In October 2020 I covered some of the sorry history of McGregor’s Landing at Ardlui (see here).  A failed commercial enterprise it was then leased by West Dumbartonshire Council as an outdoor centre until 2015 since when it has lain vacant.  Ten months later, in August 2021, a company called Ardlui SPV Ltd, which had been set up in June 2021, bought McGregor’s Landing for £1,300,000.

The paper trail that reveals the purchaser

SPVs or “Special Purpose Vehicles” are, as their name suggests, subsidiary companies set up by a parent company for a specific business purpose or activity.  Among the advantages they offer to those able to access capital is that they provide a means of protecting the parent company, i.e limiting liability, if things go wrong.

Ardlui SPV Ltd is one of 11 SPVs controlled by a company called HMS (999) Ltd which was incorporated in April 2014.  All these companies have a single Director,  Alan Peter Beattie.  He is recorded as owning 75% of the shares in HMS (999) Ltd but, since HMS has just £2 in share capital and the SPVs it controls just £1 in share capital, this tells you very little.

The unaudited micro accounts for Ardlui SPV Ltd to the year until September 2021 (see here for companies house filings) show the total cost of purchase was £1,357,210 and the company owed over £1,340,110 to creditors.  While the accounts don’t reveal who those creditors are, two charges over the property – ie security for the loans –  were lodged in February and March 2022 the second of which shows that DCM Optical Holdings Ltd had loaned Ardlui SPV Ltd £2 million at 2.5% over the Bank of England base rate:

DCM (Optical Holdings) Ltd is a company owned by David Charles Moulsdale – hence the “DCM” -, the founder of Optical Express  through another company called Lorena Investments Ltd.  DCM (Optical Holdings) Ltd and Lorena Investments Ltd are both registered at The Ca ‘D’ Oro, 45 Gordon Street, Glasgow, G1 3PE, the same address as HMS (999) Ltd, a further indication of the close connection between these companies.

It is almost certain, therefore, that Mr Moulsdale is now the real beneficiary of the land occupied by McGregor’s Landing.

So why has David Moulsdale apparently financed the purchase of McGregor’s landing?

The Land Registry shows McGregor’s Landing has exchanged hands no less than four times in the last twenty years, with the prices paid for the property fluctuating significantly:

The previous owner almost doubled their money from £750,000 to £1,300,000 in just two years.  Evidence that our National Parks are rife with land speculation.

The Land Registry also records that there has been no change to West Dunbartonshire Council’s lease which has transferred to Ardlui SVP Ltd the new owner of the property:

The £65,000 rent is enough to the cover the interest on DCM’s £2m loan (currently 3.25% taking account of the Bank of England base rate) without Mr Moulsdale having to do anything else. Thanks to West Dunbartonshire Community Party Councillor Jim Bollan I have been informed that the terms of their lease for McGregor’s Landing still stands so they are legally  committed to paying this for another 13 years.

The most recent accounts for HMS (999) Ltd shows it currently classified Ardlui SVP Ltd as one of a number of rental businesses:

It is quite possible therefore that David Moulsdale has simply purchased McGregor’s Landing for its current rental income.  If so, that would be another example of how private developers extract money from the public sector and of the disastrous consequences that have resulted from local authorities entering into leases rather than owning property.

And meantime young people in West Dunbartonshire Council area continue to miss out on all the benefits that would come from being able to experience outdoor education and recreation in a residential setting.

However, if Mr Moulsdale’s intention was limited to taking advantage of this publicly funded gravy train, it is difficult to explain why DCM Optical Holdings has loaned £2 million rather than the £1.3m needed to cover the purchase price. That suggests it may be Mr Moulsdale’s intention to re-develop the site (which in turn could result in the lease being terminated – a good thing).

If so, however, that would raise much wider issues about the public interest given that Mr Moulsdale now controls a significant amount of the land that could be used for development on the west shore of Loch Lomond, including the land at Tarbet where three years ago he initiated steps to get planning consent for a major development.

So far there has been no sign that Ardlui (SVP) Ltd is about to lodge a planning application to redevelop McGregor’s Landing for some other purpose.  Unfortunately, however, the LLTNPA have a history when it comes to big developers and have a number of questions to answer when it comes to Mr Moulsdale.

 

The LLTNPA’s relationship with Mr Moulsdale and his companies

First, there are questions around how the  LLTNPA rented the Shore in Balloch to an events company controlled by Mr Moulsdale which then walked out on that lease (see here).  The LLTNPA have never revealed how much money the National Park Authority lost as a result of that disastrous attempt to support private enterprise in what had previously been a centre for the public.

Second, there are questions about how  LLTNPA allowed the land they owned at Tarbet to be included in Mr Moulsdale proposed development there (see here).  The LLTNPA did the same with Flamingo Land in their original planning application for the Riverside Site at Balloch where they allowed the land they lease from Scottish Enterprise to be included.  The fact that that land is not in the latest application strongly suggests that that was wrong although the LLTNPA have never admitted this.

And third, there are serious questions about how the LLTNPA has responded to Mr Moulsdale’s unlawful felling of trees and creation of a new driveway to Ben Cruach Lodge, the house he owns in Tarbet (see here).

Ben Cruach Lodge update

Having refused planning permission in October 2020 (see here for planning papers) and on review, the LLTNPA by its own admission entered negotiations with the Mr Moulsdale to find a way to grant planning permission.  None of these discussions are recorded on the planning portal but rather belie the claim that the LLTNPA made in a news  release in April saying they were stepping up action against unauthorised developments (see here).  LLTNPA planning officers, without any involvement of Board Members, then approved a revised application from Mr Moulsdale in May (see here).

The officers’ report makes sorry reading and illustrates how the LLTNPA has bent over backwards to help Mr Moulsdale.

““The works carried out to date (primarily comprising of the tree clearance within the application site, enlarged access, new driveway and timber fencing and gates) were unauthorised; however, the aim of planning enforcement is not to be punitive (i.e: requiring all works to be removed/reinstated as suggested by a representee) but instead to seek resolution, which in this case is through the planning application process.  It is acknowledged that this process has taken some time but that the proposals presented can now be accepted as addressing the key issues of road safety and acceptable design for the setting and landscape context.  The conditions recommended below have been timed to re-dress the length of time that the unauthorised works have been in-situ, whilst still being reasonable to the applicant to provide them sufficient scope to commission and undertake the approved works”.

This is not some ordinary member of the public, who might have great difficulty paying for the land to be restored to the original conditions, it concerns someone who appears to be a multi-millionaire.  Officers, however, dismissed concerns that Ben Cruach lodge is rarely occupied and the driveway forms part of plans for a much bigger development and instead in several places in the report refer to Mr Moulsdale as the householder.

Officers also performed a volte face on what they had previously said:

“The previous 2020 planning application assessment directed the applicant towards a simpler, reduced proposal being more acceptable.  The current design of the access and entrance, albeit larger than the pre-2020 entrance, is improved from the 2020 proposal”.

And as for principle:

“It is noted that the representations received in relation to this current planning application are significantly reduced relative to the number and issues raised in respect of the 2020 planning application (being 18 individual representations and representations from the Tarbet & Arrochar Community Development Trust, a Member of Scottish Parliament and Arrochar & Tarbet Primary School).”

In other words, planning policy in the LLTNPA is practically meaningless and of no account.  Unless enough people object – the public needs to take note in respect of the new Flamingo Land application at Balloch – the LLTNPA just lets developments through, particularly when they are backed by rich developers.

This is part of the much wider corruption of Scotland’s planning system, which is no longer fit for purpose, but particularly sad to see in what is supposed to be a National Park.  If Mr Moulsdale does intend to develop McGregor’s Landing, the auguries are not good.