check this thread...
Discussion
... running over on the C6 forum. Sorry I meant the Corvette forum, or did I mean the C6 dealers forum
I've also posted the gov's response to the petition where complaints have been instigated by resident(s) against a long standing activity (for example, church bells, sports facility, local airfield and similar), and where residence has been taken up since the start of that activity (providing there has been no significant increase in activity), a presumption should be made to protect the continuation of that activity and reject such complaint."
I've also posted the gov's response to the petition where complaints have been instigated by resident(s) against a long standing activity (for example, church bells, sports facility, local airfield and similar), and where residence has been taken up since the start of that activity (providing there has been no significant increase in activity), a presumption should be made to protect the continuation of that activity and reject such complaint."
Edited by Gixer on Friday 24th October 17:38
Yeah I know.
Read the Government’s response
It is a statutory requirement of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 that Local Authority Environmental Health departments investigate all complaints relating to alleged statutory nuisances from residents living within their boundaries. During their investigation, the Environmental Health department must determine whether the noise occurring can be considered to be a statutory nuisance.
When reaching a decision as to whether the noise is a statutory nuisance, a variety of factors are taken into consideration, such as, the type of the noise, the frequency and duration of the noise, the loudness of the noise, the general character of the area, sensitivity of the complainant and reasonableness of the activity causing the noise. The determination of each of these issues is carried out by reference to established case law.
Were the changes proposed made to the legislation, a statutory nuisance causing activity, such as a factory or a noisy neighbour, could be allowed to continue to blight an area as they happened to be resident before the complainant. Case law states that this situation cannot be allowed to happen. In relation to the noise sources specifically mentioned, however, it seems unlikely that an Environmental Health department would consider church bells or children playing in a playground to be considered a statutory nuisance as they very well may be considered reasonable for the area.
As the statutory nuisance regime is currently structured, the determination of whether a statutory nuisance exists cannot be made until a qualified representative of an Environmental Health department witnesses the noise. As such, discouraging residents to make complaints relating to noise could be argued to be counterproductive.
It is for these reasons that there are no plans at present to change the law to favour existing noise sources over new residents.
Read the Government’s response
It is a statutory requirement of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 that Local Authority Environmental Health departments investigate all complaints relating to alleged statutory nuisances from residents living within their boundaries. During their investigation, the Environmental Health department must determine whether the noise occurring can be considered to be a statutory nuisance.
When reaching a decision as to whether the noise is a statutory nuisance, a variety of factors are taken into consideration, such as, the type of the noise, the frequency and duration of the noise, the loudness of the noise, the general character of the area, sensitivity of the complainant and reasonableness of the activity causing the noise. The determination of each of these issues is carried out by reference to established case law.
Were the changes proposed made to the legislation, a statutory nuisance causing activity, such as a factory or a noisy neighbour, could be allowed to continue to blight an area as they happened to be resident before the complainant. Case law states that this situation cannot be allowed to happen. In relation to the noise sources specifically mentioned, however, it seems unlikely that an Environmental Health department would consider church bells or children playing in a playground to be considered a statutory nuisance as they very well may be considered reasonable for the area.
As the statutory nuisance regime is currently structured, the determination of whether a statutory nuisance exists cannot be made until a qualified representative of an Environmental Health department witnesses the noise. As such, discouraging residents to make complaints relating to noise could be argued to be counterproductive.
It is for these reasons that there are no plans at present to change the law to favour existing noise sources over new residents.
Gassing Station | Vipers | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff