PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Travellers on 'holiday let' land
Options
Comments
-
Would you like to tell us where your back yard is, so we can advise that they move there?.
No thanks, I don't believe in "moving on" people's perceived problems to someone else. I would suggest looking whether your local authority has a traveller liason officer. Mine does. They may be able to help?An answer isn't spam just because you don't like it......0 -
This isn't a 'perceived problem' though; it's a disregard for planning law, which either the local authority act on, or else admit that for a select few, the law doesn't apply.diggingdude wrote: »No thanks, I don't believe in "moving on" people's perceived problems to someone else.0 -
This isn't a 'perceived problem' though; it's a disregard for planning law, which either the local authority act on, or else admit that for a select few, the law doesn't apply.
i completely agree with that, regularly come across travellers through work and many of the rules dont apply to them it seemsAn answer isn't spam just because you don't like it......0 -
Out of interest, how long ago were they in use as a holiday site? You say 8-10 months of the year while you were growing up, but that could potentially be some time ago. Was it a derelict site for a while and could there have been a change of use?All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well.
Pedant alert - it's could have, not could of.0 -
diggingdude wrote: »i completely agree with that, regularly come across travellers through work and many of the rules dont apply to them it seems
I was just pointing-out that the council may be obliged to act when anyone is seen to be challenging planning law in a highly visible manner. Each council chooses their own time frame for this. Mine is quite laissez-faire, but others with greater pressure for housing may feel obliged to move faster or risk not being taken seriously
For example, there's a small family group with a caravan living on a council lay-by not far from me. They're not messy or anti-social and their child attends the local school, so they've been quietly tolerated for around 2 years. No one in the village is asking for them to be moved. Obviously, they can't stay there for ever, but there is tolerance, because the site hasn't expanded and no one has suffered as a result of their presence.0 -
I was just pointing-out that the council may be obliged to act when anyone is seen to be challenging planning law in a highly visible manner. Each council chooses their own time frame for this. Mine is quite laissez-faire, but others with greater pressure for housing may feel obliged to move faster or risk not being taken seriously
For example, there's a small family group with a caravan living on a council lay-by not far from me. They're not messy or anti-social and their child attends the local school, so they've been quietly tolerated for around 2 years. No one in the village is asking for them to be moved. Obviously, they can't stay there for ever, but there is tolerance, because the site hasn't expanded and no one has suffered as a result of their presence.
On the other hand a group of travellers some years ago got onto a country park open space not far from where I live. This open space is the only bit of parkland which is not actively managed and so has aspects of countryside in it. Like hay meadows and wild flowers along with 100 year old trees. A lovely place for a walk. The travellers cut down the 100 year old trees that belonged to the local community and burned them for firewood. They put rubbish in the wildlife ponds and they turned the area nearest to the road into a polluted tip. Mounds of rubbish. The damage they caused cost £1000s of council tax payers money to clear up which of course they didn't contribute to. We can never get our trees back to enjoy although they have planted new ones. I am not racist I just don't think that anyone has the right to take what isn't theirs and to destroy what belongs to all of us just so that they can have their lifestyle choice. Living in a caravan is a lifestyle choice. There are plenty of settled traveller families who live in houses. So living in a caravan is not the only way that someone identifies themselves as a traveller. It is purely a lifestyle choice for some families.
Whether the council acts quickly or not seems to depend on where they have put their caravans. For instance an invasion of a school playing field would mean they were moved off as quickly as possible before they had contaminated the playing field.0 -
I don't put people into named groups, like 'travellers.' I lump them together as people who don't obey planning laws, or in the case you are describing, people who cause criminal damage as well. Nothing excuses the latter.
Giving people special descriptive titles rewards them with status they don't have; they're just British citzens who ought to abide by the law, and the law should be sufficient to dissuade them from doing otherwise. Clearly, it doesnt.
Obviously, there are different degrees of not abiding by planning law, so council responses should be proportionate and timely whenever necessary to protect the environment.0 -
NIMBYism refers to things that people hold to be necessary, but that they want someone else to have to deal with. Things like a new power station, or sewerage works.diggingdude wrote: »start by getting some "NIMBY" signs printed
Travellers committing crimes and despoiling the area do not fall into this category any more than would a multiple rapist operating in the area.
It is not NIMBYism to now want criminal scum messing up the village that a community has made into a good place to live.0 -
You seem to find those people you deem "travellers" inherently "criminal scum".NIMBYism refers to things that people hold to be necessary, but that they want someone else to have to deal with. Things like a new power station, or sewerage works.
Travellers committing crimes and despoiling the area do not fall into this category any more than would a multiple rapist operating in the area.
It is not NIMBYism to now want criminal scum messing up the village that a community has made into a good place to live.
That probably says a lot more about you than about them.0 -
They might own the property, but I'd bet it's freehold - and their use is not within the lease's restrictions and requirements.
It's going to be a long, slow and expensive process, though.
Is it not, though? How long have they been there? If these plots were typically used 10 months of the year, is their use even restricted? Even if it is, is not entirely possible the travellers will up sticks and move on for at least 2 months in every year? They are, after all, travellers.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards