Latest update February 14th, 2025 8:22 AM
Land dispute compromises Sports Academy plans as Law court has final say
The church in background on the disputed Coverden East Bank location.
The great plans nurtured by Wayne Walcott for the construction of a modern day academy have suffered a major setback following a recent decision of the law courts. Despite this new development, Walcott maintains that he is still intent on fulfilling such dreams. He has assured this newspaper that his ambitions would be realized in the very near future.
When we last spoke with Walcott on Monday September 21, he had intimated that he was bequeathed several acres of land in the Coverden Soesdyke/Linden Highway.
The sports administrator also said that he had every intention of converting a portion of that land into a modern day academy complete with all necessary amenities.
He had also intimated that he had initiated court proceedings to have the church that was on the property, removed.
While these plans appeared grandiose in nature, this journalist received a rude awakening when confronted with conflicting reports.
The Pastor of the church in question, Deoram Timram was extremely upset by the report which he labeled as inaccurate and mischievous. He is of the opinion that the sports administrator in question had chosen to deceive readers.
Indeed investigations on the part of the journalist who dealt with the report have uncovered certain inconsistencies that certainly do not mesh with what we were initially told.
Furthermore, a check at the Deeds Registry revealed that the transport for this portion of land at Coverden owned by Walcott was bequeathed to him since the 20th September 1999.
This simply means that all along when Walcott had sought the intervention of Minister of Youth and Sports for a portion of land at the Durban Park recently to facilitate the construction of a similar sports facility, he would have already owned the Coverden property. He did not tell us this which borders on dishonesty.
While we were up at Coverden to examine this plot of land, Walcott had told us that he has sought the intervention of the courts to have the congregation removed from the property.
This reporter questioned Walcott of the legal implications and was assured that all parties had arrived at a mutual understanding and that the removal of the church was merely an academic issue.
We decided to engage Pastor Timram on the issue and he made several revelations. He said that on the 5th May 2000, the Church entered into agreement with Walcott for the purchase of two sub-lots of land lettered “D” and “E” for a price of two million, seven hundred thousand dollars.
Pastor Timram further said that he paid Walcott two hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($250,000.) at the signing of the agreement with the assurance that the balance would have been paid at the passing of the transport.
This arrangement was supposed to have been advertised and passed within one year.
Pastor Timram had further told the court that Walcott, contrary to the initial agreement, attempted to re-sell the sub-lot lettered “D” to another interested party. He said that the church sought, and was granted an ex-parte Injunction granted by Justice Burch-Smith on the 20th August 2001.
He said that despite Walcott’s actions, the church entered into a supplemental agreement to advance to him an additional sum of money that when added to the initial sum, amounted to one million seven hundred and six thousand dollars ($1,706,000.).
This sum was supplied to facilitate the issuance of the Certificates of Compliance as well as to do revetment and developmental works to the land.
Pastor Timram informed that Walcott has refused to do the revetment and was either unable or unwilling to pass the transport to the church.
Instead he took the church to court on the 2nd July, 2008 demanding the whole of the purchase price.
The church was brought before the courts and we were told that the learned Judge dismissed the case.
Further attempts by Walcott to seek redress ended on September 25 last when Walcott’s lawyer Mr. Frank Fraser, withdrew the case during the second appearance.
This newspaper has since spoken with Mr. Walcott who has a different angle to what actually occurred.
He has since sought the intervention of this reporter to highlight what he referred to as pertinent facts.
While we at Kaieteur News are anxious to facilitate any action or ploy towards the development of sports, we are, unfortunately constrained by the final order of the courts and wish to bring closure to this issue.
(Michael Benjamin)
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Protest electoral tyranny
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- There comes a time in the life of a nation when silence is no longer an option, when the... more
OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus
Antiguan Barbudan Ambassador to the United States, Sir Ronald Sanders By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The upcoming election... more
Weekend Cartoon
