Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

Constant Plantation land approved for housing by government

Constant

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

On May 6, 2014 the BU family discussed the ‘tearing’ up of prime agriculture land located at Lower Greys in the St. George Valley. It was a sacrilegious act to ‘plant’ concrete at that location. The decision was made under a Democratic Labour Party (DLP) government by then Minister of Housing Michael Lashley. At that time the then Barbados Labour Party (BLP) was silent.

First they came to Mount Wilton,and cut up prime agricultural land to put big houses on. I did not live anywhere near Mount Wilton so I rocked back and did nothing. Next they came to Castle Grant, and cut up prime agricultural land to put big houses on. I did not live near Castle Grant, so I sat back and did nothing. Then they came to Lower Grays, where I live, to cut up prime agricultural land to put big houses on………………………………….. Still those people who are living on top of the hill, in the tenantry, on prime residential land, overlooking the picturesque St George Valley, are lucky not to be removed, like they did the people in 40 Acres in St Thomas some years ago.

–the late Colonel Buggy

Fast forward to November 14, 2024, a decade later under a BLP government and nothing has changed, more land in the agriculture heartland of Barbados is approved for planting of concrete, this time at Constant in St. George. This time the DLP is silent.

By the way, do you recall the CLICO houses that were allowed to go derelict a few metres to the north of the land earmarked for sale?

A sign that should be offensive to any Barbadian is erected for all to see. Two signs were erected but the ‘gods’ saw it fit to blow down one. This is a call for that space to be preserved for productive purposes. There comes a time when enough is enough.

If there are two indicators Barbadians should take note of as we gear up for Independence Day celebrations:

  1. the crazy number of vehicles on the roads, well over 120,000
  2. the number of buildings both private and commercial littering our fields and hill

The look and feel of our island is being changed quickly and surely by an incompetent political class we have slaved to educate. We spend hours on the road attempting to travel a couple miles on a 21×14 island. As the late Reverend Hatch warned, our windows to the sea are all but a few. What the hell are we doing?

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

106 responses to “Constant Plantation land approved for housing by government”

  1. John Avatar
    John

    Read the fine print on the Instagram post, it is for April to September, six months or two quarters.

    Double the numbers for the whole year.

    An extra 300 million coming out of taxpayers over 2023.

    What did we get for the extra 300 million?

  2. John Avatar
    John

    NorthernObserver
    November 14, 2024 at 2:04 pm
    Rate This

    @David
    John is back to Kingsland. When did his side place a lien? Or any other mechanism which would indicate to the legal fraternity, beyond internal company by laws, the title was not marketable.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Read the 269 million judgment and tell me if you don’t see the word indemnitors!!

    Kingsland agreed to terms under which the tenants in common would convey their 1,133 acres of land in 1958 and became an indemnitor of each and every one of the nine tenants in common.

    That’s why Mr. Armstrong said, “All must sell or none can sell”.

    I would add, “All must sell (and release) or none can sell”.

  3. John Avatar
    John

    “According to Black’s Law Dictionary, a lien is a legal right or interest that a creditor has in another person’s property. It usually lasts until the debt or duty that the lien secures is satisfied.”

    I prefer the terms of the 1958 Indenture!!

    It attaches ALL of Kingsland’s land until it is released and it is open ended.

    The only limitation is the value of the land, reckoned to be over a billion dollars whereas a lien is for some specific dollar value!!

    Give me the undertaking any day …… sorry, come to think of it, I already have it and have never released it.

  4. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    John
    You are so bull headed and binary, you miss the point and can only relate to your personal focus.
    I am not saying what occured at Kingsland was correct or legal.
    But it was your very own flesh and blood that screwed you over? Sue them?
    The point of a lien wasn’t as you interpret it, though you are not incorrect, it is to make all lawyers aware there is an issue with title.
    How many people do you think give a shit whether your mother’s brothers and remits screwed her over or not? I dare say, only those other clients of Mr.Joey who find themselves in a similar situation. And you know, there are others.
    And the dichotomy, is the very same clause you hold so dear, all agree or none agree, is what you hold against the GoB, where All the seats are held by a single entity, until a floor crosser appears. That is wrong because your binary interpretation of the Constitution makes it so, yet, when similar applies to Kingsland or similar it is good.
    I know, I am missing the power of dissention, there must be space for opposition. Without that right, everything is wrong because that is what you have spent much of your life fighting for.

  5. 555dubstreet Avatar
    555dubstreet

    Do not feed the trolls as they will shit everywhere
    Rebutting John’s diarrhea is Déjà vu all over again

    John the Trolls logic is not not not sound which is equal to logically unsound and often starts from a false premise

    some examples of which are

    “all fascists are socialists, and Trump is not a socialist, so Trump is not a fascist”, the premise that “all fascists are socialists” is false, since some fascists aren’t socialists, and this renders the argument logically unsound.

    “all Ku Klux Klan are Democrats, and Republicans aren’t Democrats, so Ku Klux Klan aren’t Republicans”, the premise that “all Ku Klux Klan are Democrats” is false, since some Ku Klux Klan are Republicans, and this renders the argument logically unsound.

  6. John Avatar
    John

    It was never a family fight as it was made out to be.

    It was a simple matter of business which did not need to go to court.

    One family was willing and had the finance to buy out the rest.

    The problem was the others were never acting in their own interests but were puppets of others.

    Only one family stood strong.

    Two directors spoke for all the other members, one was a weakling under the sway of the second and the other was in debt, had a severe gambling problem and was beholden to others.

    A complete mess thus resulted.

    Kingsland lost its marketable title to all of its property and assets as it was supposed to under the 1958 Indenture.

    That was the genius of the old conveyancers who set up the numerous family trust companies to avoid the theft of their clients’ lands by the companies they incorporated.

    Their methods worked like clockwork.

    The court now faces 400 plus additional matters to resolve which it created.

    All of them were created by the former director of CLICO and now unconstitutionally appointed Chief Justice.

  7. John Avatar
    John

    NO

    Let me show you how this madness went down.

    The matter was characterised as Marjorie Ilma Knox vs John Vere Evelyn Deane et al!!

    John Vere Evelyn Deane was the eldest male living member of the family but he was by then not a director.

    He hated the guts of the two directors who spoke for him and others and they hated his guts!! The feelings were mutual.

    He and my mother were good buddies from childhood. The two of them were sent to Adams Castle in 1939 to manage the plantation for my Grandfather.

    They were always close, in fact until he could no longer operate a phone he religiously called my mother every single day.

    Often, I would answer and once the case started he invariably told me he hoped we would win!!

    One day for fun, you know me, I asked him if he realised he was leading the charge against my mother.

    He called me a “bloody liar” and told me everybody knew he was against the family going to court and there was no way he could be in court.

    I handed the phone to my mother with him still expounding “I have been crucified ……” She calmed him down. When I handed the phone over I said “one of the mighty Deanes wants to talk to you”!! He blew his stack!!

    I could have told the court of the conversations but at the time he had given his power of attorney to his son, the lawyer, Malcolm Deane, who worked with Clyde Turney who represented Classic. Vere Deane was under the sway of Clyde Turney because Malcolm Deane was also under the sway of Clyde Turney.

    I knew he would really get crucified then so I chose to keep quiet.

    I am putting this in writing because no one can interfere with him now.

    The prospective purchasers waited for the shareholders to get old and then like vultures moved in.

    Except my family fought.

  8. John Avatar
    John

    NorthernObserver
    November 15, 2024 at 9:31 am
    Rate This

    But it was your very own flesh and blood that screwed you over? Sue them?

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Done that already in Florida and won!!

    There is a simpler way!!!

    It is just business!!

  9. David Avatar
    David

    You win if you get the money. You won the case being it wasn’t contested.

  10. John Avatar
    John

    I don’t want the money, the win.do just fine!!

  11. John Avatar
    John

    Read the published decision.

  12. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    @John
    Family squabbles are a thing, usually exacerbated if their is money/assets, and every one has the spendthrift, gambler, alcoholic, womanizer, etc etc
    I stated earlier, and not directed to you, the challenges with private companies, owners, directors etc Even public companies have these battles, their advantage is oversight by a corporate secretary, and the Reporting requirements. Occasionally even stock market rules and regulations.
    Didn’t you see in Simpson’s battle with Parkland, the manoeuvres each are pulling. Each trying to get an advantage. It’s just business.

  13. John Avatar
    John

    NO

    Law of the jungle.

    The weak get eaten unless they fight back and learn.

    Just life.

    Family squabbles usually arise because of childhood experiences and often have absolutely nothing to do with assets and money but of course sometimes they do.

    There will often be a bully or bullies that arise in a family but often they have a problem because the bullied just get stronger.

    A bully is often never tested, assumes supremacy and fades away when the real tests in life come.

    When the real tests come, it is often the bullied who stand tall because they have already been through fire, emerge tested and are prepared for the real fights in life.

    You will often find that in families, the supposed weaklings emerge from the fires of life walking as they have always walked, fighting as they have always fought and eventually get where they are going.

    The tortoise and the hare!!

  14. John Avatar
    John

    I have no idea who is winning or losing in Parkland and Simpson or who will win.

    Sir Kyff was a political animal who progressed under EWB and political protection.

    I don’t know much about Parkland and its weaknesses or strengths but Simpson has a serious weakness which may or may not be the final arbiter.

    Who is winning and why are they fighting?

  15. John Avatar
    John

    Sometimes the predator becomes the prey.

  16. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    Sad situation.

    https://barbadostoday.bb/2024/11/16/food-crisis-forces-elderly-to-choose-between-health-hunger-barp/

  17. David Avatar
    David

    https://barbadosunderground.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Screenshot-2024-11-16-at-9.42.11 AM-358×480.png

  18. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    @ David,

    what is the significance of the image you posted above?

  19. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    @john
    Family squabbles, animosities and jealousies can arise for any number of reasons.
    However, the real nastiness is usually when there is something of meaningful value to squabble over.
    Potential inheritors don’t flock to pay late U.Charlies bills and debts? Been there, seen that!!
    And once there is more than one, any of the many human behaviours can arise.
    I have seen them go back way further than the living’s lifetime.

    I don’t follow Parkland closely. But Kyff never had business partners. At Parkland he is a minority (20%) owner. Not a position to which he is accustomed.

  20. David Avatar
    David

    @Hants

    Random fyi.

  21. David Avatar
    David

    @NO

    Is it about Kyffin or his kin at this stage. He is an old man now who show prioritize making things right with his maker?

  22. 555dubstreet Avatar
    555dubstreet

    “Family squabbles, animosities and jealousies can arise for any number of reasons.
    However, the real nastiness is usually when there is something of meaningful value to squabble over.”

    Social living does not work when some people are still greedy, selfish and want more and more and more and will never be happy as they want it all

    The ancestors must be ashamed of their family feuds

  23. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    David
    Old is a relative term? I have no idea who calls the shots at Simpson Oil. Yet most entrepreneurs like him, tend to have significant input, whether retired in title or not. Until 6 feet under, they’ll have a say. It’s in their DNA. Betchya a company, of which he remains the controlling shareholder, owns the shares.

  24. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    The ancestors must be ashamed of their family feuds

    Several of them employed ‘control from the grave’ mechanisms, which could have little benefit other than ensure a feud? Even up to the 70s in Barbados, inheritances favoured boys vs girls. With 4 children, 2 male, 2 female, it wasn’t uncommon for each male to 1/3, and the two girls split the remaining third.
    Control is a fuck of a thing. People don’t give it up.

  25. John Avatar
    John

    For your amusement!!

  26. John Avatar
    John

    NorthernObserver
    November 16, 2024 at 5:17 pm
    Rate This

    The ancestors must be ashamed of their family feuds

    Several of them employed ‘control from the grave’ mechanisms, which could have little benefit other than ensure a feud? Even up to the 70s in Barbados, inheritances favoured boys vs girls. With 4 children, 2 male, 2 female, it wasn’t uncommon for each male to 1/3, and the two girls split the remaining third.
    Control is a fuck of a thing. People don’t give it up.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Not true.

    In the absence of a will the heir at law inherited everything.

    The heir at law was the eldest male, if none I guess the eldest female.

    The law changed in the 1970’s I think and all children from any spouse or common law partner were treated equally.

    If you look through the wills from the 1600’s, you will see most testators treated all children equally.

    The reason is again because they were all Quakers!! Primogeniture was not observed except in the case where there was no will.

    My grandfather treated all 7 of his children equally when in 1949, he made them 7 equal tenants in common with himself and his wife in the 700 plus acres of land he had acquired from 1939.

    When he finally died in 1985 with not much in his own name he left everything equally to 3 of his six surviving children.

    My mother, one of those 3 children who had respected him to the end and whose unconditional love he had as a father, told him in no uncertain terms that to leave out his other daughter was not right because she had cooked every mouthful of food he had consumed over much of his life.

    So, he added a codicil to his will to specifically include all of his six surviving children.

  27. John Avatar
    John

    Sir Kyff may have done the same thing!!!

    You would have to look at his deeds during his life.

  28. John Avatar
    John

    When Kingsland was formed in 1958, each of the 7 children and my grandparents conveyed their 1,133 acres to it by a deed of indenture.

    The day before that transaction happened, Kingsland was formed and its Memorandum and Articles of Association spelt out why it was formed and that principally was to purchase the 1,133 acres.

    It was a cashless transaction and the consideration was shares in a valueless company and terms under which they transferred the land.

    Besides being a limited liability company, Kingsland is a Trust!!

    A shareholder could leave his/her shares or interest in the terms of the indenture to any children, or spouse or ancestor or sibling but not to someone who was not a shareholder.

    Both Colin Deane and Muriel Deane never married and had no children. Their estates could not transfer shares in Kingsland to any nephew or niece, no matter what their wills said!!

    What their estates could do was to sell the shares after first giving other shareholders the right to purchase those shares at $4.80 per share.

    My mother offered the same price they had indicated their willingness to sell at.

    Should have been a no brainer business transaction!!

    So why would the Executive Branch fund the Judicial Branch with Taxpayer money to thwart this simple run of the mill business transaction?

  29. John Avatar
    John

    I will show you another thing older people used to do with their assets in relation to their children.

    In 1967, my Grandmother was 83 and my Grandfather was 76. There was an inheritance tax at the time which could be avoided by disposing of their assets to the intended inheritors.

    My Grandfather kept 6 shares and my Grandmother 4 and all the rest were equally divided among their 7 children.

    Once the gift was 5 years or more before death, no tax was charged. My Grand mother died about 6 years later and my Grandfather about 19 years later.

    They both avoided the death tax.

    My Grandmother’s 4 shares went to her spouse as personal property which was allowed by the Articles of Association.

    When he died he willed his 10 shares to his grandson because the Articles of Association allowed him to do so also.

    The grandson was in direct line.

  30. John Avatar
    John

    Neither my uncle nor aunt who were unmarried could will their shares to a nephew or niece.

    They could only will them to a sibling or siblings or an ancestor.

    My uncle died before his father but my aunt died years after.

    The only way they could will to their nephew or niece was if their sibling transferred a share or shares to the nephew or niece making the nephew or neice a shareholder in Kingsland.

  31. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    John
    What wasn’t true?
    I could give a flying flamingo what the Quaker wills of the 1600s did or didn’t do, or about dying intestate. I speak to actual wills of which I was an executor, or those I was required to reference in said role.
    The uneven split between males and females happened.
    Then, you give excellent examples within your own family, of control from the grave mechanisms. Also illustrates another not uncommon feature, where those who chose not to marry, had separate restrictions which applied to their inherited assets.
    What about the “outside children”, or children born outside a marriage or common law, where the person was single, and never entered either of the two described unions. Most estate/wills deemed them to not even exist?
    Another dandy which happens, is the inheritor marries someone with children. And for whatever reasons, those prior children are never formally adopted, though they were seemingly treated by all as biological family.
    There are so many twists and turns in all such matters, both biological and legal.

  32. David Avatar
    David

    @NO

    Correct. The late Henry Forde built a reputation on much of what you highlighted.

  33. John Avatar
    John

    NO

    Check the Succession Act.

    https://www.barbadoslawcourts.gov.bb/assets/content/pdfs/statutes/SuccessionCAP249.pdf

  34. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    Lol.
    You want me to send you the link to the NIS Act?
    You have spent hours posting and providing your interpretation of the Constitution. Even inviting others to challenge current/recent actions.
    I am reasonably aware of the Succession act, even several methods to circumvent it.
    What various statutes seemingly ‘intend’, and what persons actually do, are frequently at odds.

  35. John Avatar
    John

    The mechanisms used in my family trust company were all contractual entered into by willing members of the family in the prime of their lives and in full possession of their senses and Kingsland.

    My eldest Uncle, Colin, died in 1982 leaving a will written in 1959 which left what he owned equally to his brothers and sisters and parents which he could because the Articles of Association allowed it.

    After all, before the Company was formed the 9 of them owned the 1,133 acres equally.

    My cousin, BWWR aka Iain Deane, destroyed the 1959 will and produced one he concocted in 1982 leaving all of the shares of my Uncle’s Estate to him!!

    He figured the shares were the personal property of Colin Deane to do with as he pleased but he was wrong.

    He could not inherit them because the shares were issued subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Company and BWWR was not a shareholder.

    What he could have done was to have asked his father, Vere, to give him one share of his inheritance, and then he could get his uncle’s shares.

    However he hated and mocked the father, and the father had no use for him.

    His only choice was to sell Colin Deane’s shares to the siblings of Colin Deane at $4.80 per share or latch onto a purchaser who would buy all of the shares at a higher price.

    The problem with that was all shareholders had to release and sell, and one was not going to do that easy, she wanted to buy all the shares at whatever price the others negotiated.

  36. John Avatar
    John

    NorthernObserver
    November 17, 2024 at 12:17 pm

    What various statutes seemingly ‘intend’, and what persons actually do, are frequently at odds.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Agree.

    But as my uncle Vere used to say, a vagabond is a vagabond until he meets another vagabond and then there are two.

  37. John Avatar
    John

    You began by telling us about primogeniture.

    “Primogeniture has been abolished in most parts of the world, but it is still practiced in some places with hereditary monarchies, such as Great Britain.”

    All children are treated equally in the case of intestacy.

    That does not mean a child cannot be left out of a will, the Quakers did that too but whereas a disinherited child in Quaker days had no recourse, today a disinherited child has recourse.

    The answer of course is for the distribution of assets to occur during the life of the testator.

    How is a child disinherited in this fashion to have recourse?

    Iain Deane was in effect disinherited by his uncle once his uncle entered into an indenture with the 8 other tenants in common, and Kingsland.

    His father included him in his 1982 will which he had a lawyer friend prepare but to no avail. His brothers made their father rewrite his will in 1997 and leave BWWR out.

    They hated his guts too as he hated theirs.

  38. John Avatar
    John

    As you can see, with all that hatred knocking around, the natural thing was for my mother’s family to go its own way!!

    We had that figured out from childhood!!

    I suspect Fleetwood Mac copied the idea from us!!

  39. David Avatar
    David

    Yes, hatred among a family. What a thing.

  40. John Avatar
    John

    It makes people do foolishness.

  41. John Avatar
    John

    BWWR hated everybody, including my mother’s family.

    Even his own mother hated him as he hated her.

    The irony was we treated him as we would have treated any human being, but we knew
    the score. We probably were the only family that gave him the time of day which made the rest hate us even more.

    Not a problem so long as we held fast to our beliefs.

    We went our own way.

  42. John Avatar
    John

    Proverbs 25:21-23
    King James Version

    21 If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:

    22 For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord shall reward thee.

  43. John Avatar
    John

    … one of my mother’s tenets.

  44. Cuhdear Bajan Avatar
    Cuhdear Bajan

    @John “John Vere Evelyn Deane was the eldest male living member of the family but he was by then not a director. He hated the guts of the two directors who spoke for him and others and they hated his guts!! ”

    Why the hate?

    Where did it begin?

    Could not the elders have fixed the hate?

  45. John Avatar
    John

    They were the elders!!

    We just followed the path we saw before us independent of them and used what the Articles of Association allowed us to use!!.

    Remember, they all wanted to sell, we wanted to buy what they were selling and offered the price they wanted.

    We had no hate, just wanted to do business and separate ourselves from the mess, get on with our lives.

    By now you must be figuring out they were being manipulated by a third party!!!

    So, what third party could want to control 1,000 plus acres of land?

  46. John Avatar
    John

    Kind of easy.

    We spent so far 26 years in court, the Judicial Branch.

    Who idiot/wicked person pays good taxpayers money to the run the Judicial Branch and produce decisions over the past 26 years that create 400 plus defective title deeds in the Land Registry?

  47. John Avatar
    John

    If your answer is “the Executive Branch” then, go to the top of the class.

  48. John Avatar
    John

    Why do you think the Executive Branch would want to control so much land?

  49. NorthernObserver Avatar
    NorthernObserver

    “The answer of course is for the distribution of assets to occur during the life of the testator.”

    One of a few ways to get around. They also use trusts, they come in several forms. I have even seen an intermediary used.

    A lawyer’s/consultant’s role is to get the result their client(s) desire. If they do, they’re the best; if they don’t, then they’re (bad word).

    The previous owners of Paradise got the taxpayers of Barbados to pay off their debts. Great lawyers?

  50. John Avatar
    John

    NorthernObserver
    November 17, 2024 at 6:37 pm
    Rate This

    The previous owners of Paradise got the taxpayers of Barbados to pay off their debts. Great lawyers?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Corrupt Executive Branch.

    EWB was a member of that Branch wasn’t he?

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading