Contact Us

Since the Stop Lovett & Bailey Team were featured in the Echo, visits to this website have gone through the roof. We have had one or two technical issues with the email address which have now been resolved and welcome those wish to contact us.

Utter Madness

The Echo ran with an article on Thursday that the Shoeburyness Residents Association were going to hold a vote at their Kangaroo Court, sorry AGM on plans for flood defences at Shoebury Common.



To whip up the membership of the Leitrim Avenue Peter Lovett fan club, sorry, the Shoeburyness Residents Association, John Budge from the Shoeburyness Residents Association have 'blasted' our local councillors for the heinous crime of...asking residents in the flood plain their views on the proposed flood defences. Here is a copy of the offending leaflet which caused John Budge to look totally spaced out and danger man Peter Lovett to look mortified.



This is the same John Budge who urged residents to attend a public meeting so the council could hear a wide range of views? Surely not.

Or the same Peter Lovett who accuses the council of not listening to the views of the electorate but doesn't want our local councillors to solicit residents view? Surely not.

If danger man Peter Lovett believes their is such huge opposition, then surely he would want residents to tell their councillors? The real reason why Peter Lovett does not like residents in the flood plain being asked their views can be found in the last line of a recent readers letter. His motive is only for the people who use Shoebury Common recreationally not to protect residents in the flood plain whose lives could be in danger. Peter Lovett = one very, very dangerous man.

David Trayner - Southend Echo

There has been some distasteful things said during the past few weeks but none more appalling than this from the Echo. This has appeared on a couple of occasions giving the impression that no one is listening to the shit that the pair of goons Peter Lovett and Ray Bailey spout but we support you

All the articles have the reporter David Trayner as heading up each article. Now if average members of the public in the Stop Bailey & Lovett Team can expose the real reasons why Peter Lovett and Ray Bailey are pushing the 'Friends of Shoebury Common' scheme then surely for a journalist it would be easy? This is, unless of course, that the Echo and David Trayner actually support these pair of prats and want our homes to flood. Below are the articles in question.

Jim Worsdale

Regular readers of the Southend Echo will be aware of the occasional ramblings of Jim Worsdale a former editor of the Echo. Jim has recently decided to use his article to write about the proposed flood defences at Shoebury Common.



To understand why dear old Jim has adopted these views it needs to be understood where Jim lives. Yes folks, you guessed it, Leitrim Avenue. The home of Peter Lovett. So now we have a neighbour using his media connections for another neighbour but supposedly speaking on behalf of all Shoebury residents. You couldn't make it up.

Finally, A Sensible Shoebury Resident

Our views entirely...

Thorpe Bay Yacht Club

Another 'group' to speak out against the flood defence plans at Shoebury Common are the Thorpe Bay Yacht Club. The comments on their website are worthy of some note. We have the secretary Bill Dashford, their 'Cruising Secretary' speak out against the plans who confirms that he lives nowhere Shoebury Common.  Also, one poster on their website confirms that Ray Bailey is behind this.

The Stop Lovett & Bailey Team could not agree more with Martyn Ellis who describes Lovett & Baileys alternative proposal as 'the meanderings of an old man'.

Here is his views in full:

Dear Nick,

Thank you for the email relating to the flood defense at Shoebury Common. Whilst I appreciate all you do for the club I believe you are wrong on this occasion. I note with interest that neither yourself or Ray Bailey have a property that would be affected by any potential flooding and it is in the interest of the well being and safety of my family that I respond.

Putting this into perspective “On 1 February 1953, the North Sea Flood hit Canvey Island during the night and caused the deaths of 58 people” I for one would not like to see a repeat of this headline. Sadly like others I am unable to view any sketches in the alternative document and cannot make a fair and measured opinion of both schemes without these at present. 

However, in my opinion many of the arguments raised in the alleged alternative design scheme appear unsubstantiated, weak and simply flawed in some cases. The introduction sounds like a group of people sat around a table and raised a wish list and list of moans;

“Impact on disabled (Mobility impaired) gaining access..”, no substantiation provided.
“Loss of privacy..”, again not substantiated.
“Health & safety issues when crossing the road”?
“New secure beach huts..” how nice…why? (I have one and don’t believe the rest of Shoeburys rate payers should sponsor it).
“Lifting the promenade will strengthen the sea wall” will it?
“Raising the boat ramp 900mm to match MOD wall” 

If this relates to the TBYC slipway location? I cannot see this being practicable any ramp allowing vehicular access would have to start in the middle of the road. I could go on, and without disrespect the document appears to be the meanderings of an old man.

If there is to be a serious and viable alternative, it must be well thought out and properly presented, i would suggest the input of a designer/engineer to arrive at a proper scheme that will offer the needed protection. I work for one of the worlds largest Civil engineering companies, given the two offerings in there present form, the council’s option(s) appears the most valid.

Martyn 

Ian Murdoch

It was good to see another of Ray Bailey's neighbour's in Parkanaur Avenue being a denier of a flood risk at Shoebury Common.

Don't worry folks, the Stop Lovett & Bailey Team are aware that Ian Murdoch is another committee member of the Burgess Estate Residents Association.