Report back from photoshoot today and work towards BHRUT meeting on 15th January

 Many thanks to everyone attending earlier today. The letter sent is below:

Here is a photo of us:

Below is a YouTube video of interviews outside store

NHS trusts rarely take councils to court about them not taking them the NHS into account.

These are two examples 

https://www.townlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/2023-EWHC-263-Admin-13-February-2023.pdf

https://www.townlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/2023-EWHC-1995-Admin-31-July-2023.pdf

BHRUT next meet on 15th January 1;15pm at King George Hospital 

Our objective appear to be getting unions, faith groups, school governing bodies and resident associations to attend or write to BHRUT asking them to write to Redbridge asking they write to Redbridge Council to ask the developer to make a contribution towards the NHS.

A recent letter from the NHS at an earlier blog talks of £1.9M  for reg 122 funding per the link below: https://stopthetescotoxictowers.blogspot.com/2025/11/stop-tesco-toxic-towers-update-on.html

I quote from the link above

"Redbridge Local Plan Site Allocation 70 (Goodmayes Retail Park) identifies provision of a new health facility as part of the comprehensive redevelopment of the adjacent site. This presents a deliverable solution to local health pressures, bringing GP-to-patient ratios closer to benchmark levels. NHS NEL therefore considers it both necessary and proportionate that the proposed development contributes to the delivery of this facility in line with Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, which requires planning obligations to be directly related and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. In accordance with London Plan policy and established practice, the capital mitigation associated with a scheme of this size and tenure is £1,928,813" ENDs Quote

The site 70 quoted appears smaller than the Tesco site suggesting the reg 122 could be higher than £1.9M.

I will write more later on this.