

37 BFC-OP0001

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 29 July 2015 16:02 To: [email protected] Cc: Paul Clough Subject: Your clients: Messrs Evans, Nant y Boncath

Annwyl Iwan

Your clients: Messrs Evans,

Western Power Distribution requires entry onto your clients’ land at Nant y Boncath for the purpose of conducting a survey of the existing electricity apparatus on Friday 07 August 2015. The survey will be conducted on foot only.

I would be grateful if you would relay this information to your clients and should you have any further queries, please let me know.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

38 BFC-OP0001

APPENDIX 2

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN WPD AND BJP/LANDOWNERS AND AM/MP TO ORGANISE LANDOWNERS SURVEYS AND NEGOTIATE PAYMENTS PRIOR TO CPO PROCEDURE

From ] Sent: 11 September 2014 10:56 To: Iwan BJP Subject: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

Hi Iwan,

Thank you for your email.

I will reiterate that I was not told of the "5 day" contact agreement when Matt was on my yard, when he informed me Environmental Surveys were (definitely) taking place week commencing 11 August 2014. I was assured the exact day of that week would be confirmed by his Assistant via email. No email was forth coming. I had advised him that I had a Highland Bull that would need to be removed before strangers wandered about in his field/s. He has huge horns and is a curious beast by nature.....

I housed said Bull from the 11th of August and awaited contact from Matt's assistant. None came.

I contacted Matt by email some time later to ask what happened, as no one had contacted me as he had promised, he was at that time unaware that the Surveys had not happened. Why would I have emailed to ask why no one had arrived if I had been aware of this 5day rule?? Why was his initial reply to this email not to quote said 5day rule???? Basically, because he had not explained it to me on his initial visit.

What possible reason would I have in making this up?

'People' seem to be forgetting that the land they wish access over is not theirs to treat as they wish. I make no apology for the fact I do not want ANY interference to my land and my peace and quiet. I am averse to these power lines/poles being sited on my land. I made this clear to Matt on speaking to him in person. I asked him what I could do to preserve my land and privacy, he shrugged his shoulders and said 'nothing' He said if they wanted access to my land they would get it. He told me I was the only land owner being 'difficult'

However, in the interests of being 'reasonable' I did make arrangements to make the Surveyors 'safe' by housing my Bull for the entire week. I agreed to the surveys in principle given that he had told me I basically had no option than to agree. I gave him my contact details email/mobile phone number.

I reiterate, first mention to me of the 5 day rule is when it was quoted in the second reply email from Matt, after he had the opportunity to 'look into' what had happened details of which you have.

Initial contact with Matt was confusing as he has 2 business cards, 1) Freedom 2) Western Power. Western Power (WP) had (that week) been cutting trees on my land, I (reasonably) assumed he was associated with that work.

Interestingly WP had insisted they had my permission to access my land to cut trees. They had not, their surveyor had not visited/obtained my signature. So they do have 'history' of non-communication.

With regard to who they should contact in the future, I will take your advice on said.

Let me know when you are free for that chat

Best regards, -Joanna. 1 BFC-OP0001

Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 11 September 2014 12:31 To: Nia Wyn Davies Subject: FW: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

Hi Nia

FW: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

This is not as straight forward as you wish to purport. I am also in receipt of another letter from anther retained client in the Brechfa area where your contractors have on two occasions not turned up at the appointed time. I will advise you more when I have spoken to the client again who is very upset by your contractors laisse faire attitude.

I have a number of clients who have experienced these occasions when your contractors have failed to turn up on previously agreed appointment times.

We look forward to your further observations regarding Llwyncelyn at the very least

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 11 September 2014 15:39 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

Annwyl Iwan

Thank you for your e-mail, the content of which I will review and respond in due course.

Yn ddiffuant

Nia

NIA WYN DAVIES Wayleave Officer For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 11 September 2014 15:48 To: Nia Wyn Davies Cc: ; Lauren; Celia Subject: RE: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

Hi Jo

RE: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

2 BFC-OP0001

Please note the response from Nia. Nia is going to look into your concerns and I would suspect that she will return with a more substantive reply before the end of the week.

Regards Iwan

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 September 2014 10:55 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa.

Annwyl Iwan

I refer to your e-mail of 11 September 2014.

In response to your first and second paragraphs, please supply details of where appointments have been missed and I will review the same.

With reference to your client, Ms Boughton:

1. It is our standard approach when approaching landowners to advise of surveys that a period of notice is established, if required. 2. Our records show that at least five days’ notice period was to be provided to your client in advance of a survey. 3. Matthew Bickford’s contact details were left at your client’s property on 16 July 2014. He has one business card but also carries a Brechfa Forest Connection Project contact card. Contact could be made with Matt via either. 4. Both Matt and I are instructed by WPD with regards to the Brechfa Forest Connection Project and thus, can offer no comment to the tree cutting work to which your client refers. However, your client’s comment has been passed to WPD for its attention.

As stated previously, further surveys may be required on your client’s land and thus I would appreciate confirmation, owing to your instruction, whether we continue to liaise with your client directly or refer to you to arrange future survey accesses.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES Wayleave Officer

Dear Nia

Subject: RE: No show for 'Surveys' at Llwyncelyn Brechfa – Land Owner Jo Boughton.

I have been with Jo Boughton this afternoon and she has confirmed that the previous appointments missed were the week commencing the 11th August 2014 as previously detailed.

Jo has confirmed once again whether your standard practice or not ‘no 5 day notice was mentioned by Mr Bickford to my client’.

3 BFC-OP0001

Mr Bickford we understand also has two business cards which also caused considerable confusion to my client as she was unaware whether Mr Bickford worked for WPD or Freedom or both. Please can you explain?

Please understand that my client is not unreasonable and like any reasonable people an advance notice should be agreed and adhered to as my client are working people and needed to move livestock to accommodate your survey. This meant putting a frisky Highland Bull in doors as my clients felt he could not be trusted. This is not unreasonable behaviour. The bull was kept in for over a week and when my client did not hear from your surveyor was placed back in the field.

Please also be aware that my client is not the first Land owner to experience these ‘no shows’. Another Land Owner close to this property has an almost identical experience and has also had to move cattle to facilitate WPD access and ensure Surveyor safety. Like Jo these are not unreasonable people and have experienced the same level of frustration as this Land Owner has. My client has also asked me to ask why on the basis of the ‘no show’ has there not at least been an explanation for the no shows or whether an apology will be forthcoming.

I am aware of two other Land owners who have experienced ‘no shows. One of these ‘’no shows’ was on the 27th August 2014 when we had arranged to meet WPD Representatives to discuss the survey at 2.00 pm on the clients property. The Land Owner had in fact also taken time off work to travel back from Carmarthen to meet me and hopefully the WPD Surveyor to discuss the survey.

The WPD Surveyor did not to show up at the appointment meeting time of 2.00 pm and thereafter failed to contact my client with any revised or delayed time with there being no explanation afterwards why the WPD Surveyor had failed to turn up or even provide mention to my client his/her reasons for the failure to turn up.

I have copied this e mail to Mr Edwards MP and Mr Thomas AM who have taken a particular interest in their constituents concerns regarding the transmission line.

We await your response in due course and agreeing a convenient time to allow my client to facilitate your Surveyors.

If you still require access I would be grateful if you could phone me next week to discuss access to my client’s property and arrange times for your inspections which I trust you will adhere to. I would also like to discuss the matter of compensation for my client for inconvenience and expenses directly attributable for your surveyors inability to keep to appointed times

When you are looking to carry out survey work on my client’s property please provide me with the appropriate response in writing so I can reply directly to my client. Please do not respond to my client or contact Jo either verbally or in writing as the whole episode has been very distressing to her and her family

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Nia Wyn Davies ([email protected]) Sent: 15 September 2014 14:13:54 To: Cc: Paul Clough ([email protected]) By e-mail only to Dear Mr Lewis Brechfa Forest Connection Project Thank you for your letter dated 10.09.2014, received by e-mail by my colleague, Paul Clough.

4 BFC-OP0001

As you may be aware, surveys are conducted as part of the above-stated project for, amongst others, technical and environmental purposes. The information gleaned from such surveys is, for example, used to form part of the Environmental Impact Assessment to help us shape the design of the scheme. I note that you refer to “two no shows” for surveys. I have reviewed our records and respond as follows:

1. We contacted you on 21, 23 and 24 June 2014 to arrange accesses for a survey on 27 June 2014. No reply was received on the aforementioned dates but during a telephone conversation with an RSK Surveyor on 27 June 2014 I understand that access was not granted for that day and also the subsequent week (week commencing 30 June 2014); 2. On 10 July 2014 during a telephone conversation you advised that accesses for surveys could be arranged once the preferred route had been made public; 3. On 23 August 2014 during a telephone conversation you advised that you were uncertain whether the preferred route (which had by then been announced) affected your land. A plan was duly sent to you on 28 August 2014 confirming that the preferred route did indeed cross your land. 4. On 05 September 2014 during a telephone conversation to arrange heritage, botany and tree surveys you advised that access for surveys would not be granted until pole locations had been discussed with you.

From our records therefore, I am unable to trace an appointment to survey for which access was granted in the first instance. Finally, I note within your final paragraph that reference is made to a map which you state “showed the power lines going onto our neighbours land and not our land”. At that time, no plans were available showing indicative pole locations. Nonetheless, we will be engaging with Landowners over the next few weeks with regards to the draft final alignment for the proposed connection, which will include indicative pole locations. We will therefore be contacting you shortly to arrange a suitable date and time for a meeting to discuss the same. I trust that the above addresses your main points but should you wish to discuss the matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely NIA WYN DAVIES Wayleave Officer For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Darrell Lewis Sent: 19 September 2014 15:42 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: For the attention of Andrew Hubbold Ref BFC/AH/071

Dear Sir

Further to your correspondence dated the 12th of September 2014, as we have previously had 2 no shows from your company, we are appointing Mr I. A. R. Jones of BJP Residential Ltd who as from todays date shall be acting as our land agent. Therefore, any arrangements for access to our land should be made through him, his details are as follows:-

Mr I. A. R. JONES BJP RESIDENTIAL LTD 5 BFC-OP0001

We await your response in due course and agreeing a convenient time to allow my client to facilitate your Surveyors.

Regards Iwan Jones BSc MRICS FAAV Bjp Registered Valuer

From: Brechfa Forest Connection [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 22 September 2014 14:17 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: For the attention of Andrew Hubbold Ref BFC/AH/071

Dear Mr Jones

Thank you for your email regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project. Your enquiry has been passed on to the project team and we will provide a more detailed response shortly.

Kind regards

Jocelyn Community Relations Team

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 25 September 2014 18:49 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Access to Darrell Lewis Clun Mawr Farm Brechfa BFID 225

Hi Iwan,

Accesses are required following the 14 day NOTICE Wed 1st & thurs 2nd Oct 14.

The first at 9.00 am for the accesses, which is a quick walk along the top fields by LSTC.

The second is probably over 2 days wed/thurs by RSK looking at trees and possibly having to climb them looking at Bat holes.

Please can you let your Client know.

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 26 September 2014 13:16 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; Paul Clough Subject: RE: Access to Darrell Lewis Clun Mawr Farm Brechfa BFID 225 7 BFC-OP0001

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project Your client: Darrell Lewis

I refer to your e-mail of earlier today sent to Paul Clough relating to your above-stated client.

In response to the inclusion within your e-mail of your 19 September 2014 communication for the attention of Andrew Hubbold, a separate response from WPD will be sent to you.

In response to the remainder of your e-mail, I remind you that WPD has served your client with a statutory notice letter pursuant to Schedule 4, Section 10 of the Electricity Act 1989 (as amended) with which provision I assume you are familiar. Two surveys are scheduled on your client’s land next week (at which time the statutory notice becomes effective) and we have provided you with specific dates for the same. There is no requirement to move livestock from the fields unless your client specifically wishes to do so. Thus, please advise your client accordingly. If we do not receive a response from you before 1pm on Monday 29th September 2014 that you have advised your client of these surveys we shall contact him directly to do so.

On a separate note, I will contact you shortly with a view to arranging a meeting to collate feedback on the draft final alignment proposed on your client’s land.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES Wayleave Officer For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 26 September 2014 17:17 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Topographical Survey required EE42 Mr Walters NantyGoetre Uchaf Ferryside

Hi Iwan,

We wish to gain access to tower EE42 at Llandyfaelog on Thurs 2nd Oct to carry out a survey of EE42. Mr Walters asked if we would put the request through yourself.

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Darrell Lewis [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 26 September 2014 17:26 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: YOUR 2 NO SHOWS

8 BFC-OP0001

Dear miss Davies,

further to my earlier E-mail I am now detailing out a fuller response as follows;-

With regards to item 1 of your E-mail it is interesting to note that you have chosen to totally ignore the first appointment period that was made with your company to undertake surveys on our land. Your company agreed to undertake these surveys during the week commencing the 25th of March 2014. During this previously agreed survey period there was no contact what so ever from your company. In furtherance of this, after this first no show, I spoke on several occasions with either your Mr Clough or Mr Bickford, and at no time during any part of those conversations did either of them deny the fact that your surveyors had not turned up at the agreed period. Therefore, for your records this was the first no show.

You also state that you contacted me on the 21st 23rd and 24th of June, in this respect I have no recollection of speaking to anyone associated with your company on these dates, perhaps you would be kind enough to confirm what contact was made.

Turning now to item 2, my actual comments to your Mr Bickford was that as your company has had two no shows already, I informed him that once he provided me with a plan confirming that the power lines poles are actually going to be located on our land I was not willing to waste any more of my time. However, having said that I also informed him that once you provide a map showing the actual route of the poles you could have access to our land for your Surveys. This conversation was also had with Paul Clough on the 23rd of August 2014.

Paul Cloughs letter dated the 28th of August 2014 states that a plan is attached showing the proposed corridor as apposed to your comments Preferred route. My words to both your Mr. clough and Mr. Bickford was the actual route.

Item 3. See above item 2.

Item 4. See item 2

As you can see, once again your surveyors again seem to have neglected to inform you of the 25th of March 2014 in which access was granted to you in the first instance. Now that you have this date perhaps you would like to update your records accordingly.

Finally, as I am unable to trust you or your operatives, in order that common sense may prevail, we have now appointed an independent third party in Mr. I. Jones of BJP as our intermediary; I have supplied Mr. Jones with several dates when your surveys can be undertaken. HOWEVER IF THESE DATES ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE TO YOU THEN DO PLEASE PROCEED TO OBTAIN A WARRANT, IF YOU CHOOSE THIS LINE OF ACTION PLEASE DO LET HAVE THE DATE YOU INTEND TO GO TO COURT SO THAT I CAN ATTEND IN PERSON.

PLEASE ALSO BE AWARE THAT YOU ARE ACCOUNTABLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS AND THEREFORE YOU SHOULD ACT IN A MANNER THAT IS BECOMING FOR SOMEONE IN YOUR POSITION, AND NOT LIKE A SCHOOL PLAYGROUND BULLY.

Darrell J Lewis

CC: Iwan Jones BJP

9 BFC-OP0001

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 26 September 2014 18:21 To: Paul Clough Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; [email protected]; 'Celia' Subject: RE: Topographical Survey required EE42 Mr Walters NantyGoetre Uchaf Ferryside

Hi Paul

Subject: Topographical Survey required EE42 Mr Walters NantyGoetre Uchaf Ferryside

Noted. Can you confirm any payments to Mr Walters?

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 29 September 2014 10:48 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: YOUR 2 NO SHOWS

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

I refer to our telephone conversations of last Friday 26 September 2014 and your subsequent e-mail of the same date.

I note that you state that dates have been made available to WPD. Nonetheless, your client has been served with a statutory notice letter pursuant to Schedule 4, Section 10 of the Electricity Act 1989 (as amended) and out of courtesy we have provided specific dates for surveys being Wednesday 01 October and which may also extend to Thursday 02 October 2014 to undertake the same. Thus, the surveys are proposed to proceed as discussed.

In response to your client’s separate e- mail of 26 September 2014 the recollection by your client of the sequence of events is disagreed.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES Wayleave Officer For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 29 September 2014 11:30 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

10 BFC-OP0001

Subject: RE: Access to parcels 2191 (Llanegwad Trust) & 1041 Mr Howells Pentremawr Rhydargaeau - access to Dormice tubes 30th Sept 14

Sorry Iwan,

I had a 60th birthday party at the weekend and not quite there yet.

The person I was referring to is Darrell Lewis of course.

My apologies

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Paul Clough Sent: 29 September 2014 13:24 To: '[email protected]' Cc: Nia Wyn Davies ([email protected]) Subject: RE: Topographical Survey required EE42 Mr Walters NantyGoetre Uchaf Ferryside

Hi iwan,

No I am informed that this is not an invasive survey by WPD and therefore doesn’t attract a payment as this time.

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Darrell Lewis Sent: 29 September 2014 18:03 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Clun Mawr Farm Brechfa Private and Confidential

Hi Iwan

The dates we have offered in occtober are within the period they have stated in there statutory notice, which is between the 30th of September 2014 and the 28th of November 2014.

Due to health and safety it would be prudent to obtain the actual dates and times for there visits to our farm as we have quite a few German shepherd dogs that roam about the farm with me, in this respect access to our farm is strictly by prior agreed appointment times only as we are not willing to keep our dogs locked up all day waiting for someone to turn up or as has been the case with western power when they don't turn up. Our reason for this is that we like to have our dogs under our control and locked up in their kennels when there are individuals roaming around our farm. If they do not inform us of the dates and times of there intended surveys how can we put our dogs away.

I think it would also be prudent to find out how many people will be surveying and what type of surveys, also what about the location on our farm where they are going to be as not all of our farm falls within the proposed alignment corridor, so are they going to provide a map of the areas that 11 BFC-OP0001

they require access too.

Judging by Nia's E-Mails she is intent on being totally unflexible in her approach as to when these surveys are undertaken, we have reasonable offered her several dates to undertake these surveys within the time period that is stated on there statutory notice.

If Nias wants to behave in this manner then that is her choice, but I can not understand why she is using a sledge hammer to crack a nut, unless off course she is trying to prove a point. When surely anyone with a commodity of common sense would see that a simple path of negotiating these dates would save us and the courts a great deal of time. But, there again if she wants to waste everyones time then who are we to prevent her she must do what she feels is best for her and western power.

Lets hope that these individsuals representing western power are willing to see sense in this matter too discuss in a reasonable manner the access dates that you have put forward to them on our behalf.

Regards

Darrell

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 30 September 2014 09:41 To: [email protected] Cc: Darrell Lewis ; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: Access Clynmawr Brechfa

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

I refer to your e-mail of yesterday.

As previously advised by my colleague, Paul Clough, by e-mail of 25 September 2014, the surveyors will arrive at your client’s property by 9am on Wednesday 01 October 2014. The surveyors in attendance will introduce themselves to your client upon their arrival.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES Wayleave Officer For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 30 September 2014 10:05 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Access re topo survey to Raymond Jones PenyFedw Farm Llandyfaelog BFID thursday 2nd Oct

Hi iwan,

12 BFC-OP0001

Access required to do topographical survey on Raymond Jones this Thursday. Can you let your Client know and get back to us.

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 30 September 2014 18:08 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Mr & Mrs Bowen Lan House Idole BFID 661 Topo survey w/c 6-10 th October

Hi Iwan,

Access for a topographical survey is required next week on Mr Bowens land.

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 06 October 2014 15:57 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Topographical Survey required EE42 Mr Walters NantyGoetre Uchaf Ferryside BFID5001

Dear Iwan,

Is it possible to access next week Mr Walters, your Client, for a walkover, where his land contains the tower line EE42.

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 07 October 2014 12:46 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Access to parcels 2191 (Llanegwad Trust) & 1041 Mr Howells Pentremawr Rhydargaeau - Topographical survey w/c 13-17th Oct

Dear Iwan,

Access is required for topographical survey on your Client, Rhodri Howells at the end of next week (thurs/Friday). Can you confirm this is ok with your Client.

Kind regards

13 BFC-OP0001

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 08 October 2014 17:05 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Topographical Survey required Mr & Mrs Eagle 33 Parc Starling Johnston Carms BFID 2212/3

Hi Iwan,

Topographical access is required to Mr & Mrs Eagle’s land near Bedw, Pontarsais, who we are informed have you now as their Agent. Access is required for w/c 27/10/14. They are in dispute with WPD over a protracted easement for a scheme unrelated to the Brechfa Windfarm connection. It’s a local matter. Basically two Solicitors blaming the other side for holding up matters, which is rather familiar. Mrs Eagles Solicitors blame WPD’s and vice versa, although I am told interestingly the money has been released to Mrs Eagles Solicitor for release pending completion. I tried explaining this to Mrs Eagle but she wasn’t disposed to hear me that day. Anyway, it is unrelated to this Project and that’s as far as we can go.

Can you let me know if they will allow this topographical access to go ahead on their land?

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 13 October 2014 10:04 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; Lauren ; Celia Subject: RE: Access to parcels 2191 (Llanegwad Trust) & 1041 Mr Howells Pentremawr Rhydargaeau - Topographical survey w/c 13-17th Oct

Hi Iwan,

Please note that the topographical survey will now not be done Thurs/Friday this week. It has been shifted now to tues/wed the w/c 20th October 2014.

I trust this is satisfactory

Kind regards

Paul Clough Senior Wayleave Officer

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 13 October 2014 13:44 To: [email protected] Subject: FW: Brechfa Forest Connection Glyncaredig Rhydargaeau

14 BFC-OP0001

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 13 October 2014 13:44 To: 'Paul Clough' Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; 'dawn reed' Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Glyncaredig Rhydargaeau

Hi Paul

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection – DS, AJ & MP Reed –BFC/AH/073 - Glyncaredig Rhydargaeau SA32 7DR

I am in receipt of correspondence addressed to my client regarding additional surveys dated the 8th October.

My client has not been unreasonable and has already provided access to WPD surveyors on previous occasions.

Please in the first instance confirm payment for surveys to date and provide confirmation of any additional payment for future surveys.

My client has also requested indemnity for future surveys in respect to potential bee stings from bee hives on the holding in respect to your surveyors activities. Please confirm.

My client will also need to move some aggressive rams out of the field to ensure the safety of your surveyors and specific dates are needed in respect to future surveys. An open undertaking from our client in respect to your survey requirements is not possible due to the limited grazing available to our client and stock will need to be moved to facilitate your access requirements. My clients will not accept your indemnity as to livestock injury to your surveyors and you will need to provide specific dates for your surveys. A five week survey window is not workable for my client.

Please confirm dates so access can be made available at the specific time.

Please confirm what sort of survey will be carried out.

We await your response to all my clients questions.

Regards Iwan Bjp 01267 236363/07970 162962

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 17 October 2014 14:44 To: [email protected] Subject: Dorothy Avril Davies,Llwyn-Newydd,SA32 7DZ

Dear Iwan,

Would it be possible to gain access next week to carry out a topography survey on your clients land-

Dorothy Avril Davies

15 BFC-OP0001

Llwyn-Newydd Alltwalis Road Carmarthen SA32 7DZ

Regards

Matthew Bickford | Wayleave Officer | Freedom Group

From: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 2:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: FW: Dorothy Avril Davies,Llwyn-Newydd,SA32 7DZ

Hi Both

Subject: Dorothy Avril Davies Llwyn-Newydd SA32 7DZ Surveys WPD

Let me have your thoughts before I reply. I think we should ask for the route, request what type of survey they are proposing and compensation for the surveys as they have promised before.

They didn’t mention Bryans’ name?

Let me have your thoughts

Regards Iwan Bjp

Hi Paul

Subject: Re: Dorothy Avril Davies, Llwyn-Newydd,SA32 7DZ - Re Western Power

Can you please respond to my clients concerns.

Regards Iwan

From: Talgoed Stud [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 23 October 2014 18:33 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: Dorothy Avril Davies,Llwyn-Newydd,SA32 7DZ - Re Western Power

Dear Iwan.

At approximately 17.30 yesterday evening (22nd October )we observed 2 men walking down the lane directly in front of our house. They were both wearing High Visibility Jackets and carrying surveying equipment and we believe that they were working on behalf of Western Power. This is a private lane and is an integral part of our holding. At no time

16 BFC-OP0001

were we contacted to either request permission to access our property or to advice us of potential surveying work.

We spoke to our neighbour Mr Hodinot who had also seen the workmen on our lane and who wrongly assumed that they had our permission to be there.

We would like to communicate, in the strongest possible terms, our anger and distress at the lack of consideration and respect that Western Power has demonstrated. It is completely unacceptable for Western Power or its agents to simply assume that they can access private land without the consent and agreement of the landowner. This is simply yet another example where large companies ride roughshod over people. As our land agent we would appreciate if you can express to Western Power our incandescence at the arrogance and disdain it so obviously feels towards the public.

Regards Avril and Bryan

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 17 October 2014 14:41 To: [email protected] Subject: Messrs Evans,Nant y Boncath,SA32 7DX

Dear Iwan,

Having just spoken to Mrs Evans she very kindly pointed you will be acting on her behalf .

Would it be possible to gain access to the location (below)next week to carry out a topography survey within the 300m corridor ?

Messrs Evans Nant y Boncath Alltwalis Road Alltwalis Carmarthen SA32 7DX 01267 253 648

Regards

Matthew Bickford | Wayleave Officer | Freedom Group Unit 6 Deeside Point, 10th Avenue, Zone 3, Deeside Industrial Park, Deeside, Flintshire, CH5 2UA M: 07920 470415 | E: [email protected] | W: www.freedom-group.co.uk

From: [email protected] To: [email protected]

Subject: Subject: Messrs Evans Nant y Boncath Altwalis Carmarthen SA32 7DX Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 15:19:45 +0100 Dear Matthew

17 BFC-OP0001

Subject: Messrs Evans Nant y Boncath Altwalis Carmarthen SA32 7DX

We note the requirement for a survey. Please confirm the extent of the survey and the compensation to my clients in respect to the survey.

Please confirm the number and type of surveys to date on my clients property.

I believe it reasonable that my clients are fully versed in the type of survey proposed before entry is considered.

I would be grateful if a meeting could be arranged on site to discuss the survey.

My clients reasonably request that the surveys be undertaken on specific dates known to my clients. This is not unreasonable.

We await your response

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Linda Evans Sent: 23 October 2014 10:18 To: [email protected] Subject: RE:

Good morning Iwan,

We've heard that there were a couple people on the drive up by Avril and Bryan Davies, Llwynnewydd yesterday. Whether they came on to our land we do not know!

Regards,

Linda

From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Subject: Messrs Evans Nant y Boncath Altwalis Carmarthen SA32 7DX Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 13:17:39 +0100

Hi Matthew

Subject: Subject: Messrs Evans Nant y Boncath Altwalis Carmarthen SA32 7DX

Please refer to the e mail attached below.

Can you confirm whether surveys were being undertaken down on the lane to Llwynnewydd yesterday, the 22nd of October as my clients at Nant y Boncath have land interests in this area.

Regards Iwan Bjp

18 BFC-OP0001

Hi Paul

RE: Subject: Messrs Evans Nant y Boncath Altwalis Carmarthen SA32 7DX

Please respond

Regards Iwan

From: Linda Evans [ Sent: 23 October 2014 19:11 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Subject:

Thankyou for the e-mail, they were definitely in the area yesterday, yellow coats on with tripods, several people saw them. Our gate adjoining the lane was not closed properly and there were footprints in the mud in our field.

They are obviously lying about not being there yesterday, it would have been between 4-5 pm.

Linda Evans

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 23 October 2014 19:40 To: 'Paul Clough' Cc: 'Linda Evans' 'Talgoed Stud' ; 'ceri hoddinott' '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE:

Hi Paul

RE:

Regards Iwan

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 07 November 2014 12:53 To: 'Paul Clough' Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; Subject: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

7th November 2014 – E Mail Only

Hi Paul

Mr & Mrs Eagle 33 Parc Sterling Johnston Carms BFID 2213 - Bat Tree survey wed 12/11/14 Brian & Ann Patten (parcels 1867 & 79) Tiffany Lodge Llwyn Yr Eos Rhydargaeau - Topographical Survey. Ralph & Pamela Eagle (parcels 2212& 2213) 33 Parc Sterling Johnston Carms - Topographical Survey. Helen Dufty (parcel 6) Bryn Farm Llanpumsaint -

19 BFC-OP0001

Topographical Survey. Margaret & Huw Walters Nant Y Goitre Uchaf Ferryside (parcel 5001) - Topographical Survey.

14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 on the following days next week w/c 10/11/14.

Your notice of entry we understand stipulates a bat or door mice tree survey or a topographical survey. Please confirm. Our understanding of the type of survey as proposed by WPD is as follows:-

• A survey by definition is to quote ‘to make a detailed map (an area of land) by measuring or calculating distance and height.

• A bat survey entails by definition is an investigation to determine the presence of bats and evidence of their activity such as droppings, urine stains, bits of prey, dead bat carcasses etc. and to determine the presence of features suitable for roosting; graded on a range from negligible through to high.

A walk over is something totally different and we still await your explanation what this is.

A walk over survey is not a topographical survey or a bat survey. I understand that technically both can be carried out at the same time. But that is not the issue. I would however suggest that in the case of a bat survey where the survey is not conclusive that there may be a requirement for additional surveys. This by definition is not a walk over but a detailed survey.

As I have previously stated WPD have been most opaque with their dealings with Landowners and I would like to bring this to the intention of The Minister who granted the consent in the first instance. Please provide me with the appropriate details.

Landowners were under the impression that they would be compensated for ‘Surveys’. Your own literature states that Surveys will be compensated in the tune of £250 per holding.

We note that survey payments will not be made for any access which involves ‘walkovers’. This is appreciated as your literature is quite clear on this. Walkovers will not be compensated and this is understood by Landowners.

I had a meeting as you are aware with Mr Hubbard on the 22nd October 2014. Please refer to the email from Nia Davies on the 20th October. Your Mr Hubbard was appreciative of the confusion that was being caused by the difference of opinion over the term survey and promised that he would reply before the notices were effected. We have not had the courtesy of this reply – although it was WPD who called the meeting to ask for feedback from Land Agents which I attended and provided information in good faith, on the assumption it would be acted on. As the topic of ‘surveys’ was one area of concern as noted above to Landowners I brought it specifically to the attention of Mr Hubbard. I believe Mr Hubbard understood the confusion that his was causing and promised this response which we have not received.

I would have thought by now that WPD would have replied as in any CPO it is incumbent on the Acquiring Authority to be clear and precise in their dealings with Land owners affected by the scheme.

In this instance it is clear that WPD are in breach of their duty under the code to Landowners and WPD following our meeting have had sufficient time to return to the writer to clarify and clear up any misunderstandings with the parties regarding ‘surveys’.

20 BFC-OP0001

As you know I have written repeatedly on behalf of Landowners requesting payment for ‘Surveys whether it be a topographical or bat/door mice survey. Our requests have been ignored repeatedly and no explanation has been forthcoming from WPD.

You have also carried out topographical surveys on Nantyboncath Farm and Llwyn Newydd without Landowners consent which is of course trespass. I am still awaiting your response on that. You have also failed to make arranged appointments where Landowners have taken time off work to meet your surveyors. When I have subsequently written to you regarding these ‘missed appointments’ you have ignored my correspondence, failed to apologise for the missed appointments and generally failed to provide any answers.

One of my clients also has commercial bee hives on her property and WPD were going to come back to me with your proposals regarding your Surveyors risk assessment and insurance cover. Once again after assurances given to us at our meeting on the 22nd October 2014 we have not heard from you on both issues.

My clients have been reasonable throughout this process and it has been WPD who have been extremely reluctant to communicate with me regarding landowners concerns. We believe this to be unreasonable by way of failure in your duty to respond to our reasonable written requests for more information and requests for survey payments which you clearly set out in your own correspondence.

My clients have no wish to hamper your ongoing Surveys and I will take advice individually from them should they decide to prevent your access. This is unlikely as my clients are law abiding and decent people and if I do not hear from them then you can assume access is granted to your surveyors on the dates you propose.

As stated unless I hear contrary from my clients, then all reasonable access will be provided and I will relay any additional information from my clients to you as I get it regarding anything which may be a risk to your surveyors.

However I wish to point out for the record that I believe that these surveys will constitute technical trespass as clearly you are undertaking survey work on the ruse as ‘walkovers’ when these are surveys in all but name.

I would be grateful for details of The Office of the Executive of WPD.

Regards Iwan Jones Bjp 104 Lammas Street Carmarthen SA31 3AP CC Rhodri Glyn Thomas AM & J Edwards MP

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 07 November 2014 16:29 To: [email protected] Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Annwyl Iwan

BRECHFA FOREST CONNECTION PROJECT

Thank you for meeting with us on 22 October 2014.

21 BFC-OP0001

A draft response has been prepared to address the queries which you have raised. The draft requires internal review and will be sent to you next week.

Yours sincerely

Nia

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 07 November 2014 17:24 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Cc: '[email protected]'; Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Dear Nia

Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project – Surveys

Thank you for this.

It has been over two weeks since we last met in Carmarthen at your request so that you could deal with Landowners concerns. I understand the meetings were arranged by WPD so you could obtain feedback from Land Agents as to landowners concerns.

I raised my very serious concerns about the way you were conducting your surveys.

I noted when I was speaking regarding survey confusion, Mr Hubbard nodding his head in agreement and conceding that there was confusion in the way surveys were being described. I spent a considerable amount of time advising you why there was confusion based on the differences between a ‘survey’ and a walk over. Mr Hubbard who had issued these notices in the first place conceded that confusion could have arisen based on the unclear language being used in WPD land owner packs and the served notices.

I advised that you needed to understand that the people you were serving notices on were Landowners and not technical surveying people. Even I have failed to grasp why a topographical or bat survey would be termed the same as a walk over and I am a qualified surveyor. So you can understand Landowners total confusion.

Landowners have also questioned why some Landowners were being paid for surveys and others not?

I asked if you would clarify your position before you sent more threatening and upsetting letters to my clients. You advised me that you would respond quickly to my concerns.

You have not.

Your e mail is a little late and in the last two weeks I have in this period raised issues of trespass and questioned the non-payments to Landowners for surveys but these matters have been overlooked or ignored by WPD. We have had none or little meaningful response from WPD regarding these matters over the last 2 weeks. From an Acquiring Authority relying on CPO legislation we would have expected a more transparent and logical approach.

22 BFC-OP0001

As I have made a complaint I would expect you to deal with the complaint in accordance to your complaints procedure accordingly.

As stated access is provided by my clients as per my previous e mail, but I believe your notices to be deficient in accordance to their complete ambiguity and lack of transparency.

Your e mail late this Friday afternoon is of little comfort to my clients as I understand your notices take effect on from Monday morning next week. If my clients do not read this email or in some cases have no e mail then in effect they will be in breach of your notice and liable for a warrant enforcing entry and any costs associated with your losses if they prevent access.

I will be asking Mr Jonathan Edwards MP to bring my concerns to the attention to the Minister in whose responsibility it is for scheme and I will furnish the appropriate department with the correspondence that raises my concerns regarding WPD lack of transparency and failure to provide any meaningful reply to some of our correspondence.

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 November 2014 12:17 To: Nia Wyn Davies Subject: FW: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

Dear Both

Subject: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

You were going to respond to my points highlighted in yellow regarding the bees prior to your visit today.

Please advise?

Regards Iwan

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 November 2014 12:47 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

Annwyl Iwan

Thank you for your e-mail. I see that I was not copied into the e-mail of 07.11. 2014 thus I will review in light of our discussion with reference to Mr & Mrs Reed.

Regards

Nia

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 November 2014 12:58 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Subject: RE: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

23 BFC-OP0001

Hi Nia

Subject: RE: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

Thankyou for your e mail and I would confirm my clients reasonable request for a risk assessment and confirmation of your indemnity insurance for your surveyors prior to entry.

Please also confirm what type of survey is being commissioned and whether you intend to make the appropriate payment for the survey

My client will also draft a plan advising you and your surveyors of the safest route to minimize any contact between your surveyors and the bees

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 November 2014 14:01 To: Nia Wyn Davies Cc: [email protected]; Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

14th November 2014

Dear Nia

Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project – Surveys

Thank you for advising your surveyors not to enter my clients land today. We are aware of your rights as we discussed less than one hour ago but I would confirm that my clients concerns had not been addressed when I was specifically told in our recent meeting that they would be addressed.

Please refer to my earlier e mail to Freedom on the 7th November which has not been addressed with the specific part regarding the bees marked in yellow below.

As you are aware we have still not heard from your colleague regarding this matter and you have had ample time to address this subject.

We are still awaiting receipt of the risk assessment and a copy of your insurance cover. I am aware that your colleagues thought my clients concerns to be comical at our recent meeting but this is a serious matter that needs to be addressed by WPD in the appropriate way.

My clients are reasonable people and primarily concerned about the safety of your surveyors. Whilst I understand the risks associated with livestock, I have no idea about the safety requirements that are required around commercial bee hives – hence the need for the risk assessment which has been dismissed by WPD as laughable.

24 BFC-OP0001

This is not however a laughing matter and my clients wish to ensure the safety of your surveyors and I understand will provide me with a plan showing the best route for your surveyors to avoid ‘flight paths’ which I will pass onto you when I receive it.

I have no idea what is meant by flight paths and how this affects bee behaviour but my clients are experienced bee keepers and their concerns for your surveyors should be heeded and observed. Their valuable knowledge should therefore not be dismissed as inconsequential or laughable by WPD.

I also refer to your e mail of last week where you wrote on the 7th November 2015

Thank you for meeting with us on 22 October 2014.

A draft response has been prepared to address the queries which you have raised. The draft requires internal review and will be sent to you next week.

You have acknowledged today that this response will not be forthcoming this week. I understand that we are likely to have the response from WPD next week.

Can I again state for the record that landowners are talking to each other and asking the question as to why some landowners are being paid for surveys and others are not being paid for surveys?

We are disappointed not to receive the communique we were promised this week.

Regards Iwan Bjp

PS:I have commenced blind copying all clients with e mail accounts to all correspondence affecting their property. I hope to have a better picture in the next 14 days a full understanding of the route direction and will advise you all accordingly by separate e mails

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 November 2014 12:58 To: Nia Wyn Davies Subject: RE: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

Hi Nia

Subject: RE: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

Thankyou for your e mail and I would confirm my clients reasonable request for a risk assessment and confirmation of your indemnity insurance for your surveyors prior to entry.

Please also confirm what type of survey is being commissioned and whether you intend to make the appropriate payment for the survey

My client will also draft a plan advising you and your surveyors of the safest route to minimize any contact between your surveyors and the bees

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 November 2014 14:58

25 BFC-OP0001

To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; Celia ; Matthew Bickford Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Annwyl Iwan

I refer to our earlier telephone call.

As discussed, we seek meetings with your following clients to discuss draft conceptual route alignment and indicative access plans:

1. Mr & Mrs Eagle 2. Mr & Mrs H Walters, 3. Mr & Mrs RC Jones, 4. Mr & Mrs RDH Bowen, ; 5. Ms DA Davies, ; 6. Mr & Mrs Patten, ; 7. Mr & Mrs RHW Howells, 8. Mr & Mrs Reed,

We have scheduled the afternoon of Wednesday 19th, Thursday 20th and the morning of Friday 21st November 2014 for the above meetings. We would therefore appreciate if you would liaise with your clients to arrange, if convenient, such meetings on the aforementioned dates. The plans to be referred to at the meetings will be used purely for comment and cannot be released.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yn ddiffuant

Nia

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 November 2014 16:03 To: [email protected] Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Annwyl Iwan

I acknowledge receipt of your three e-mails to me today, timed at 12.17, 12.58 and 14.01, respectively (copies attached).

Regrettably, I note from the commencement of your 14.01 e-mail that it appears that you have misunderstood our earlier discussions.

Your comments have been referred to WPD for its consideration.

Yn ddiffuant

26 BFC-OP0001

Nia

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: PHILLIPS, Rebeca [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 17 November 2014 10:15 To: [email protected] Subject: FW: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Hi Iwan

Thanks for keeping us updated with matters. If there anything Rhodri or Jonathan can do on the matter? Regards Rebeca

From: dawn reed Sent: 16 November 2014 22:20 To: [email protected] Subject: Fw: wp

Hello Iwan Please find attached a sketch plan of the route to follow over our land. Please can you let me know the day and time that wp will be attending. Thanks Dawn

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 17 November 2014 10:21 To: 'Nia Wyn Davies' Subject: Topographical Survey. Helen Dufty (parcel 6) Bryn Farm Llanpumsaint -Bee Location

Hi Nia

Topographical Survey. Helen Dufty (parcel 6) Bryn Farm Llanpumsaint -Bee Location Subject: 14 day NOTICE under the ELA 1898 WPD Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Lines

Please find attached the plan which will assist your surveyors. We trust they will stick to the route provided. Please note our clients are not accountable for any injury caused to your surveyors.

• Please confirm the time and date of the survey subject to our receipt of the appropriate risk assessment and your surveyors and WPD insurance cover. • Please confirm payment for the Topographical Survey in accordance to your own literature

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 18 November 2014 10:08 To: 'PHILLIPS, Rebeca' ; '[email protected]'

27 BFC-OP0001

; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Hi Rebecca/ Jonathan & Rhodri

RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

I would like to speak with Jonathan if at all possible.

At the last Land Owners meeting in Carmarthen, WPD had a representative in the room unknown to me or Jonathan or the landowners present. I have no issue with this per say, as the meeting was a transparent forum regarding land owners concerns. When I asked those present in which part of the County they lived in, it was my attempt to get have an understanding of the geographical location of the group.

I was then going to ask whether there was a representative from WPD present.

However someone in the room got there first and made a statement wondering whether somebody from WPD was present. This caused some amusement in the room as nobody really believed that someone from WPD would actually come to this meeting without fully disclosing their identity.

As there was no reply from the room in respect to the statement made I assumed correctly that there was no representative from WPD present in the room.

Again I would reiterate that I would not have had an issue with WPD turning up to the meeting but would have expected an Acquiring Authority to have done so with full disclosure and complete transparency.

After the meeting I was made aware that a representative from WPD was present at the meeting and taking detailed notes.

Very serious allegations have now been made against the Chair Lady in an open letter received from the WPD Solicitor acting on behalf of WPD.

I believe the representative from WPD should have made himself known prior to the meeting to both you and me and the Chairlady.

The non-declaration of an interest from an Acquiring Authority causes me great concern.

I understand that a declaration of interest is required by law.

You may recall we had similar problems with WPD on the Alltwalis Line where threats were made against Land Owners and Agents acting for landowners.

I look forward to your reply

Regards Iwan

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 18 November 2014 15:26 To: '[email protected]' Cc: '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; 'Lauren' 28 BFC-OP0001

; 'Celia ' Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project FAO Mr Hubbold

Email To: - [email protected]

Dear Mr Hubbold

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Further to the meeting of the 22nd October 2014 may I firstly thank you for your letter and the contents contained therein which I will deal with in due course. [COPY ATTACHED]

I would be grateful if you would confirm the representative from Western Power Distribution who was at the Landowners Meeting.

I am not aware of the allegations made against the Chair Lady. Please can you explain these in more detail?

As such allegations have been made, I think it would be sensible for a further meeting with Western Power Distribution possibly in the presence of the Local AM and MP, if they are so inclined to meet us, to enable you to expand on these allegations.

Yours sincerely

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

Dear Mr Hubbold

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Further to our meeting of the 22nd October 2014 I firstly thank you for the letter and the contents contained therein which I will deal with in due course.

In respect to page 3, the landowner meeting held at Carmarthen Mart, I would be grateful if you would confirm the representative from Western power Distribution who was at our meeting. At the very start of the meeting I requested information as to the makeup of the group whether they were from North of the River Towy or South of the River Towy and I also requested any information with regard to any of those people present with interests with Western Power Distribution.

I am aware that one of your representatives was at the meeting but failed to make their presence known to the panel who also included the Local Member of Parliament.

You will note that this was a Landowners Meeting and we would therefore have expected the courtesy of knowing who it was from Western power Distribution who was at the meeting. Please would you furnish us with this information and we would also be grateful for an extract from the notes taken by your representative. As you are aware, we have been fully transparent with our dealings with Western Power Distribution and it is therefore disappointing to note that not only were Western Power Distribution at a Landowners Meeting but were there also on a covert basis.

I will be forwarding the report this letter addressed to us of the 13th November 2014 to our Local AM and MP.

29 BFC-OP0001

With regard to allegations made against the Chair Lady these are fully rejected as I was not aware of such allegations being made against Western Power Distribution.

As such allegations have been made, I think it would be sensible for a further meeting with Western Power Distribution in the presence of the Local AM and MP for the area.

With kind regards

Yours sincerely

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 18 November 2014 15:29 To: '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Cc: 'Lauren' ; 'Celia ' Subject: FW: WPD Letter Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Line

Dear Both

FW: WPD Letter Brechfa Wind Farm Transmission Line

Please find attached a letter received from the solicitor acting for WPD.

I would be grateful if I could discuss survey payments and the contents of my previous letter with you at some stage

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: PHILLIPS, Rebeca [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 November 2014 11:30 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Diolch Iwan.

I have sent you number to Jonathan and he will try and call you today.

Regards Rebeca

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 November 2014 13:47 To: '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Cc: 'Lauren' ; 'Celia ' Subject: Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

30 BFC-OP0001

Email To: - [email protected]

19th September 2014

Dear Andrew

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Thank you for your letter of the 13th November 2014.

Further to our meeting of the 22nd October 2014 I would confirm the following.

i. Noted

ii. Noted

Topographical Survey on Land Subject to Statutory Notice

Payment For Surveys

Obviously as Western Power Distribution do not wish to accept the principle definition of a survey then the matter will be addressed to the inspector at any future public enquiry.

Your understanding also with regard to ‘I was of the impression that you understood our rationale for only providing payments in those cases where landowners’ or occupiers’ property may have suffered damage or loss as a result of our survey activities’ was not understood by the writer. I made it abundantly clear that your literature was not clear and was far from being transparent on this issue. The lack of transparency has caused significant confusion to the majority of Landowners.

We are in agreement that all landowners have acted responsibly and reasonably in respect to allowing Western Power Distribution rights of access to their land when those rights have been fully explained. However, virtually every client has expressed amazement that as surveys are being carried out on their land, why is it that they are not being paid for these surveys when it is quite clear in your literature that you state that surveys will be paid for. In the notices that you have also sent to various clients, it also notes in those notices that there will be ‘topographical survey’, ‘bat survey’, ‘mice survey’ or the. The extent by the damage caused or not caused by the survey is immaterial.

You are conducting surveys on private land and gathering information. This is the definition of a survey and what a survey is for.

I had a recent meeting with an experienced Western Power Distribution Operative and when I mentioned this to him he was also of a similar understanding that a ‘survey’ was for the purpose of gathering detail whereas a ‘walkover’ was a walk across a field, uninterrupted with no information gathered. If a Senior Western Power Distribution Operative is confused what is meant by a walkover then you can fully appreciate why my clients are also confused.

31 BFC-OP0001

Once again I will leave this for the inspector to decide based on the facts to be presented to him.

Professional Fees

I will advise you in due course but note that you wish to deal with fees based on a scale payment as opposed to quantum meruit.

Landowners Meeting

Serious allegations have been made against the Lady Chairman.

We would appreciate a copy of the allegations made and any transcript (if any) made at the Land owner meeting.

Out of curiosity may I also ask how did you gather this information as WPD were not present at the meeting?

I will need an answer to this point and trust you will respond in the next 24 hours with full disclosure as to how you gathered the facts to make these assertions against the Chair Person. An e mail response is sufficient for our purposes.

Have you any other allegations to make?

If you have any further allegations about me or the MP present or any of the Landowners present at the Landowners Meeting we would like these to be put on the record. Once again based on the serious allegations already made we would like a response in the next 24 hours.

As you may be aware Bjp were personally threatened by Statkraft and WPD during the construction of the Altwalis Wind Farm regarding the transmission line. Please note that on numerous occasions during and after the construction we received apologies from WPD and Statkraft regarding previous conduct. These apologies were also received by numerous Land owners represented by Bjp on the scheme.

If you have any further allegations to make then please make them now. I have copied this e mail to the MP present so that he is fully informed. May I also have the e mail details of Mr Christian Helm? I am sure I have already asked for this information.

Senior Personnel at WPD

Thank you for these details.

Appendix - Surveys

On a personal note, thank you for this letter which is helpful to us to understanding the thinking of WPD and your position regarding this scheme.

The various survey notes attached regarding Landowners will be posted to the various landowners and I will await their comments.

With kind regards

Yours sincerely

32 BFC-OP0001

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 November 2014 17:42 To: [email protected] Subject: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback

Hi Iwan,

Following on from our recent telecom where we discussed if I could contact your clients with a view to arrange meetings with them to discuss the “Draft Conceptual Route Alignment” as there informal feedback would be most appreciated.

I look forward to hearing from you shortly Regards Matthew Bickford | Wayleave Officer | Freedom Group

From: [email protected] To: [email protected] CC Removed Subject: RE: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:58:03 +0000

Hi All

RE: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback

A Mr Bickford from WPD may contact you to discuss route alignment.

I have asked for a copy of the route alignment but I am informed that these are not available to keep.

I am sorry that this at very short notice but I only received this request at 4.00 pm this afternoon.

If you are not happy with the documentation then please refer the agent back to me.

Regards Iwan

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

From: Brechfa Forest Connection [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 20 November 2014 09:28 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Dear Mr Jones

Thank you for your email regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project. Your enquiry has been passed on to the project team and we will provide a more detailed response shortly.

Kind regards

33 BFC-OP0001

Jocelyn Community Relations Team

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 21 November 2014 15:19 To: '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Dear Andrew

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Please respond to the areas which require an explanation from you.

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Brechfa Forest Connection [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 21 November 2014 17:51 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Dear Mr Jones

Thank you for your email regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project. Your enquiry has been passed on to the project team and we will provide a more detailed response shortly.

Kind regards

Jocelyn Community Relations Team

-----Original Message----- From: Dawn Sent: 21 November 2014 18:37 To: Subject: Phone call Friday 21 November

Hello Iwan Just to summarise what happened on Friday 21 November, my mother, who is in her eighties, received a call at 1622 hours on our landline. She asked who it was and the man talked so quickly and went on from one subject to another she was unable to get name. He said he had a plan given to him and wanted to come and deal with it. She said that he had to go through land agent with which he said that he had spoken to you and it was ok. She asked him for his number but he did not give it to her and said he was leaving for home. She said I was dealing with the matter and I was at work. He asked where I worked and if he could see me there with which she said it was not a good idea. He said he would like to come on Sunday and would ring me then. She approached the

34 BFC-OP0001

subject about payment for access etc and he said it was nothing to do with him but with his head office.

She felt he was very pushy and did not give her time to ask questions as he went on and on etc. She did not feel intimidated but did feel that she was put on the spot.

I then spoke to you. After our conversation I rang 1471 and got the number 01554835967 and rang it. Kevin Phillips was the man concerned and he informed me he wanted to show me the route and there would be a smaller less detailed plan in the post for Tuesday. I said I wanted him to go through you first and asked him to contact you as I wanted you to see it as well. Can you please clarify if he has rung you and whether I should see him with you or alone etc. Please can you get back to me before Sunday. Thanks Dawn Reed GLyncaredig with the bees.

Sent from my iPad

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 22 November 2014 20:46 To: 'Dawn' < > Cc: 'Lauren' ; 'Celia ' Subject: RE: Phone call Friday 21 November Glyncaredig - WPD Brechfa

Hi Dawn

Glyncaredig - WPD Brechfa Dawn Reed

I have not received a phone call from this person.

I have already told WPD that there is a requirement for a risk assessment before WPD Surveyors access your land. I also need a copy of the insurance cover.

Ring me tomorrow on 01554 891536 if you have any problems with WPD tomorrow

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 24 November 2014 16:29 To: 'Brechfa Forest Connection' Cc: 'Lauren' ; 'Celia Morse' Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project FAO Mr Hubbold

24th November 2014

Dear Mr Hubbold

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Further to the meeting of the 22nd October 2014 I would be grateful if you would confirm the representative from Western Power Distribution who was at the Landowners Meeting.

35 BFC-OP0001

Yours sincerely

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

Dear Mr Jones

Thank you for your email regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project. Your enquiry has been passed on to the project team and we will provide a more detailed response shortly.

Kind regards

Jocelyn Community Relations Team

From: Linda Evans [ ] Sent: 24 November 2014 17:47 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback

I am not happy for someone to call here, showing maps and asking feedback immediately. We do not wish to be put under pressure like that. They are, of course, free to send on plans so that we may take a look at them prior to a meeting.

I hope you will convey our wishes to WPD.

Many thanks

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 24 November 2014 20:28 To: 'Linda Evans' Cc: Removed Subject: RE: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback

24th November 2014

Hi Linda

Subject: RE: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback

I am not happy about the amount of advance notice given.

I was only told about this late on Wednesday last week and I was informed that that the “Draft Conceptual Route Alignment” would only be discussed on Thursday or Friday the 20th /21st of November.

I was informed that if we did not accept these dates that there was no guarantee that the route alignment would be discussed with Landowners.

36 BFC-OP0001

I asked Mr Bickford to deal with route alignment elsewhere on the scheme and come back to my clients after I had had a chance to arrange meetings. I asked for 14 days’ notice.

I was told by Mr Bickford that the Draft Conceptual Route Alignment had been discussed elsewhere and that it was only Bjp clients who were left to be discussed.

The amount of time and reasonable notice given by WPD to discuss these important concepts has been extremely unreasonable.

I will circulate this to other Landowners and determine feedback elsewhere. What I have heard elsewhere today confirms my concerns about the poor way WPD are conducting themselves.

To be honest I would have hoped for a better approach from WPD and 14 days’ notice to arrange meetings with Landowners to discuss the pole placement is not unreasonable. This is an important process which WPD are not dealing with in a sensitive or professional way.

I think WPD have been very poor in their communication and notices. I am not happy and I told Mr Bickford this last Wednesday but I felt that my hands were tied and I was informed that if I did not arrange the meetings for Thursday/Friday then the “Draft Conceptual Route Alignment” would not be discussed with my clients.

I know that Bryan and Avril were contacted on Sunday and that Dawn was also contacted over the weekend. I am awaiting feedback from them also but Bryan was not happy today when I spoke to him this afternoon.

Let me have your thoughts. I can pop out to see you at some time towards the end of the week if you are free

Regards Iwan

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 24 November 2014 20:56 To: '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' Subject: FW: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback - WPD Brechfa

Hi Both

FW: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback - WPD Brechfa

Please find some further dissatisfied Landowner led correspondence on this matter.

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Dawn Sent: 25 November 2014 14:42 To: Subject: Re: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback

Hello Iwan

37 BFC-OP0001

Just to recap I did not receive any more phone calls from Kevin Phillips on last Sunday. I have now had paperwork in the post which he said would be superseded by what he wanted to talk to me about on Sunday so I am not sure now if this is current. Thanks Dawn

Sent from my iPad

From: Talgoed Stud Sent: 25 November 2014 15:43 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback

Hi Iwan

I refer to your e-mail of Monday 24th and I write to you in this context.

Echoing Mrs Evans email,we would like to strongly express our anger at the unreasonable approach being taken by WPD. They telephoned us on Sunday morning to arrange an appointment - doing this is both an invasion of privacy and a total disrespect for the sanctity of weekends.

We would also like to register, in the.strongest possible terms, our protest at the lack of flexibility that WPD are showing towards the dates for discussion, by saying that they cannot guarantee that the route would be discussed with landowners if the dates proposed by WPD were not accepted, WPD are either using strongarm tactics or a subtle form of blackmail. Both of which are, at best unprofessional and at worst disingenuous and is yet more proof that there is underlying contempt for the Landowners.

As mentioned earlier, we are not prepared to discuss the proposed route until we have had time to fully study, digest and discuss the proposal with the other affected landowners.

We would be grateful if you would communicate this to WPD in the most robust manner possible

Regards Avril

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 25 November 2014 16:30 To: 'Brechfa Forest Connection' Cc: '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; Others Removed Subject: FW: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback - Bryan & Avril Davies Llwyn Newydd, Alltwalis Road, Carmarthen SA32 7BZ

Dear Sirs

Subject: Re: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback - Talgoed Stud Bryan & Avril Davies Llwyn Newydd,

Please note recent correspondence from landowners affected by this scheme.

38 BFC-OP0001

We would appreciate your opinion whether you consider the time given to Landowners to consider the scheme and the proposed pole placement which will have in many cases a serious influence on the value of the retained property caused by the effects of injurious affection is reasonable.

This is particularly so as the time allocated has not given the landowners sufficient time to discuss the pole layout with their professional advisors.

Please respond to the concerns expressed by the landowner noted.

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 25 November 2014 16:43 To: 'Brechfa Forest Connection' Cc: '[email protected]' ; '[email protected]' ; Others Removed Subject: RE: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback - Glyncaredig, Rhydargaeau, Carmarthen SA32 7DR

Dear Sirs

Subject: Re: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback - G

Note my client’s confusion.

I understand that someone from WPD had arranged to turn up on Sunday to meet my client but they failed to turn up or ring my client who stayed in to meet your representative as she was concerned that if she did not meet them on Sunday she would lose her opportunity to see your proposals before they were cast in stone.

We await your clear and unambiguous advice as Landowners are concerned that there rights are being disenfranchised due to WPD inability to organise Landowner meetings with reasonable time for the Land owners and the Land Agent to understand your proposals as the Acquiring Authority.

We will put Land owners concerns to the Inspector and reserve the right to make an official complaint to the Minister.

We await your response.

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Brechfa Forest Connection [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 26 November 2014 15:27 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Draft Conceptual Route Alignment Feedback - Glyncaredig, Rhydargaeau, Carmarthen SA32 7DR

Dear Mr Jones

39 BFC-OP0001

Thank you for your email regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project. Your enquiry has been passed on to the project team and we will provide a more detailed response shortly.

Kind regards

Jocelyn Community Relations Team

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 27 November 2014 13:31 To: 'Brechfa Forest Connection' Cc: Removed Subject: Request for Information Paperwork Dawn Reed Glyncaredig Rhydargeau.

27th November 2014

Dear Sirs

Request for Information Paperwork Dawn Reed Glyncaredig Rhydargeau.

I have had a meeting this morning with Dawn Reed regarding the Request for Information Paperwork. Dawn confirmed that Mr Kevin Phillips who was supposed to contact her on Sunday and arrange the appointment for Sunday failed to phone or call at my clients property. This is disappointing.

Initially Mr Phillips phoned Dawns mother Friday afternoon who is elderly and Mrs Reed Senior was firstly put out by the pushy nature of Mr Phillips and secondly by the speed with which he spoke to her on the phone. Mrs Reed asked for his phone number which he did not provide.

Mr Phillips requested details where my client worked so that he could meet Dawn at her work place. This seems a fairly unusual practice for WPD.

On arriving home Dawn had to ring 1471 to get Mr Phillips phone number. I was away until Monday so Dawn was unable to obtain appropriate professional advice.

My client phoned Mr Phillips and he told her that he would contact her on Sunday to arrange an appointment to allow plans to be viewed. In the Friday evening call he told Dawn that a package would arrive on Tuesday outlining WPD proposals for the line. He also stated that what was being sent out for Tuesday had been ‘superseded’ by the information he had to show my client. He failed to call or turn up.

We would therefore like to know the following:-

• May we have a copy of the revised information which supersedes the document my client has received. • How are we supposed to provide WPD with the information you request knowing the document is factually incorrect. • My clients are unhappy that appointments or phone calls were agreed and your Agent failed to contact my client or phone them to tell them that he was to going to turn up. My clients waited in all day for the call that never materialised. • I have already stated that these meetings were arranged at the last minute without any consultation with the clients Land Agent and in many instances we were unable to warn or advice clients of these impromptu meetings as many clients would not have read e mail correspondence by then and many have no e mail facility. 40 BFC-OP0001

Furthermore my clients are still on notice and potentially subject to prosecution. We have already advised the need for a risk assessment due to bee hives on the clients retained land and a copy of the appropriate indemnity insurance.

Please confirm what surveys have been carried out to date.

We await your response

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Brechfa Forest Connection [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 01 December 2014 11:07 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Request for Information Paperwork Dawn Reed Glyncaredig Rhydargeau.

Dear Mr Jones Thank you for your email regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project. Your enquiry has been passed on to the project team and we will provide a more detailed response shortly. Kind regards Jocelyn Community Relations Team

3rd December 2014

Western Power Distribution Freedom Group Unit 6 Tenth Avenue, Zone 3 Deeside Industrial Park Deeside CH5 2UA

Dear Sirs

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Request for Information Your Ref: WPD/NWD/103

Thank you for your letter of the 24th November 2014 to Ms DA Davies, Llwyn-Newydd, Alltwalis Road, Carmarthen SA32 7DZ.

We have filled in your questionnaire to the best of our knowledge.

Please note the following.

With regard to ‘what is your interest in the land’, we would confirm that we have ticked this as Own and Occupy all of the land. Currently there are tenants on the property but we are not aware whether there will be tenants on the property as and when your notice to treat will be completed to access the land. Until that time, we are unable to answer this question and would therefore declare that the land is occupied by the owner. When we have an indication as to when the proposed development is intended for, we will have a better indication as to whether the land will be owner occupied or whether part of the land will be sold for the season for the ‘sale of grass’.

41 BFC-OP0001

We will advise you in due course and prior to entry we will require appropriate notices to be able to answer question 3 in greater detail for you if applicable.

We trust that the questionnaire has been fully answered in accordance to your requirements and that this conforms to the request for information as contained within your most recent letter.

On a personal note, I would confirm that the landowner is much opposed to your scheme and this will cause significant injurious affection to the value of the retained property.

Our client is concerned that he has no objection to the scheme to comprise underground cabling without poles.

Please note that we will object to the scheme as it currently stands in particular with regard to the extent of the compensation payments being made available to the land owner which does not compensate the land owner in respect to the full losses in particular comprising injurious affection.

Be aware of course that there is significant precedence elsewhere in West Wales concerning other wind farm developments in particular the Alltwalis Wind Farm Scheme where significant compensation packages were awarded over and above those currently being ascribed to your schedule of payments contained within the land owners brochure.

We would fully appreciate an understanding of the legislation concerning the payment of compensation to the land owner for injurious affection in particular with regard to the loss in value of the farm due to the current proposed Brechfa Wind Farm Development and the overhead cabling route which as noted is of concern to the landowner in particular with regard to the loss in value of his retained land interest.

We look forward to your earliest reply but we would confirm that at this time we will continue to object to the scheme until all of our questions regarding the accommodation works to minimise the effects of the scheme on our clients property comprising underground cabling has been considered as an alternative to the aforementioned scheme.

We look forward to your earliest reply.

With kind regards

Yours sincerely

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

Properties within 50m of the proposed development

A significant diminution in MV of the property based on the proximity of the line and the direction of the line in particular taking views from the property in the north west direction.

Diminution in MV of the property due to the requirement for access to maintain and update the line.

I would be grateful also for a copy of the Deed of Grant that would be considered with regard to our clients retained property. Our clients are concerned that the Deed of Grant will have a significant impact on the MV of our clients retained property.

42 BFC-OP0001

We would confirm that the amount of compensation being considered by WPD does not fully compensate our clients for their losses based on previous payments set during the Alltwalis Wind Farm Development and the acknowledgement of significant injurious affection during that scheme. We are aware of extensive precedent which favours additional payments over and above those being noted by Western Power Distribution. However this does not preclude our client’s desired position to have the cables underground and this will be the policy adopted by our clients reasonably based on the public enquiry regarding the CPO on this issue. We look forward to your earliest reply in due course.

My clients have also confirmed that the difference being travelled on the overhead line is approximately double of that which would be required for an underground cabling route which would be that much straighter and would therefore not cause as much disruption to the visual environment of our clients retained property which is significant. We would be grateful if you would consider your proposals again based on this information and consider a more direct route and cabling as opposed to overhead in particular with regard to improved technology which has made the underground cabling a much more viable option with regard to routing and cost.

Please note that our clients will continue to object to the scheme until all of their concerns are met and only then will they reasonably withdraw their objection to this scheme.

Straight route cabling overhead would also be in a straight line.

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 09 December 2014 21:22 To: 'Brechfa Forest Connection' Cc: 'Lauren' ; 'Celia Morse' Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project FAO Mr Hubbold

Dear Mr Hubbold

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Further to your letter of the 3rd December I am aware that the person who you refer to as ‘a member of the public’ is in fact employed by WPD.

Please confirm this point.

We were aware of the person employ (WPD) during the course of the meeting but had no objection to the gentleman’s presence as the meeting was an open invitation to all and was also attended by other Land Agents acting for other Land owners.

Pleased provide full disclosure that the member of the public you refer to is in fact employed by WPD.

We await your immediate response

Yours sincerely

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

43 BFC-OP0001

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 09 December 2014 21:31 To: 'Lauren' Cc: 'Lauren' ; 'Celia ' Subject: RE: Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Lauren please attach the letter 3rd Dec 2014

Dear Andrew

Please note my additional points in red

Regards Iwan

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 21 November 2014 15:19 To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' Cc: 'Lauren'; 'Celia ' Subject: RE: Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Dear Andrew

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Please respond to the areas which require an explanation from you.

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 19 November 2014 13:47 To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' Cc: 'Lauren'; 'Celia ' Subject: Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Email To: - [email protected]

19th September 2014

Dear Andrew

Re: Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Thank you for your letter of the 13th November 2014.

Further to our meeting of the 22nd October 2014 I would confirm the following.

i. Noted

ii. Noted

44 BFC-OP0001

iii. Noted. I am not aware that this was agreed but I am more than happy to be fully transparent in our dealings with Western Power Distribution and to keep you informed of all clients as and when we receive written instructions. Further to your letter of the 3rd December which I have scanned and attached I would confirm that I have no objection to informing you of other Landowners represented by Bjp. A transparent approach is essential and the information packs returned this week will confirm additional landowners who have engaged Bjp.

Topographical Survey on Land Subject to Statutory Notice

Unfortunately we are in complete disagreement on this particular subject. You accepted in our meeting that there was indeed confusion caused by the literature prepared by Western Power Distribution. Landowners have complained that some landowners have been paid for surveys and others have not. I will bring this to the attention of the Minister and I will request the Local AM to write to the Minister. Your literature is confusing and not understood by Landowners. The literature has caused confusion with Landowners and they have asked why some landowners are being paid for surveys and others not?

Payment For Surveys

Obviously as Western Power Distribution do not wish to accept the principle definition of a survey then the matter will be addressed to the inspector at any future public enquiry.

You are conducting surveys on private land and gathering information. This is the definition of a survey and what a survey is for.

Once again I will leave this for the inspector to decide based on the facts to be presented to him.

Professional Fees

I will advise you in due course but note that you wish to deal with fees based on a scale payment as opposed to quantum meruit.

Landowners Meeting

45 BFC-OP0001

Serious allegations have been made against the Lady Chairman.

We would appreciate a copy of the allegations made and any transcript (if any) made at the Land owner meeting.

Out of curiosity may I also ask how did you gather this information as WPD were not present at the meeting?

Have you any other allegations to make?

Please confirm the identity of the person at the meeting?

Senior Personnel at WPD

Thank you for these details.

Appendix - Surveys

On a personal note, thank you for this letter which is helpful to us to understanding the thinking of WPD and your position regarding this scheme.

The various survey notes attached regarding Landowners will be posted to the various landowners and I will await their comments.

With kind regards

Yours sincerely

I A R JONES BSc MRICS FAAV

From: Brechfa Forest Connection [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 11 December 2014 09:13

46 BFC-OP0001

To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Brechfa Forest Connection Project FAO Mr Hubbold

Dear Mr Jones

Thank you for your email regarding the Brechfa Forest Connection Project. Your enquiry has been passed on to the project team and we will provide a more detailed response shortly.

Kind regards

Jocelyn Community Relations Team

From: PAM EAGLE Sent: 22 May 2015 11:33 To: [email protected] Subject: Western Power

Dear Iwan,

We have recently received new plan's from Western Power. We see from the plan's that they now wish to use our gateway for access + our yard. They want to take the hedge + fence down, to our gate way, using the field as access, meaning this can nolonger be used. We use the barn for storage and if they take the yard over we will not get access into it. We strongly object to the new plan's.

We are sending this objection late as we have been away and only just understand the new plan's.

Would you please forward our objections to Western Power.

Regards from Pam and Ralph Eagle

From: Iwan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 22 May 2015 16:20 To: Paul Clough Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; 'Lauren'; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: FW: Western Power

Dear Paul

Ref: BFC/AH/091 Dear Mr & Mrs Eagle Brechfa Forest Connection Project - proposed changes to the order limits

Please note my clients continuing objection to the scheme highlighted red

Regards

IAR Jones Bjp

47 BFC-OP0001

From: Paul Clough [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 04 June 2015 16:30 To: Iwan Cc: [email protected]; Matthew Bickford ; [email protected] Subject: RE: Western Power

Hi Iwan,

Trust all is well with you.

Sorry for the delay, as I have been away. I have now reverted this query to the Project Team to look into this and shall come back to you with a response in due course.

Thank you for your patience.

Kind regards

Paul Clough | Senior Wayleave Officer | Freedom Group Delta House, 10th Avenue, Zone 3, Deeside Industrial Park, Deeside, Flintshire, CH5 2UA M: 07824864273 | E: [email protected] | W: www.freedom-group.co.uk

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 June 2015 09:02 To: [email protected] Cc: Nia Wyn Davies; Paul Clough Subject: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, Alltwalis Rd, Alltwalis, Carmarthen, SA32 7DZ

Dear Iwan,

Brechfa Forest Connection

Please find attached copies of documents posted to your clients on the 12th June 2015 the contents of which are self-explanatory .

Regards

Matthew Bickford For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 June 2015 09:36 To: 'Matthew Bickford'

48 BFC-OP0001

Cc: 'Nia Wyn Davies' ; 'Paul Clough' ; '[email protected]' ; 'Celia ' Subject: RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, Alltwalis Rd, Alltwalis, Carmarthen, SA32 7DZ

Hi Matthew

RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, Alltwalis Rd, Alltwalis, Carmarthen, SA32 7DZ

No documents were attached

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 June 2015 09:56 To: Iwan Jones Subject: RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, Alltwalis Rd, Alltwalis, Carmarthen, SA32 7DZ

Dear Iwan,

It appears that the file is too large or your mailbox is full, I don’t recall delivery problems with previous documents due to size so maybe the latter is the case?

Regards

Matt

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 June 2015 10:52 To: 'Matthew Bickford' Cc: '[email protected]' ; 'Celia ' Subject: RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, Alltwalis Rd, Alltwalis, Carmarthen, SA32 7DZ

Hi Matt

Can you send it in a transfer file please?

Regards Iwan

From: Matthew Bickford [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 16 June 2015 12:12 To: Iwan Jones Cc: [email protected]; Celia ; Nia Wyn Davies Subject: RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage,

Dear Iwan,

I will be posting copies of the documents to your office today.

49 BFC-OP0001

Regards Matthew Bickford For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 26 June 2015 09:05 To: 'Matthew Bickford' Cc: >; 'Paul Clough' ; 'Nia Wyn Davies' ; 'lauren' Subject: FW: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage,

Dear Matthew

Subject: RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, A

I can confirm that the forms are still incorrect.

Unfortunately I had a meeting organized yesterday with the client but I was unable to attend due to personnel matters.

I hope to meet the client next week but they have confirmed their frustration that documents continue to show errors.

My clients also wish to know who is liable for their costs and continual disturbance?

I should also point out that Ms Birch is actually Mrs Birch and is not the daughter of Mr Birch but his wife

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Iwan Jones [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 02 July 2015 13:40 To: 'Matthew Bickford' Cc: ' >; 'Paul Clough' ; 'Nia Wyn Davies' ; 'lauren' Subject: RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage,

Hi Matthew

RE: Mr & Ms Birch,

50 BFC-OP0001

Can you update me on this one. My clients are still concerned that the paper work on their property is still incorrect.

Can you reply to the points highlighted below in yellow

Regards Iwan Bjp

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 03 July 2015 09:27 To: Iwan Jones ; Matthew Bickford Cc: b ; Paul Clough ; lauren Subject: RE: Mr & Ms Birch, Derlwyn Cottage, Alltwalis Rd, Alltwalis, Carmarthen, SA32 7DZ

Annwyl Iwan

Brechfa Forest Connection Project

Thank you for your e-mail of yesterday to my colleague, Matthew.

I respond to the points highlighted yellow in your e-mail of 26 June 2015, as follows:

1. with regards to your clients’ continued concerns about the documents recently submitted to them I would be grateful if you would specify those concerns so that I may seek to fully address the same;

2. As you will be aware from previous Data Information Sheet (DIS) exercises, your clients are eligible for a payment for the receipt of a completed DIS form and plan; and

3. Our records will be revised to show Mrs Birch and I am grateful to you for bringing this to our attention.

I look forward to hearing from you on account of point 1, above.

Yn ddiffuant

NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

From: Nia Wyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 16 July 2015 16:06 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; Celia ; ; Paul Clough ; Matthew Bickford Subject: Brechfa Forest Connection Project Your clients: Mr & Mrs R Eagle

Annwyl Iwan Brechfa Forest Connection Project Your clients: Mr & Mrs R Eagle

51 BFC-OP0001

I refer to your e-mail of 22 May 2015 on account of your above-stated clients. Please accept my apologies for the delay in reverting to you but some of the project team members have been on annual leave and their input was required to address the nature of your clients’ highlighted issues.

To recap, your clients submitted comments which concern WPD’s proposal to gain access across their land to enable the construction of pole 128. I would like to take this opportunity to provide you with some more information concerning the works proposed in the hope that they might assuage your clients’ concerns. The location of pole 128 may be found on the Planning Inspectorate Website for this project: http://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/projects/Wales/Brechfa- Forest-Electricity-Connection/ - please select the tab marked Documents (about a quarter of the way down the page) and click Next (on the right hand side of the screen) until you reach the view “showing 91 to 100 of 149 entries” and the first entry being BFC Vol 02.1 Works Plans Section C is the applicable document for reference. Your clients’ are correct in their understanding that we will need to use their gateway for access. We do not however require the use of the yard itself, although vehicles will need to cross it in order to use the existing gap into the field. Similarly, we do not wish to remove the existing hedge alongside the road. Instead we propose to ‘coppice’ it to approximately 1m in height to allow for visibility. Having done this, and should it be necessary, WPD will also ensure that the field boundary is stock-proofed and will also provide a new replacement gate into the yard. Access to the pole will be taken alongside the field boundary, as shown on our plan, before heading in a south-westerly direction towards the proposed pole location. WPD’s approach to access is not to install stone roads unless it is absolutely necessary to do so. To this end we are of the opinion that it would be possible to drive across the field without the need to bring in stone or other materials to create a track. The only place where we will need to carry out some works is where the vehicles would enter the wetter area of ground immediately to the south of the field, around pole 128. In this location we expect the need to use some roadstone to create a track. Construction is likely to take place late in 2016 and at this location it is likely to be of 29 weeks in duration. However, for the majority of weeks there will be no activity. In total, we anticipate vehicles requiring access through the field on approximately 11 weeks over this period. Within this 11 week period there are likely to be 5 weeks when there may be up to 6 deliveries in the week. In the remaining 6 weeks, deliveries are likely to be no more than one per week.

WPD is committed to working with landowners to ensure that works take place with the minimum of disruption and we would anticipate that given the number of vehicles involved that it would be possible for your clients to maintain access to their barn at all times. We would seek to discuss our construction programme with you prior to the commencement of the work in this location to ensure that any disruption is minimised.

WPD proposes to erect a second pole on your clients’ land. This would be pole 127 and would be located to the south of pole 128 within an existing stand of pine trees. This location has been selected for ecological reasons so as to minimise the need to undertake works within the boggier ground in that area. By placing the pole within the trees it will be necessary to create a new access onto the highway and to remove some of the trees, both for the access, and to ensure appropriate clearance from the line. You may be aware that we have now submitted our application for the connection to the Secretary of State. The application has been validated and your clients will have been contacted by us separately (with a copy sent to you for information) with information on how they can make a 52 BFC-OP0001

representation, where it should be sent and the timetable for submission (by 7 August 2015). This provides your clients with an opportunity to make their views known to the examiner appointed by the Secretary of State.

I trust that this clarifies the position but should you require any further information, please let me know.

Yn ddiffuant

Nia NIA WYN DAVIES For and on behalf of Western Power Distribution

53 BFC-OP0001