The Inspector stated at Para 193 of his decision: “Early in the appeal process the existence of fraudulent representations, in the form of letters of support for the proposals, was brought to my attention. I have excluded these from my considerations, and they have had no influence on my decisions.”

It is interesting that the Inspector saw fit to mention this and accepted that there had been fraudulent misrepresentation. Neither the Council nor the developers have seen fit to investigate or offer an explanation as to how these letters found their way onto the Council Planning Portal. Regrettably as a consequence we do not actually know whether anyone who gave evidence was involved in the fraud.

This was full explored in a previous posting on 26 November 2024: see

The only defence was an attack on the whistleblower.