Charity Refuses to Answer Key Questions Over Hospital Land Sale as Residents Consider Charity Commission Referral

The battle over the proposed new Frimley Park Hospital site has entered a new phase, with local residents now considering a formal approach to the Charity Commission after Frimley Fuel Allotments declined to answer a series of detailed governance questions.

The charity, which owns the Pine Ridge land identified by Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust as the preferred location for the replacement hospital, recently issued a public statement welcoming the proposal and describing the potential benefits it believes could arise from a future sale.

Trustees argued that helping deliver a new hospital is consistent with the charity’s objectives and stated that any proceeds from a sale would remain within the charity, enabling increased support for local charities, community groups and residents experiencing hardship.

However, some residents say the statement raises as many questions as it answers.

Following the announcement, local residents wrote to the charity seeking clarification on a number of governance matters, including whether the land is held as permanent endowment, whether the Charity Commission has been consulted, what independent professional advice has been obtained, how conflicts of interest have been managed and what evidence supports the trustees’ conclusion that selling the land would provide greater long-term benefit than retaining it.

In a response from Chair of Trustees Alan McClafferty, the charity confirmed that trustees had considered the long-term financial position of the charity, obtained professional advice and concluded that disposal of part of the landholding could provide greater and more sustainable benefits for beneficiaries.

However, the charity declined to provide further details, stating that trustee deliberations, professional advice received and commercial discussions remain confidential and commercially sensitive.

For campaigners, that response is proving controversial.

The issue is not whether trustees have considered these matters. The issue is whether beneficiaries are being given enough information to understand how one of the most significant decisions in the charity’s history has been reached.

Frimley Fuel Allotments is not a commercial developer. It is a registered charity entrusted with managing substantial land assets for charitable purposes. Many residents therefore believe that a higher standard of transparency should apply when considering the disposal of land on this scale.

The charity’s response did not confirm whether the land is held as permanent endowment, did not disclose the nature of the professional advice received, did not explain whether any conflicts of interest were declared or managed, and did not answer questions regarding trustee voting arrangements.

The trustees maintain they are acting in accordance with their legal responsibilities and have stated they would cooperate fully with any enquiries from the Charity Commission should they arise.

That statement has done little to quieten calls for further scrutiny.

Importantly, no evidence has emerged suggesting fraud, misconduct or unlawful behaviour by the trustees. Equally, many of the governance questions being asked remain unanswered.

As a result, some residents are now considering asking the Charity Commission to review whether beneficiaries have been provided with sufficient transparency regarding the proposed disposal of a major charitable asset.

Whether the Commission chooses to take any interest remains to be seen. However, the fact that residents are now discussing regulatory scrutiny demonstrates how much trust has been eroded during the site selection process.

For many people, the debate is more than where a new hospital should be built.

It is about whether decisions involving charity-owned land, public assets and the future of the local environment are being made openly enough for the community to have confidence in the outcome.

What Can Residents Do Next?

Campaigners are urging residents to remain factual, respectful and focused on evidence.

Suggested actions include:

• Attend Frimley Health engagement events and ask questions directly.

• Request publication of site selection evidence and comparative assessments of alternative locations.

• Write to Frimley Fuel Allotments trustees seeking clarification on governance and transparency issues.

• Contact local councillors, MPs and decision-makers with specific concerns rather than general objections.

• Submit responses to the official consultation process.

• Review Charity Commission guidance on charity land disposals and trustee responsibilities.

• Encourage independent scrutiny of traffic, infrastructure, environmental and governance issues.

Whatever view people take on the hospital itself, campaigners argue that the coming months will be critical. Once major decisions are made and approvals begin to progress, opportunities to influence the outcome become far more limited.

For that reason, they say now is the time for residents to engage, ask questions and ensure decision-makers know that the community is paying attention.