What Will Become of The Royal Oak?
On the 15th of June this year, we wrote about our visit to the Royal Oak, a historic coaching inn halfway between Birmingham and Manchester, which has been a disused blot on the High Street of Cheadle for more than a decade.
TLDR: (Too Long Didn't Read)
A group of councillors from both the district and town councils acted outside of their roles and asked the town council to underwrite a loan for a yet-to-be-formed charity aiming to restore the Royal Oak into a viable community business.
They have canvassed local residents for investment without having a legal structure in place, and anyone who invests does not have an automatic right to get that money back. The group called "The Oak Project" has failed to raise the purchase price of an estimated £300,000 and will need around another £1,700,000 to get the building to a point of trading. The business plan is poor, very little research has been done, and there is a lack of experience within the group. Support for this project could put established businesses and other organizations at risk, including the town council.
You can find out about our visit, including pictures, in our article. "Can the Royal Oak Be Saved?" Today, we are reviewing the story since our visit and bringing you an update on what is likely to happen next.
Back in June, along with local experts and the helpful agent at Butters John Bee, Cheadle COG went along with open minds and open hearts to assess how this building might be saved. One of our experts was also a member of the Friends of the Royal Oak Group*.
*Friends of the Royal Oak and the new Oak Project
The "Friends of the Royal Oak" were a long-standing group of local residents with a desire to bring the Royal Oak back into public use. The group had gotten quite a long way down the road, having plans drawn up, various assessments done, and had a pledge from English Heritage to help them financially if they could get the project off the ground.
Unfortunately, the mountain looked too big for the group to climb, and with the Royal Oak not actively for sale, nothing much more happened. The Asset of Community Value (ACV) status obtained by the group via SMDC to protect the building from sale to a commercial buyer lapsed.
The building was put up for auction in June/July 2026. We spoke with the "Friends of the Royal Oak," who, instead of taking the project forward as might have been expected, dissolved, and a new group called The Oak Project was formed, spearheaded by several SMDC & Cheadle Town Councillors and the original chair of the friends group - Mike Plant, local historian and leader of the discovery group.
The Oak Project managed to get the asset of community value reinstated, which halted the auction while they attempted to raise the funds. Funding will be needed not only to make the purchase but for extensive refurbishments which are required to bring it back to a usable standard. Fixtures and fittings, stock and equipment, training the staff, etc., will also be needed to make it a going concern. Our experts agree that while the Royal Oak appears to have good bones, there is nothing usable in the building either to sell or use for the new business.
There is a steep mountain to climb before this project might break even, whoever buys the building. To make money, you must have a robust plan, solid experience in two different areas - heritage building and large-scale hospitality or multi-use building management, along with excellent contingency for when something goes wrong - which happens on almost every build.
Deep pockets, great skill levels, and grit are what's needed to give this lovely old building the success it deserves. The love of your town or the building will sadly not be anywhere near enough.
Who can buy the Royal Oak?
The Oak Project Group heralded the halt in the sale as a victory for the town. But was it? Time will tell. The experienced team at the local estate agents Butters John Bee, responsible for the sale, have lined up several heritage organisations interested in taking on the building. Interested parties are believed to have extensive knowledge and expertise in commercial development and are able to restore the building to provide the type of usage the town needs in the shortest space of time.
This helps reduce impact for the town and get closer to paying back extensive costs to develop the site for the new owner. The halt in sale meant that these potential buyers could no longer bid for the building, and the Oak Project, as a newly formed group with no capital, can't buy it either.
Potential buyers are keen to see this property developed as a combination of gastropub or cafe/restaurant on the ground floor and Airbnb or boutique hotel on the upper floor. BJB has a strong history of working with local towns, including Cheadle, and feel that a hotel/Airbnb would offer affordable accommodation for people who might want to visit Alton Towers or come to the area for work. Whilst the ground floor cafe/restaurant or gastropub will service the hotel and bring in locals and visitors alike.
The building is unlikely to be used for housing alone, something many residents fear. SMDC has already rejected two applications for that previously, and as the building is in the conservation area, there are some robust guidelines which must be met. Whilst SMDC may not have the power they previously enjoyed to veto planning—you may recall they were deregulated from overseeing large-scale developments earlier this year—the conservation rules and general heritage rules, along with the strength of feeling in the town, mean it's very likely the building will be developed in line with what's needed, especially with local elections coming up next year—everyone wants this building back into use!
It's worth noting that the Oak Project does not have exclusivity should another community group wish to make an offer and have the resources in place to do so. The Oak Project could be displaced as buyers.
Can the Oak Project Raise the Money?
On the 5th of October, Cllr Vicky Wheeldon, lead at the Oak Project who is also chair of finance at Cheadle Town Council, asked the council to consider underwriting the loan of £300,000 for the Oak Project to purchase the building. This follows several months of heavy campaigning to attract the finance from local residents, businesses, and the like, which according to sources has failed to materialise.
We'd been at one of those campaign meetings where Cllrs Wheeldon and Spooner outlined the plan to set up two arms to the group: a charity which would own the building and be responsible for bringing it back into use, and a community benefit society which would run the business and keep the building in use. They were clear that they believed it was unfair to burden the townsfolk with the debt, which they believed would be around 2 million pounds. Why did they then ask the Council to consider underwriting the debt when Cllr Wheeldon, better than anyone, knows that the council is funded by council tax of the people of Cheadle?
In her post as Chair of the Town Council's finance committee, she is well aware that the town council has less than £300,000 currently in reserves. They can't cover this loan, and doing so would put the services in our town and jobs of our officers in serious peril. It also sets a dangerous precedent if the town agreed to fund this charity that they have no influence over or agreement with, and what's to stop any other charity asking for the same option for a building in the future?
Cllrs Wheeldon and Spooner promised that they would not burden the people of Cheadle with the cost of the Royal Oak but have gone one step further by desiring to put the whole town at risk. You can hear the appeal to the town council early this month below.
At that earlier campaign meeting, they were asking for members of the public to give them money, but because they had no legal structure in place and therefore no obligation should their bid fail to return money to the townsfolk, we could not support their project at the time.
When they asked the council to consider underwriting the debt, the feeling in the council was mixed. We have evidence that the group asked over 20 people to go along to the meeting to support that application. It's common knowledge in council circles that when the public are present, councillors consider their views in the light of that presence. Those members of the public were not there by chance; they came because they were asked by Cllr Wheeldon to add weight to their proposal.
We know this was unfair because the members of the public could not have found out about the topic being discussed other than directly because we checked the town website before and after the meeting, and the agenda was not published - something the council is legally required to do.
Following the council agreeing to investigate the possibility of underwriting the loan, Cllr Spooner - a district, not town councillor - took to social media to announce the town council had agreed to support them. That wasn't really what had happened, but he took the opportunity to show that the town council was supporting the group. Some councillors were outraged by this action.
We immediately put together a questionnaire for the group based on feedback and concerns raised by the public. Here's what we asked, Cllr Wheeldon as the contact lead for the group:
The Questions We Asked The Oak Project
No Answers to date
1. Who's going to be chair of the trust and are any of the trustees planning to take paid roles too, if so who will be doing what?
Notes: This is particularly important if these people currently hold a political office whether paid or voluntarily. There is a rumor that all three councillors involved in the project are currently looking for work and an accusation has been lodged that this project would provide all three with a living.
2. Why is the name changed to The Oak and not the Royal Oak?
Notes: Is it moving away from something which is quite negative or for better branding or is it supportive of an anti-royalist policy?
3.1. When do you expect to have the CBS set up?
3.2. Have you got someone to lead that?
Notes: if so a little bio might go a long way for confidence building.
4. I know you & Matthew were keen not to burden the public with the cost of re refurbishment and managing the asset, what changed between the public meeting that I and the mayor attended and your proposal on the 5th of October to the town council?
5. Why was the proposal to make the town responsible for the debt should things go wrong and not perhaps either encourage this purchase as an asset by the council directly or set up a council company such as a LATCo?
6. As Chair of Finance at Cheadle Town Council,
6. 1. Is this project a conflict of interest for you and if you are successful will you be stepping down from any role on the finance committee and any other that may present a potential conflict at CTC?
6.2. The reserves of CTC have been severely depleted in the past two years and currently would not be able to cover the debt your group is asking them to underwrite. As chair of the finance committee have you considered what would happen to the council should you default on the debt and how that would be paid without burdening the people of Cheadle with the cost?
6.3. Question for Cllr Paulette Upton, As chair of Leisure and Operations at Cheadle Town Council is this project a conflict of interest for you and if you are successful will you be stepping down from any role on the leisure and operations committee and any other that may present a potential conflict at CTC?
Notes:(we will ask this separately) but are asking it here for context.
7. What is the level, appetite and availability of funds from SMDC?
Notes: The disclosure of this whether good or bad could go a long way towards building public confidence
8. Can you tell us clearly how any funding given over by residents will be spent and what will happen to that funding should the project not move forward?
9. Thinking about the business, what competitor analysis and local business impact have you conducted to reach the decisions on chosen income streams? In particular
9.1 The cafe?
Notes: There has been one new cafe opened in the town since your first public meeting and another on the way in the new year plus the micro pub plus the planned town market.
9.2 The Business Suites?
Notes: Given that there is no frontage to the business areas currently to offer retail space and that it is all located on the first floor. Additionally there are currently at least 4 business room spaces in the town - Daisy Bank, Chamber of Commerce, The Talbot, & Lulworth house.
9.3 Spaces for Hire to community groups?
Notes: In our experience community groups and many support organisations locally have very little or no money to pay hire fees. Wellspring are due to break ground on their 3-fold community space and are already operating well in this area.
9.4 How will you pivot and in what direction would you go should any of the above streams become untenable?
9.5 What proportion of the total income do you anticipate the income streams to rely upon?
9.6 How quickly do you hope to be profitable?
9.7 How long will the business be able to survive until income starts to come in?
9.7 When do you anticipate having your first paying customer?
10 Some people have said this is a vanity project led by people who have no experience. How would you counter that claim?
11. Notes:This is a question for Yourself, Matthew & Paulette,
Are you concerned that asking the council to take on this responsibility sets a dangerous precedent and anyone will now think they can come and pitch to the council and have their ideas underwritten by local government, opening a floodgate to time wasting and confusion by the volunteer councillors.
12. Cheadle Community Pantry
12.1 It's been just over a year since you formed, how popular is the service with local residents?
12.2 Is this organisation solvent?
13. Is there anything else you would like our readers to know that we haven't already asked?
Their Response
We received an email from Cllr Wheeldon assuring us of their intention to comply, inquiring about the print deadline, and asking if we would not print anything until they came back to us. We said that we couldn't do that.
On the 20th of October, we received a further reply from Cllr Wheeldon saying that Cllr Spooner was having internet issues. She said they intended to put out a reply to the questions on their Facebook page and asked if we would point our readers to their Facebook page. We explained our policy of never linking to Facebook, and to date, we have received no response to the questions. Interesting that Cllr Spooner is unable to send email but is able to post on Facebook.
This appears to be nothing more than an attempt to get COGNEWS to support the group with free endorsement, in much the same way as they acted at the town council earlier this month.
We have also not yet received a reply from Cllr Upton, who is listed as both a trustee of the Oak Project and is the head of the Leisure and Operations committee at the town council, which also has devolved financial powers with regards to her involvement. Question 6.3
In the meantime, although not listed as a trustee in the business plan, District and Town Cllr Ian Plant appears in the Royal Oak leaflet allegedly sent to 7,500 homes as one of the leaders. His position with the Oak Project is unclear.
Should the town council agree to underwrite the Royal Oak loan?
Absolutely not! Here are a few reasons why:
The council can't afford it. They don't have sufficient money in reserves, and a default on the loan could bankrupt the town.
They don't have great independent income streams to be able to cover the debt either. For example, the newly constructed bowling pavilion headed by Cllr Upton, trustee of the Oak Project, cost over £220,000 and has not been set up as an income stream to date. It will take years for losses from this project to be recovered. Additionally, Mayor Mills, under a service level agreement with SMDC, agreed to cover all costs associated with Churchill Road Recreation Ground which were not covered by the section 106 money paid by Bellway & Turners Pasture developments. This includes fencing, CCTV, and other security, gates, etc.
According to the Oak Project business plan, if 75 percent of the trustees meet and agree to dissolve the charity, this can be dissolved within two weeks, leaving the town council covering the debt.
Upton and Wheeldon are sole chairs of committees that have spending power at Cheadle Town Council. This means they would effectively be able to run the Oak Project from within the council, making major decisions without full council agreement being needed and with very little scrutiny.
The business plan does not explain how they will make money, how much they will spend, what contingencies and reserves they have, or even who will run the business.
The members of the Oak Project do not have the heritage building experience required for a commercial loan of this type. In principle, the town council does, and it is possible that the group is using the council to get the loan based not only on underwriting the debt but also falsifying their level of expertise to investors, something which is needed to ensure the success of the build.
The charity they say is established according to the Charities Commission does not exist, and neither Vicky Wheeldon, Matthew Spooner, Paulette Upton, Ian Plant, nor Mike Plant are trustees of anything in a similar name which could have been set up incorrectly. The Charities Commission told our researcher that there is no delay in setting up a CIO currently and there are no cost implications which might impact a group from being able to proceed. They simply haven't done it. The commissioner advised our researcher to speak with the funding regulator and report it to the Charities Commission Complaints & Concerns.
Should people support the Oak Group in their bid for the building?
Sadly, at this time, as when we looked at the project back in June, we would not recommend investing in this. It is, according to our research and expert views sought, a bad risk.
What next for the councillors involved in the Project Bid?
We are in the process of providing our evidence to both the Town & District Council raising concerns about the conduct of the Cllrs involved in the Oak Project. One outcome could be that they are asked to resign. They could even face criminal proceedings if an official investigation finds that this project is a scam.
Most Importantly, what next for the Royal Oak?
In early January 2027, if the Oak Project group is not successful in finding the finance to purchase the property, which is ready to sell, it will be sold.
We are informed that there are buyers waiting and all the Oak Project will have achieved is delaying the opening of the much-needed historic building by six months. Buyers are likely to look to complete the project within the year.
Cheadle Market
Cllrs Spooner, Wheeldon & I Plant are all SMDC councillors representing Cheadle. SMDC purchased Cheadle Market & Market Square from the estate of the private owner on September 12th, 2024, when the market, though in decline, held weekly markets outdoors and several tenants indoors, including an indoor cafe with an outdoor seating area. Cllrs Plant & Wheeldon said that following a Growth and Economy meeting held in May 2026, steps will be taken to modernize Cheadle's Market Square. The building remains locked and continues to decline.
SMDC Budget Shortfall
SMDC has stated an overspend of £929,000 for the current year's budget. According to Deputy Opposition Group Leader Cllr James Aberley, that figure is closer to £5,000,000. We've asked if any of the projects for Cheadle will be completed - Churchill Road Recreation Ground, Cheadle Market, Cheadle Leisure Centre. We await their response along with those outstanding on Churchill Road Recreation Ground Development.
What Would You Like to See for The Royal OaK?
Share Your View....
What Will Become of the Royal Oak?
