Bank Holiday = Time to Build (read ruin)

[Saleen836]

A new place to live!
Looks like the usual bank holiday happenings again, this time in Hertfordshire
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16089829/Tr...

[AB]

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16087809/Tr...

Less than 10 mins from me in a relatively nice area.

[JoshSm]

Lot of contractors involved pretending to know nothing.

[fido]

They don't have a emergency legal team to apply a Temporary Stop Notice?

[Mabbs9]

fido said:

They don't have a emergency legal team to apply a Temporary Stop Notice?

Sounds like they did and it was ignored.

[JagLover]

This is the new approach, buy up agricultural and other green land and then build on it without planning permission and the councils don't usually do much if it is travellers.

[swisstoni]

Local authorities need to wise up to this and provide whatever cover is required over the holidays.

[Hereward]

Local residents also need to wise up and purchase any plots that come up for sale. The purchase cost will be far less than the resultant implications of not doing so.

[Ian Geary]

But the stop notices get ignored anyway, so it's somewhat of a moot point.

And it's not just "the council", it needs court services to be around too, and then police to police it all.

Ultimately, travellers are reacting to the massive massive under provision of travellers pitches. Every council has a plan saying they will build "x" number, and every council fails to do so.


District councils around me in surrey do take action against unauthorised developments, but it's slow, and expensive.

And then, in a hit of irony, the council will approve a housing estate a few hundred feet away from that very same green belt land that is so valuable absolutely nothing can be built on it.

I can see why travellers just think "sod it" and get on with it.

Though being a Brit and working for a council, the idea of rules not being followed makes me want to tut and shake my head sadly, and of course it will hit house prices...

[LittleBobbyTables]

fido said:

They don't have a emergency legal team to apply a Temporary Stop Notice?

I refer you to paragraph 4 of the article…

[JagLover]

Hereward said:

Local residents also need to wise up and purchase any plots that come up for sale. The purchase cost will be far less than the resultant implications of not doing so.

I have wondered how feasible it would be to buy up any land around a village. Many of the residents must have money.

[CoolHands]

BBC article of the same plac:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9e04v18zko

I like how the police are there while work carries on chocolate teapot. I also like how ‘wildlife’ spot makes it a noteworthy media story whereas plain ‘human’ spot does not.

[nikaiyo2]

What I don’t get is why travellers need to do this, they are not travelling are they?

It’s just lawless scum that Blair called a minority.

They should be moved on from any place they settle. If the police won’t, Army and live rounds. Enforce child abusers laws against them and proceeds of crime act.

[98elise]

Ian Geary said:

But the stop notices get ignored anyway, so it's somewhat of a moot point.

And it's not just "the council", it needs court services to be around too, and then police to police it all.

Ultimately, travellers are reacting to the massive massive under provision of travellers pitches. Every council has a plan saying they will build "x" number, and every council fails to do so.


District councils around me in surrey do take action against unauthorised developments, but it's slow, and expensive.

And then, in a hit of irony, the council will approve a housing estate a few hundred feet away from that very same green belt land that is so valuable absolutely nothing can be built on it.

I can see why travellers just think "sod it" and get on with it.

Though being a Brit and working for a council, the idea of rules not being followed makes me want to tut and shake my head sadly, and of course it will hit house prices...

There is also a massive under provision of houses for the general population. Why should some people who choose a different lifestyle and ignore the law get what they want?

It should be law that if you completely ignore planning then you forfeit the land so that it can be reinstated.

Occasionally they do get moved off the illegal sites

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyz5pxlg7wo

Even then the travellers were ordered to pay about 1/3 of the restoration cost, but I doubt the council will ever see a penny.

[carl_w]

Saleen836 said:

A new place to live!
Looks like the usual bank holiday happenings again, this time in Hertfordshire
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16089829/Tr...

I used to live round the corner from here when I was a kid. The whole area is floodplain.
It seems they left at around 9 this morning.

[Russ35]

Hereward said:

Local residents also need to wise up and purchase any plots that come up for sale. The purchase cost will be far less than the resultant implications of not doing so.

I spoke to a customer a few weeks ago about the site that has recently appeared next to his house. An equestrian business that had gone out of business years ago. About 1.4acres, he offered £100k, it sold for £200k. Now has 6 or 7 caravans on it.

Sounds like he has got lucky with a good owner by what he said. Apparently 1 caravan has already been kicked of site due the mess they were creating. He apparently had one of the kids climb over the wall (about 10ft) into his garden. He mentioned it to the owner not complaining or anything just that it was a bit dangerous. Next day the boy and his father came around apologising.

[paulw123]

This country really annoys me at times.

Retrospectective planning shouldn't exist. If you don't apply properly the works before you start then the works should never be allowed. No iffs, buts or maybes.

Once a stop notice is granted. Police should stop material deliveries to site, any companies failing to adhere should be massivly fined

Us mugs apply through the proper channels, the law should be the same for everyone.

Edited by paulw123 on Monday 31st August 13:54

[Gareth79]

JagLover said:

Hereward said:

Local residents also need to wise up and purchase any plots that come up for sale. The purchase cost will be far less than the resultant implications of not doing so.

I have wondered how feasible it would be to buy up any land around a village. Many of the residents must have money.

My parents have sort of the opposite problem. They want to sell a jointly-owned piece of land near their house, and there's a settled traveller's site immediately adjacent, with an access track to their house (and a few others) running inbetween. The travellers have been there for 40+ years and while the site has expanded a little it's generally all ok.

They have a private offer from a neighbour at what the land is probably worth, but the land is half owner by a relative who thinks it's worth twice as much, and would only ever want to sell it on the open market (but doesn't need or want to sell it at all).

Parents plan to live there for a few years yet and don't want the risk of the land being sold through a 3rd party to the travellers, so currently there is no progress. Nobody involved *needs* to sell it, but my parents just want to "tidy their affairs" really.

[cliffords]

They did exactly this last Bank holiday near me , Sussex.
They were given the stop notice on the Friday with Police in attendance. It doesn't stop them as the Police want to avoid a public disorder.

They have built a little town near us . Cut into water ,sewage and electricity all for themselves. They built a massive and very smart gate too and have big guard dogs

Perhaps we need ICE .

[Gareth79]

paulw123 said:

Retrospectective planning shouldn't exist. If you don't apply properly the works before you start then the works should never be allowed. No iffs, buts or maybes.

There should be some scope for genuine errors, eg. permitted development which falls outside the requirements.

The most outrageous example near here were 2x huge soundstages which started construction before the application was even submitted, and had been finished and were in use at the time the decision was made (they were approved). Now, while the people in the flats opposite could never guarantee there wouldn't be buildings constructed on the land I can appreciate their annoyance at their windows looking onto solid grey!

https://www.hampshirelive.news/news/hampshire-news...