Builder Budges Bump
Discussion
Heard (on the radio this morning) that a builder in Oxford got up one Saturday morning and removed a road hump outside his house.
He was fed up of the squeal of air brakes, et cetera, keeping him awake all night.
Apparently he went straight down to the police station, but they don't know what to charge him with!
I'd charge him with a medal for services to the community!
Doh - edited to say: here's the story: www.thisisoxford.co.uk/oxfordshire/news/TOPNEWS0.html
>>> Edited by beano1197 on Tuesday 26th November 09:17
He was fed up of the squeal of air brakes, et cetera, keeping him awake all night.
Apparently he went straight down to the police station, but they don't know what to charge him with!
I'd charge him with a medal for services to the community!
Doh - edited to say: here's the story: www.thisisoxford.co.uk/oxfordshire/news/TOPNEWS0.html
>>> Edited by beano1197 on Tuesday 26th November 09:17
It's ben archived now - find it here -
www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/oxfordshire/archive/2002/11/25/TOPNEWS0ZM.html
www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/oxfordshire/archive/2002/11/25/TOPNEWS0ZM.html
Note the two-faced argumentation used in the article!
""We have had several instances of people putting down their own humps, but never this," said Mr Carritt.
: 'It does not surprise me, but I think there will have to be a prosecution.
"You can't have people taking the law into their own hands, otherwise residents all over the county who complain they are being disturbed by road humps will demand us to come and level them."
So it's OK for someone to take the law into their own hands and BUILD a hump, but not to remove one!
Cynical double talking lying council tw@s
probably labour too!
""We have had several instances of people putting down their own humps, but never this," said Mr Carritt.
: 'It does not surprise me, but I think there will have to be a prosecution.
"You can't have people taking the law into their own hands, otherwise residents all over the county who complain they are being disturbed by road humps will demand us to come and level them."
So it's OK for someone to take the law into their own hands and BUILD a hump, but not to remove one!
Cynical double talking lying council tw@s
probably labour too!
"You can't have people taking the law into their own hands, otherwise residents all over the county who complain they are being disturbed by road humps will demand us to come and level them."
Er...in that case, why not try consulting the residents before building the damn things, to see if they actually want them?
gnomesmith said: Should I damage my car or worse still a motorcyclist fall off as a result of the trench that the hump removal has left will the builder pay compensation?
There can be a downside to direct action.
humbug
In the article he is quoted as saying “I scraped it down to the asphalt and made sure it was flat so passing cars could drive over it safely — and quietly."
I dont see a downside.
I quite like humbugs, they are a good suck and we all need that from time to time.
Builder was quoted as saying he had offered to tarmac over the damage himself but the council wish to use an approved contractor. I'd imagine that is a condition of their insurance.
There is a very noticable trench where the hump was removed and obvious degredation of the edges of the trench. If an unwary biker had to brake, and that is not unusual in the vicinity of a primary school, it could have a rather sad outcome, similarly lets hope there is not a cold snap as an ice filled trench is not nice to come across.
It seems that the object of becoming 'Humphry' was to stop the noise of lorries passing over the hump, they now make a noise crashing into the trench.
I think the legal problems resulting from any insurance claim are fairly obvious, even if the builder has public liability insurance I doubt if it would cover the results of criminal damage so I hope Bob has a nice pot of cash just in case. Offhand I'd guess we are dealing with the law of tort albeit an unusual variation.
>> Edited by gnomesmith on Tuesday 26th November 21:53
Builder was quoted as saying he had offered to tarmac over the damage himself but the council wish to use an approved contractor. I'd imagine that is a condition of their insurance.
There is a very noticable trench where the hump was removed and obvious degredation of the edges of the trench. If an unwary biker had to brake, and that is not unusual in the vicinity of a primary school, it could have a rather sad outcome, similarly lets hope there is not a cold snap as an ice filled trench is not nice to come across.
It seems that the object of becoming 'Humphry' was to stop the noise of lorries passing over the hump, they now make a noise crashing into the trench.
I think the legal problems resulting from any insurance claim are fairly obvious, even if the builder has public liability insurance I doubt if it would cover the results of criminal damage so I hope Bob has a nice pot of cash just in case. Offhand I'd guess we are dealing with the law of tort albeit an unusual variation.
>> Edited by gnomesmith on Tuesday 26th November 21:53
So finally a greatest Briton candidate worth voting for. I was so impressed I waited for the national news to interview the guy. He was kin brilliant. Stated his case, then shifted the hump. TV got him together with an Oxford coucillor (bless). Some mincing little bastard who pompously bleated on about the law taking its course. So Bob the builder tells him what is going to happen next (smack in the mouth) Classic, I think we should all chip in to put this guy up for parliament. We need our country run by down to earth people like this guy. I like his aproach. Problem--- solution --- mincing tosser objects to solution --- smack him --- problem solved. 
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff