Member Info for Skwizz

*But the council still rejected the APPLICATION

:)

K3VMC - "Ultimately, the reasons for refusing a planning application have to be legal, as they were advised bu their own counsel."

Ultimately yes, they do.
Otherwise the applicant can take the council to court and appeal the decision.
But, as far as the committee decision is concerned, the application can be rejected by the committee.

If that decision is legal it will stand and there's nothing the applicant can do about it, other than waste money by trying to appeal it.
If it is not legal it will STILL stand until an authority overturns it (whoever that is).

The chair tried to explain to his committee that he believed their reasoning in rejecting the application would not be legally upheld if UKOG went to appeal.
He went on to say that he believed the reasons given for rejection had no legal support and would ultimately cost the council £250k in appeal court costs and the rejection would then be overturned anyway.
But the council still rejected the decision and can do exactly the same this second time, for exactly the same reasons.

Those reasons may not have any legal basis, but they can still reject the application.
It will then fall to the applicant to take it further and have the rejection overturned at the next stage (appeal court) for that reason.
:)

The SP is down -6.25% atm.
So how accurately do you think you're post reflects what's really going on?
I suspect there may be some misinterpretation.
;)

"So what's happened? I am down £20k lost 95%"

Tall Chap_UK
May I ask why you invested here?
The historical charts show UKOG at 8p three years ago, in fact it reached just over 11p.
I know because I was EXTREMELY lucky and sold at 10.2p.
But that happened so quickly there is no room to show it on the charts.
I hope your portfolio is well diversified.
If not, you chose the wrong investment.
I think what may have happened is that you may have been swayed by "Boiler-Room Rampers" who talk the share value up so that they can dump their own shares onto other people into buying this share at precisely the wrong time (making a profit themselves by persuading others to lose out).
You might notice that they are all (well, mostly all) still spouting the same rubbish today.
If they had to go and physically buy the shares themselves rather than being able buy them online, they would be planting magic beans tonight.
:)

There may still be a remote chance of seeing some of your investment back.
I still have some invested here although I banked my original profits.
I trade/speculate in tranches (dictated by whatever the Buy/Sell price for each tranche was) and my first tranche "Sell" price is at £0.5p.
Good luck and I hope you recover at least some of your investment, if not all and more.
:)

If you're trading (buying/selling), the changing SP is important during the day.
If you're holding, it only matters what it closes the day at.
:)

Cheers J4U.

K3VMC - There was no legal reason last time.
Everything had been explained and justified by the council's own experts, who also supported the application.
The chair warned his committee of that and other reasons to approve when he started to suspect they were thinking of rejecting it for the reasons they'd raised, although those exact reasons had been covered and eliminated.
They still rejected the application.
The reasons don't have to be "legal".
They can reject for exactly the same reasons as before, that they didn't understand or think the case had been made clearly enough (even though it plainly had been).
Members of the committee can resit and hear the exact same case again with more supporting evidence and explanation, but could still reject that as well and force us to go to court to overturn it.
The member raised the initial rejection said she hadn't understood the explanations.
The guy who seconded it had his own interests and agenda (admitted by him in the build up to the sitting).

This is only about NIMBYism and their money.
There is more concentrated in and around Loxley and the members don't want to lose their support.
That is all this was about.

The ONLY reason this could have been rejected was a legal reason but was not proposed as a reason.
That was a group of people (travellers) who reside within an area close enough to the site that specific notification is required by law.
By the council's mistake they had not been, so they did not have sufficient opportunity to raise their own objections.
This was raised in the meeting and could have been used to at least delay the proceedings.
But it was not.
If it still hasn't yet been rectified during the delay, it could be used this time instead.

Sames amount of decent sized Sells too.

Versus how many sold?

:D

Explained many many many times, Bladderman.
Last one at 15 Aug 2020 11:40 (trying to be helpful and to save you looking it up).
The only shares I'm trading outside my main portfolio atm is UKOG so I only have a passing interest in the others I held.

I hold and trade UKOG shares.
That post doesn't give all of my reasons.
I've made a lot (percentage-wise) from UKOG.
But all of that was from trading, not holding.
My efforts, not theirs.

I am disgruntled because of the way this has been mis-managed.
The reasons behind the falling share value have been as unbelievable as its' ramping here.
If I was to go back three years, I wouldn't be holding any shares now.
I would've continued to trade everything.
But even those trading opportunities have mostly dried up over the last two years (they do still arise, occasionally).

There will be fewer posts from me from now on as I had to resort to using my filters recently.
Not something I ever really wanted to do, but the general gibberish has gone beyond a level for which I can find a use.
Half of it doesn't even relate to UKOG and it certainly doesn't provide input from the real world.
:)

Except that he didn't call for a motion for refusal.
He called for a motion to approve the rejection.
Voters were left asking for clarity on what they were actually voting for.

There was a planning application on the table.
The motion should have been to approve the plan or reject it, based upon whatever reasons.
Not approve rejections or reject approvals.

I got bored of wasting my time with their* ravings a while ago.

*He's one of a bunch who have nothing to contribute and just absorb time, if you allow them.
The others are mostly harmless but mislead, 'floaters'.
:)

My expectations of Turkey are similar to those for the UK.
That of being ramped up, by the same turkey that ramped up Horsehill (by "billions of barrels" too many).
:(

LOL Brillo.
I can dream.
I'm sure she'd like a 60-year old guy every now 'n' then.
"Slap a wrinkle an' riiiiiide the wave!"
:)

More chance of finding me in bed with Katie Perry.

I see the price of Brent topping $70/barrel in the next couple of years, and possibly even $100/barrel.
But UKOG doesn't sell oil in the kind of quantities that might be affected by that.
Trousers has more in his comb than he's found underground so far.
:)

The more I watch the more I think it's just a bunch of over-excitable kids.
They get exhilarated over the smallest buys and rises in the SP, most of which are cancelled out later in the day.
Kind of funny, but mostly sad.
:)

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3608044-half-of-gulf-of-mexico-oil-production-shut-due-to-twin-storm-threat?utm_source=investing.com&utm_medium=referral

"Energy producers have shut 1.07M bbl/day, or nearly 58%, of offshore crude oil production and 1.2M cf/day, or 45%, of natural gas output from the U.S. Gulf of Mexico because of the twin threat from Hurricane Marco and Tropical Storm Laura, says the U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement.

Workers have been evacuated from 114 production platforms out of the 643 manned platforms in the Gulf of Mexico, according to the BSEE.

Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A, RDS.B) says it has "shut in production at all but one of our assets" in the U.S. Gulf but does not identify the field that continues to produce.

Equinor (NYSE:EQNR) says it has finished evacuating and shutting in production at its Titan platform in the Gulf, while BHP is ramping down operations at its Shenzi and Neptune oil platforms.

BP, Chevron (NYSE:CVX) and Murphy Oil (NYSE:MUR) also have evacuated personnel and shut-in production, according to previous reports.

Crude oil prices are nudging higher, with the front-month futures for both WTI and Brent crude up ~0.2%."

LOL!
I like this 'new' Joey.
:D

When yer right, yer right.
The detractors can only run their mouths.
:D

LOL!!!