News

Secret session discusses unlawful Bryn payments

Published

11 years ago

August 1, 2014

IF you were one of the people trying to find out how controversial Council fat cat Bryn Parry Jones had responded to a Council request to pay back the unlawful payments he received, tough luck! Despite the fact the contents of the letter responding to the Council’s request were already in the public domain, the discussion of how public money had been spent on a public servant was held in private. Conservative group leader David Howlett told the Herald: “With David Bryan, I voted for a public debate which was lost and so we went into private session. We supported a Plaid amendment that it would be foolish to pursue court action due to costs but expressed regret that the money was not being returned. “Some IPPG members supported this and had Labour members also supported it, we would have won. Because Labour did not support the Plaid amendment, we had another vote to take no further action, from which I abstained. “Labour’s stance meant the end result was no further action would be taken. I have to ask whether (Labour leader) Paul Miller sees this as a result, because that is what he and his group made sure happened.” Labour leader Paul Miller told us: “On principle, the Labour group decided not to accept anything less than the Chief Executive being forced to pay back the money unlawfully paid to him. “The vote today is not the end of the matter. “I still firmly believe that the Council must take action to get the money back.” Accepting a request from Bryn Parry Jones’ union Councillors chose to discuss Bryn’s letter, which told his employer to get lost, behind closed doors and with the cameras turned off. That union’s request was backed by the Council’s Head of Legal Services, who said: “Members have strong feelings about this issue, it is the case, in my opinion, that all employees of the Council do have a legitimate and reasonable expectation, both in employment terms and in accordance with their human rights, that their relationship with their employer should be conducted in appropriate confidence. “ The letter’s content was reported online and reveals: • Bryn gave the unlawful payments he received to his wife for her to invest; • Bryn claims his employer acted unlawfully by ceasing to make unlawful payments to him; • Bryn alleges that he has suffered a detriment by not receiving the unlawful payments. In addition to the above, Mr Parry Jones relies upon advice given to the Council that it was doubtful whether he could be compelled to disgorge the unlawful payments back to his employer. That element of his response is likely to cause particular controversy, as the Council’s CEO did not contribute to the cost of the legal advice he now relies upon to buttress his refusal to repay the money he received from the Council. Mr Parry Jones, whose Porsche sports saloon is paid for and insured by Council Tax payers, claims that he was entitled to rely upon the unlawful payments continuing to help plan his retirement and alleges a breach of contract by the Council in failing to make contributions to his pension. However, if the Council had continued to make unlawful payments to its CEO then it would itself have been acting unlawfully. Mr Parry Jones’ suggestion that he should have continued to receive the unlawful payments not only flies in the face of reason, but also suggests that he would have preferred the Authority to spend more Council Tax payers’ money defending his RIGHT to receive unlawful payments in the High Court. Again, at NO cost to himself. In addition, the whole scheme was hatched in order to help the CEO avoid tax on his massive publicly funded pension. The Council did not force Mr Parry Jones to accept the unlawful payments. Instead, he voluntarily entered the scheme in order to avoid future tax payments on his seven-figure pension pot. That scheme was hatched after Westminster government changed the Local Government Pension Scheme rules when it became clear that the system of tax relief was being abused by a minority of senior officers across the UK. The Pembrokeshire Herald asked the County Council to comment both on the letter’s content and the fact that it had been leaked. A Council spokesperson told us: “The letter to which you refer is marked private and confidential. It is not appropriate for us to comment on its contents.”

Crime

Former police officer accused of making sexual remarks to women while on duty

Published

25 minutes ago

December 18, 2025

Court Reporter

Court hears allegations of inappropriate behaviour during official police visits

A FORMER police officer has appeared in court accused of making sexually inappropriate remarks to women he encountered while on duty.

Luke Silver, aged 34, is alleged to have abused his position as a police officer by making unwanted and explicit comments to two women during the course of official police business.

Cardiff Crown Court heard that Silver attended one woman’s home following an incident involving her partner and took an initial statement. However, the woman told the court that Silver later returned to her address on several further occasions, during which the conversation allegedly became personal and sexual in nature.

She said the officer asked intrusive questions about her sex life and made comments about her appearance, which she found unsettling. In messages sent to a friend at the time, the woman described his behaviour as “inappropriate”, “strange” and “creepy”.

The court was told she later said she felt uncomfortable during the visits, claiming Silver behaved in an overly relaxed manner while speaking to her and made remarks that were entirely unrelated to the police matter he had attended for.

A second woman has also made allegations that Silver asked her sexually explicit questions and made comments about her body while acting in his capacity as a police officer.

Silver, formerly of Gwent Police and now living in Lamphey, Pembrokeshire, denies three counts of improper use of police powers or privileges. The alleged offences are said to have taken place in 2021.

The trial is continuing at Cardiff Crown Court.

(Image: WNS)

Crime

Bail revoked for teenager charged with rape following Sands Nightclub allegation

Published

46 minutes ago

December 18, 2025

Rieve Nesbitt-Marr

A TEENAGER charged with rape following an alleged incident at a Saundersfoot nightclub has been remanded into custody after bail was revoked at Swansea Crown Court.

Joshua Probert, aged eighteen, is accused of raping a woman at Sands Nightclub in the seaside village during the early hours of Sunday (Dec 14).

The complainant is entitled to lifelong anonymity and no details that could identify her can be reported.

Probert was initially granted bail by Llanelli Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday. However, on Thursday afternoon (Dec 18) the Crown Prosecution Service applied for a special hearing at Swansea Crown Court, arguing that the earlier bail decision had been made without all relevant information being available.

The hearing was presided over by Paul Thomas KC. After considering new material put before the court, the judge ruled that there was a risk of reoffending.

There was also discussion that the defendant was at risk in the community due to alleged threatening phone calls against him.

Bail was therefore revoked and Probert was remanded into custody.

The defendant appeared in court supported by members of his family, including his mother, stepfather and father.

Much of the detail discussed during the hearing cannot be reported for legal reasons.

Probert is due to return to court in four weeks’ time as proceedings continue.

News

Welsh Government outlines new rights for homeowners facing estate management charges

Published

2 hours ago

December 18, 2025

Tom Sinclair

HOMEOWNERS living on privately managed estates in Wales are set to gain new legal protections under changes being introduced as part of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, the Welsh Government has said.

In a written statement published on Thursday (Dec 18), the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government, Jayne Bryant MS, provided an update on how the legislation will be implemented in Wales, with a particular focus on estate management charges paid by freehold homeowners.

Until now, homeowners on privately managed estates have often faced unclear or high bills for maintenance and services, with limited ability to obtain information or challenge costs. Once fully implemented, Part 5 of the Act is intended to address those concerns.

New powers for homeowners

Under the reforms, homeowners will be given the right to challenge the reasonableness of estate management charges for the first time. Estate managers will also be required to provide clearer information about the services being paid for through those charges.

In cases where estate management has failed, homeowners will be able to apply to a tribunal for a substitute manager to be appointed. The Act will also require estate managers to publish details of any administration charges in advance, where payment is expected.

Jayne Bryant said the changes would bring “significant new rights and protections” for homeowners affected by estate management fees.

Welsh and UK consultations

Responsibility for introducing the necessary secondary legislation is shared between the Welsh and UK Governments. While many of the powers rest with UK Ministers, Welsh Ministers are responsible for rules relating to the publication of administration charges in Wales.

The Welsh Government has confirmed it is working alongside UK counterparts to ensure both consultations are launched at the same time, allowing homeowners and stakeholders to consider the full set of proposals together.

Homeowners are being encouraged to respond to both the Welsh Government consultation on administration charges and the UK Government consultation on the wider estate management regime.

The consultations are now open and form part of the process to bring the new protections into force.