Travellers in town car park - why aren't they fined?
Discussion
Davel said:
It tends to be the transient ones who give us problems. Those on fixed local sites are normally much less of a problem.
Are they still a traveler if they live on a fixed site? I've got a mate who lives in a static caravan park, wouldn't describe anyone I've seen there as a traveller. It's one of these over 55's only places.
J4CKO said:
Personally I would love to hear a story where travelling folk came to town, left their site as they found it, did some good and reasonably price work for the townsfolk, had a great "craic" in the local pubs with no fighting and no increase in theft was registered.
Artists impression of just such a scenario:something like this (if the vehicles are registered at all)? http://www.boatmail.co.uk/motorhomemail.html
I think a lot of being itinerant means that the whole "s
tting on your own doorstep" thing no longer applies.
Where my dad works, the vacant unit next door had them break in and set up, they were there months and it was basically made a mess off, people using the back of their workshop as a toilet, they left a huge mess and it cost over ten grand to get it cleared up.
Sadly, nobody welcomes them, because rarely does it bode well for a location, people have a lot of unfounded prejudices but the travelling community one seems to be pretty rooted in fact sadly.
The folk who run the fun fairs and the like are not the same, they travel with the fair because they have to, usually just during the season.
I think that the travelling community is fairly small, if there were millions of them there would be much more in the way of legislation, as it is, they are a small problem, unless they appear on your land.
I don't like it when it gets described as a racial thing, I dont care who they are, or where them come from originally, if they rock up in the local park or on some empty ground and make a mess for someone else to clean up then that isn't a race, that's an inconsiderate group of people.
tting on your own doorstep" thing no longer applies.Where my dad works, the vacant unit next door had them break in and set up, they were there months and it was basically made a mess off, people using the back of their workshop as a toilet, they left a huge mess and it cost over ten grand to get it cleared up.
Sadly, nobody welcomes them, because rarely does it bode well for a location, people have a lot of unfounded prejudices but the travelling community one seems to be pretty rooted in fact sadly.
The folk who run the fun fairs and the like are not the same, they travel with the fair because they have to, usually just during the season.
I think that the travelling community is fairly small, if there were millions of them there would be much more in the way of legislation, as it is, they are a small problem, unless they appear on your land.
I don't like it when it gets described as a racial thing, I dont care who they are, or where them come from originally, if they rock up in the local park or on some empty ground and make a mess for someone else to clean up then that isn't a race, that's an inconsiderate group of people.
RizzoTheRat said:
Davel said:
It tends to be the transient ones who give us problems. Those on fixed local sites are normally much less of a problem.
Are they still a traveler if they live on a fixed site? I've got a mate who lives in a static caravan park, wouldn't describe anyone I've seen there as a traveller. It's one of these over 55's only places.I was in kirby lonsdale at the weekend and they are all parked up at devils bridge on their way to appelby. The council puts a skip and portaloos there to discourage them from stting in the woods. When some had gone sunday morning they had just left the rubbish strewn all over the layby. Even when people try to help and pay them a bit of respect they still take the piss....begs the question, whats the point in trying....??
tting in the woods. When some had gone sunday morning they had just left the rubbish strewn all over the layby. Even when people try to help and pay them a bit of respect they still take the piss....begs the question, whats the point in trying....??Don't the authorities have the right to crush illegal vehicles? Perhaps they should be presented with the option of paying the fees / fines they have incurred, or having their vehicles legally removed and crushed. It might make them a little more likely to pay the fees / and fines, that it appears only apply to everyone else, except them?
[quote=KAgantua]What abut their human rights?[/quote
What about them? When a person has rights, they also have responsibilities. exercising ones rights but avoiding one`s responsibilities (in particular paying fees / fines etc that everyone else has to pay) is an extremely poor attitude.
All too often we hear travellers bleating about not being given `facilities' but what do `they' pay towards them?
The Dale Farm incident cost the local taxpayers millions to resolve what was an illegal occupation of a site, but how much did the `travellers' pay towards dealing with the problems `they' caused, and in particular clearing up the mess they left behind.
What about them? When a person has rights, they also have responsibilities. exercising ones rights but avoiding one`s responsibilities (in particular paying fees / fines etc that everyone else has to pay) is an extremely poor attitude.
All too often we hear travellers bleating about not being given `facilities' but what do `they' pay towards them?
The Dale Farm incident cost the local taxpayers millions to resolve what was an illegal occupation of a site, but how much did the `travellers' pay towards dealing with the problems `they' caused, and in particular clearing up the mess they left behind.
budfox said:
Also, when all is said and done, would you want to live in a caravan?
Following the Dale Farm incident, it was found that a most of the travellers there also had fixed properties elsewhere, and in the case of the `traveller' who instigated the illegal occupation of the site, substantial properties. They were also offered houses by the local authority so that their children could continue to attend local schools, but refused them, saying they were travellers and it was `not their way of life' (which `appears' to be taking as much as they can get from those around them, and paying nothing back for it) so no, they don`t have to live in caravans, they just choose to live in caravans.
If non travellers go on land and build illegal dwellings, without planning permission etc, in green belt areas they are obliged to demolish them, or they are demolished at the owners expense.
They just want to establish fixed dwellings, without going through the procedures and paying the going rate / fees etc that the rest of us have to, to take advantage of rising prices for fixed properties. Another example of them flouting the law to make a profit out of those around them.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff