Restrictive Covenant

cannyberry

The Environmental Department of the local Council is already involved I am happy to say - as a direct consequence of the photos I had taken so was able to print in A4 format and attach to my initial letter requesting their intervention. (I don't trust e-mail and attachments in circumstances such as these - too easy for an idle council operative to deny receipt or claim un-downloadable attachments!. Hence snail mail letter plus very large printed photos!)


In fact this is the only department which has shown willingness to assist. An officer called, inspected the outside of the property including peering over my fence to see the back garden, was appalled, took his own photos and has initiated what action he can. My neighbour has been told to clean up the garden. The inspector and I both know however that after his follow-up visit it will all start again. I am looking for a permanent solution.


Unfortunately, the Environment Department jurisdiction extends only to the property's boundaries. It does not cover activities in the road and on the pavements. These come under the Roads & Highways Department of the County Council, who take the view that they can't be bothered with what goes on in a Close, because there is no swift passing traffic. Ditto the Police.


I am currently dealing with four different agencies - the Planning Department of the District Council
apropos improper use of a domestic property for business purposes, the Environment Department of the District Council regarding pollution and waste disposal, the Roads & Highways Department of the County Council concerning destruction of the pavement, the grass verge and the kerbs, the Police concerning obstruction of the highway generally and the use at times of decrepit untaxed and un-MOT'd vehicles (which I've checked with DVLA). The Police, like the Roads & Highways, take the attitude that as there is no swift passing traffic in a Close, they can't be bothered to act. (The precise words of one of their constables.)


My comment on the above - no wonder our local services cost us so much. Too many departments, too many Chief Executives, too many middle managers, too much buck-passing, too little action.


So now I have resorted to a fifth line of attack - the Law in the form of enforcement of a Restrictive Covenant.


Keep the comments coming please. Each one throws a slightly different light on things.

moneyistooshorttomention

macman wrote: »

Good luck with your campaign, but the fact that the tenant and his son may have criminal records has absolutely no relevance to any breach of restrictive covenants, or to any other breaches of law regarding waste handling or fuel storage.

Maybe so. But it certainly is relevant as to whether the owner of the house wishes to keep renting to them. If I were a landlady and found I'd been inadvertently renting to criminals I would be mortified. There would be shock at my bad character judgement, followed by my next thoughts being how to protect myself from them during the eviction process I would start against them. Why house dishonest people - when there are plenty of honest people around needing a home?

Out,_Vile_Jelly

OP,

Have you considered writing to your MP and/or local councillor? This would need to be a concise summary with a dated list of your contact and comments from the various departments.

Is the business registered: https://www.gov.uk/report-an-unregistered-trader-or-business Any ideas if they're claiming benefits as well as working cash in hand: https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

System

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Maybe so. But it certainly is relevant as to whether the owner of the house wishes to keep renting to them. If I were a landlady and found I'd been inadvertently renting to criminals I would be mortified. There would be shock at my bad character judgement, followed by my next thoughts being how to protect myself from them during the eviction process I would start against them. Why house dishonest people - when there are plenty of honest people around needing a home?

And what would you do if they obtained a criminal conviction DURING the tenancy? Even something as minor as a speeding conviction (because they argued it in court and lost thus making it a criminal conviction)

moneyistooshorttomention

!!!!!! wrote: »

And what would you do if they obtained a criminal conviction DURING the tenancy? Even something as minor as a speeding conviction (because they argued it in court and lost thus making it a criminal conviction)

I think that is a question with an obvious answer, ie:

- a speeding conviction could be down to an honest mistake and only caught by a few mph

v.

- a "criminal" act as such - ie theft, fraud, etc etc and to which the answer would be obvious (ie hand them their notice in the next post).

This is all part of how one deters people from committing criminal acts - ie the knowledge it wont just be "The Law" that will exact penalties on them for having done that. That being - the ordinary person in the street will take account of their actions too and make decisions accordingly.

DaftyDuck

In the US, it's illegal to discriminate against convicted felons. I don't know what the situation is here in Blighty. Never faced it myself.

Money: If all landlords were to discriminate against anyone with a conviction, what do you think that would lead to? Progress?

What about the concept of spent convictions, rehabilitation? Or, once a criminal, always a criminal, and bring back branding?

G_M

Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974

DaftyDuck

So, only eight years late over here then...

moneyistooshorttomention

Well...I haven't got a crystal ball (errrm...well I have actually...but its still on the To Do list) to know whether criminals have or have not had a "Road to Damascus" moment and renounced their "wicked ways".

So - I make life easy for myself and give known honest people what they want first, before I start going in for trying to work out whether criminals have (or have not) changed their ways....

You have to cut the odds somehow of coming a cropper...

#blow political correctness.com

System

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I think that is a question with an obvious answer, ie:

- a speeding conviction could be down to an honest mistake and only caught by a few mph

v.

- a "criminal" act as such - ie theft, fraud, etc etc and to which the answer would be obvious (ie hand them their notice in the next post).

This is all part of how one deters people from committing criminal acts - ie the knowledge it wont just be "The Law" that will exact penalties on them for having done that. That being - the ordinary person in the street will take account of their actions too and make decisions accordingly.

A speeding conviction becomes a criminal conviction if it goes to court.

You need to make up your mind. criminal act or criminal conviction. You can have people committing a criminal act but have no conviction for it and you can (as you seem to think) have a criminal conviction without a criminal act.


Honest guv it was an honest mistake, I was only showing him the knife when I slipped and disembowelled him.