A Personal Account from the East

[Admin]

East Lodge 1984 - 2016

My name is Michael McNIcholas, I am a native of Staffordshire, born at Kidsgrove in 1945.

I moved to East Lodge, Moorcourt in March/April 1984, along with my wife Christine and children Paul and Sally-Ann.

What follows is a blow by blow account of our interactions with people who live or have lived on the estate, the peculiarities of how the restrictive and other covenants have been breached, and the unexplained involvement of various authorities, ie Social Services, Staffordshire Moorlands District Council, and the good old Staffordshire Police and especially the Leek Division.

At this point I must warn anyone reading this that I will account for every material detail and wherever I deem it necessary I will name certain individuals.

Before going any further I must go back to before we bought the property and the advice I ignored. My solicitor at the time, a well known and respected man named Dickie Panter, did the conveyancing work and dealt with the vendors solicitors Messrs Bishops of Hanley. The acting solicitor for Bishops being a Mr Oliver W Bull. This name is significant as it will crop up throughout.

Dickie advised me not to buy East Lodge. He knew that I had set my heart on the property, and that his advice, albeit well meaning, would fall on deaf ears. He told me that if Oliver Bull was involved we would have problems...

How right he was.

Before we bought the house, we asked the local authority, if the estate would be purely residential, we were assured that it would be.

At the time we moved in Mr and Mrs Johnson were living at the Coppice with their two children. Peter Pinecoffin lived at the Hall, and several other properties were also sold.

The Mystery of the disappearing water

When we first bought East Lodge, we had two water supplies one in the garden which mysteriously disappeared. I will explain what happened and name who dug up our pipework.

Before we moved into East Lodge, our nearest neighbour asked if he could buy all or part of the adjoining land. I asked why he wanted it, but he didn't give a satisfactory reason. However the true nature of the enquiry would as time went by be revealed.

Our friends Mr and Mrs Johnson at Coppice farm were without water, so I suggested that they could get as much as they need from our garden tap. We hadn't moved in at this stage.

Apparently the water in the garden was fed from a hydram, whilst the water to the house came from tanks on the estate behind Oaklands Bungalow, which in turn were fed by hydrams in the woods below the estate, owned by we believe Mr Ball at Goldenhill Farm.

Mr Johnson told me that when he tried to get some water, the tap ran dry, this was odd as it was running very well the day before.

The garden at East Lodge was at the time separated from the field by an interwoven fence, as I looked over the fence I could see the problem. The land had been dug up and the water pipes feeding the tap had been removed. This was our land bought at the same time as the house, therefore no one should have been digging up any pipe work. It emerged that Mr Pitt had taken the pipe out and effectively cut off the supply.

I had been kept firmly in the dark regarding water rights to East Lodge, nut having now had sight of the original conveyance from the Prison Commissioners, and conveyance to Keepers Cottage we now know that the supply to East Lodge must be maintained whilst there is a spring rising at the hydram. We later found out the the main pipe from the hydram entered the estate from Mathers Wood and on to our land, hence the interest of the neighbour enquiring about buying the land, we simply didn't know Why Mr Pitt couldn't have just been honest about it I don't know, we could have worked together rather than have to put up with devious tactics. Eventually following the intervention of Dickie Panter the supply was reinstated, we constructed a pond and installed all the necessary pipework and outlet to allow the system to work. This was something Mr Pitt could not do.

Peaceful Enjoyment

Around about 1987, all the properties were occupied and for sometime everything was peaceful. We really appreciated what was a mini community, getting along quite well. There were about eight children and they got along with each other, having mini adventures all around the estate, no one seemed to be upset seeing children playing.

Part of the agreement when buying our property regarded the upkeep of the estate roads. That was fair enough, until Mr Bull opened his old peoples home. Although this was a business, most residents seemed to let it go on without complaint. However, there were concerns with additional traffic created, especially via the East Lodge entrance, we never complained about this, we left it to others.

However, all was about to change. Mr Bull decided to sell the estate roads to himself, a secret deal, to which no one knew about. This action seemed rather odd, as the rules had changed somewhat. Whereas before we had a residential use throughout the estate, we now had commercial activity with the roads transferred into the hands of the man running that enterprise - Mr Bull. The roads soon began to look worn as the increased traffic to and from the home quickly eroded the tarmac.

Around 1989, things were about to change again. Mr Pinecoffin sold the Hall to a Mr Peter Thornley. We had already heard of Mr Thornley as we had friends in the Wolverhampton area who knew of him. Eventually about 1993 Mr Bull sold his business to Mr Thornley, with a view to expanding his operation. He also wanted to replace the elderly residents with people with learning difficulties. It was mooted in the local press that it was a better financial consideration triggering the change of use. Mr Thornley admits that residents of Moor Court became hostile towards him regarding the changes.

In or about 1990, my son Paul was playing along with some other children along the track, as had been done many times before with the previous owner. At Oaklands Bungalow, they were confronted by Mr Thornley, the new owner, who told them to 'f' off and not to come back.

The children had often walked the track past Oaklands which came out on Farley Road, opposite Bank House, Mr Pinecoffin never showed any objection to the children being on or around the estate, presumably as he was a parent he appreciated the fact that children should have some freedom.

The Coppice Farm

The Coppice Farm was occupied by the Johnson family, David as we knew him Ernest to his close family, ran a business called Directnoor Ltd., dealing in antique pine furniture, mainly destined for the US market. We were quite fond of David and his wife Deidre, as were the children Celeste and Stephan. David was concerned that as his business grew it could become the focus of attention regarding the covenants and so moved most of the work to Leek.

The Johnsons eventually moved lock stock and barrel to the USA. We were very saddened and distressed when we learnt that David had died, he was too young and had a great life ahead of him. He is buried at Cotton Cemetery.

May he rest in peace.

The Coppice remained empty for some time. It was eventually sold to Nicholas Hadley and Gillian Clewes. We did not know at the time that Hadley and Clewes were close associates of Mr Thornley. Following several altercations with Mr Hadley and Clewes we realised that we were being set up by orchestrated events.

Hadley and Clewes disappeared as quickly as they appeared in the middle of the night. Following a 3 year pursuit by UK Police and Interpol, across East Germany, West Germany, Spain and eventually cornered in the South of Ireland, they were arrested and brought back to UK to face dozens and dozens of charges related to fraud.

Again the Coppice stood empty for several years eventually being sold to its current occupants.

The Governors House

As the name suggests this property was originally for the governor of the prison. It is now known as Willow View.
This property was originally sold to David Johnson's sister, Miriam Potter and her husband Tom. They never occupied the house and eventually sold it to a Mr and Mrs Adams and they then eventually sold to a Mrs Wyant.

Mrs Wyant eventually tried to sell her house but found it difficult, ultimately selling it at a knockdown price to Mr Thornley. She was terrified of him, so much so, she was unable to testify against him at a forthcoming trial. The trial was following clashes between the people at the Coach House and Thornley.

The Former Hostel

The Former Hostel, as it was described in the sale particulars of Bridgfords Estate Agents, known more recently as Moorside Lodge, and is currently referred to under the name of Lee Rigby Lodge. This property has a chequered past, being used to house people with learning difficulties under Mr Thornley's company Moorcare Ltd, however a big question mark is over the 'permitted' use and how that use transposed to existing form from the original Prison Commissioners conveyance. Further details will hopefully emerge following a decision in the courts.

The building itself is in poor condition requiring much maintenance and repair, in my opinion it should be demolished, as it does not fit with the intended use of the estate and the Bolton family's wishes.

Which were as follows:

All the properties and land at the Moorcourt Park Estate, can be used as follows and this is taken from the Prison Commissioners Conveyance and applies throughout:

Dwellings
Agriculture
Prison
Borstal

Any other use requires a Deed of Variation or Release, as was the case for the following property.

Oaklands Bungalow

Oaklands was bought in 1983 by Mr Gordon Hodgkinson, originally it was used as a workshop by the Prison service. Mr Hodgkinson applied for planning approval to convert the workshop to a dwelling. The application was successful, however when Mr Bull knew of the approval he said that Mr Hodgkinson now needed a Deed of Variation to 'regularise' the situation, a fee was paid and the Deed was formally raised on or about August 1985, but not without impediment. I mention this to outline the strength of restrictive covenants, they cannot be ignored.

Whilst we are at the Oaklands, it is worth discussing the arrangements for passing traffic.

Gordon Hodgkinson had an agreement with Peter Pinecoffin regarding traffic passing the Oakland bungalow. It was agreed and I am sure I have a copy of the written agreement somewhere. Basically it says that there shall be no traffic past the bungalow except in emergencies and definitely no tractors. To ensure compliance Mr Hodgkinson erected a 5 bar gate and posts and he held the keys.

Since the passing of Mr and Mrs Hodgkinson, Peter Thornley has chosen to take control, when quite clearly he has no right so to do. Thornley removed Gordon's single gate and replaced it with 2 of his own, a crafty move to take control. and to give the appearance that its his right, Is there no end to his twisted talents.

The Coach House

The Coach House was originally the 'motor house' or garage used to store exotic cars belonging to the Bolton's. The property is now a residence and has been extensively reshaped and enlarged to form a generous family home. It used to house snobbish old bangers, things don't change much. The Coach House is situated near to 'Traitors Gate' and leads on towards Moorcourt Hall.

Restrictive Covenants

Whilst we are on the subject of restrictive covenants, it is worth mentioning that there are several covenants on all the properties at Moorcourt. Despite attempts to ignore them and to make use of the various properties in connection with business, which is in breach of the covenants, (this also includes 'charities' as these are businesses and usually recorded as such at Companies House) it is also that a condition regarding use which could become or grow to become a nuisance, annoyance or disturbance is also a breach. Therefore, use other than for domestic dwelling would fall into this category. The land at Moorcourt, fields and pasture are all classed as agricultural, therefore equestrian use is in breach of the covenants. The associated nuisance of equestrian use can become quite intrusive. Equestrian use also deprives the community as a whole to produce food.

The strength of restrictive covenants was recently exposed in an aborted court case earlier this year (2017). Unfortunately the case never got to trial, as it would have meant moving it to Birmingham. The Judge recused himself. However it was agreed between the parties to observe and respect all the covenants at Moorcourt. It will be interesting to see what action may be taken if that is not the case.

As a reminder under the restrictive covenants, business from any dwelling is forbidden, charities are businesses and therefore not permitted.

Equestrian use is also forbidden, as the land is strictly for agricultural use.

Moving on

The village of Oakamoor is criss-crossed with roads and small lanes, the latter being used to take short cuts from the village to Alton and vice versa.

Lately there has been a ground swell of people with genuine concerns about the welfare of the inhabitants and especially the impact of development regarding increased traffic.

Just recently, various individuals have been active and vocal, none less than the local Member of Parliament, Ms Karen Bradley. She has lent her support with regard to traffic concerns especially on Farley Road, she can be seen on the Churnet Valley Conservation Society (CVCS) website, with her vote winning smile standing by the South Lodge entrance to Moorcourt.

The CVCS have been talking about the impact of various developments, such as Moneystone Quarry, Lightoaks, Whiston Golf Club, and probably others, however when Moorcourt is mentioned, the silence is deafening.

Lets make something crystal clear at this point, I have stood for the protection of Moorcourt as whole, to respect all the private residents and to remember Moorcourt's history. I know some have questioned my reasoning, but quite frankly its highly likely that there wouldn't be a tree left standing on the estate, and there would have been enough concrete to span the channel, if I hadn't done what I have done, I make no apologies to anyone who came to Moorcourt to waste it, or to ride roughshod over the peaceful living residents.

So what is the big secret surrounding Moorcourt? Why are the local authority, the police various individuals and other organisations so agitated when my name is mentioned in relation to the estate? Why have I been pilloried for conserving the estate, no different than the 'volunteers of CVCS? It's no use pretending,there is something about Moorcourt that simply doesn't add up.

The latest to hit Moorcourt is a set of 'charities', charities are without doubt the 'new' business and currently have a low public regard. People are fed up with giving especially when a new charity ends up diluting the effort of an existing one. At Moorcourt we have the situation where traffic will be a problem. Farley Road is already classed as dangerous, but no one will discuss Moorcourt - why?

Moorcourt Hall and South Lodge

I hadn't intended to include both of these properties together, but as there appears to be a link with the occupiers, I think it may be interesting to explore their relationship.

Moorcourt Hall being approached from the East and accessed through 'Traitors Gate' down a small incline to view the front elevation of the property. Before privatisation, so to speak, Moorcourt Hall was used by the Prison Commissioners to care for the less fortunate in society, I mean the criminal society and the ones who got caught are the less fortunate in so much as much criminality goes unchecked despite authority knowing about it.

This is where an oddity occurs, and to discuss South Lodge for a moment and its occupants. As far as I am aware South Lodge is occupied (2017) by a Mr and Mrs B Skitt. Baden or 'Bill' Skitt is an ex police officer of high rank and fits well as the gatekeeper to Moorcourt South Lodge entrance. Not a lot is known about Mrs Clare Skitt, other than her association with the Churnet Valley Conservation Society and as a therapist.

I have used the word occupier as opposed to owner of these two properties as it is not easy to distinguish the owners, especially regarding Moorcourt Hall. Most recently 2010/11 Moorcourt Hall was owned by Moorcourt Holdings Ltd (in liquidation). The liquidation process of this company started in 2010/11 and is recorded at Companies House number 03225974. Of interest is the Liquidators Statement of 14 December 2011, where it lists various assets belonging to the company, and in particular Moorcourt Hall.

Moorcourt Hall has been the seat of various ventures and companies owned or controlled by the current occupiers none less than Moorcare Ltd. It was whilst this company operated as a care home that 'parties' were organised and members of the wrestling fraternity partied.

Moorcourt Holdings Ltd is still listed as in 'liquidation', although its assets have been transferred to a company called TSMM Llp. Nothing is known about this company, other than the assets transferred to it from Moorcourt Holdings Ltd have since been transferred to another company called The Kendo Nagasaki Foundation, a company registered at companies house and is relieved from applying the LTD or Limited suffix.

At this point may I draw the readers attention to the most latest Liquidators Statement of 8 December 2016, where at paragraph 32 it states that HMRC are still pursuing a claim for £1.4 million pounds in respect of an Employees Benefit Trust. Rangers football club has a similar claim against it. Although the accountants and the liquidators have stated that the directors have given an indemnity regarding the HMRC claim, it seems rather odd that it could have been avoided for so long, nearly 7 years. How did the properties become redistributed as the assets clearly belonged to the company.

As this is in the public interest I asked Karen Bradly MP (close associate of Clare Skitt) for her opinion, as she is versed in corporate accounting I thought she could provide the answer, however the Right Honourable Lady has so far, avoided the question.

So what is going on, Moorcourt Hall seems heavily fortified, access gates locked permanently, street lighting on all night long on the private roads, a high ranking officer of the law keeping tabs at the lodge, HMRC stymied in a claim?

Are the MoD involved, which property is the safe house, and who is Visotski, one hell of a mystery what say you Mr Holmes?


At the time of writing this topic we were unaware of Mr Skitt's demise. This is what happens when communities are divided and unnecessary bad feeling replaces neighbourlyness.

To be continued