The times I see stores like this one of people moving into an area and then complaining about how its been for 100s of years. Gets on my wick
Sex God
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Bl**dy outsider's
Sex God
My sister's ma-in-law moved somewhere then complained about the church bells. Typical of the odious woman though.
Sex God
I love hearing church bells - but to be honest if people ring them manually, they don't happen every hour. If they are done 'automatically' they can be adjusted to suit the surroundings. Avoiding it between 11pm and 7am seems a reasonable limitation. But it should be done by civilised negotiation - not by formal complaints. (I'm an athiest, btw, so not supporting the church automatically)
When someone is planning to move into an area it is incumbent on them to enquire about possible irritants. Not asking if the church bells are ever rung, and assuming they will always be quiet, is like checking out a house in the summer holidays and complaining about school-kids passing by your house when school starts again.
When someone is planning to move into an area it is incumbent on them to enquire about possible irritants. Not asking if the church bells are ever rung, and assuming they will always be quiet, is like checking out a house in the summer holidays and complaining about school-kids passing by your house when school starts again.
Master of Sex
Quote by Bluefish2009
The times I see stores like this one of people moving into an area and then complaining about how its been for 100s of years. Gets on my wick
jeebus,they've had a computer ringing the bell for hundreds of must be a god then.
perhaps if the vicar had to stay up to ring the bell every 15 mins it would have stopped yrs ago
I quite like the sound of church bells ringing on a Sunday morning, but at my last home I thought about campaigning to have them outlawed in the UK, why, because I lived within earshot of no less than 3 mosques, I was worried that the right to ring church bells would give mosques the right to sing out the call to prayer on the loudspeakers they use in other countries, how many times a day is it that they sound the call to prayer, it would have drove me mad, now I live neither near a church or a mosque so sod the rest of people it wont affect me anymore 
Quote by MidsCouple24
I quite like the sound of church bells ringing on a Sunday morning, but at my last home I thought about campaigning to have them outlawed in the UK, why, because I lived within earshot of no less than 3 mosques, I was worried that the right to ring church bells would give mosques the right to sing out the call to prayer on the loudspeakers they use in other countries, how many times a day is it that they sound the call to prayer, it would have drove me mad, now I live neither near a church or a mosque so sod the rest of people it wont affect me anymore
yes mids not much worse in life that being subjected to chanting from loud speakers from a mosque.
is that allowed outside of luton?
Quote by MartnJewl
There are 14 devices in our house capable of telling us what time it is. Do we need to have church bells clanking away late at night nowadays?
I love the fact my church bells can be heard at night. They ring every half hour. I love Saturday and Sunday mornings working in my garden and hearing them ring for weddings and morning worship.
BTW I travel to lot of Arab countries and hearing the Adhan, there or in some areas of the UK, 5 times a day isn't much of a hardship. It only lasts for 2 minutes.
Tough for the church I am afraid. Their excuse that the computer software cannot be re-programmed is a load of tosh. The church is one of the richest institutions within the UK so a few hundred quid to reprogramme is do-able.
What made me laugh is that the couple now want to overturn the abatement notice. Unfortunately, it is not like dropping the charges with the police. The notice has been served and if the church breaches the notice then they are put before the local beak to explain why. This may be what the church actually needs.............their day in court. If they get the rest of the village to turn up as witnesses to say that it does not effect them, then there will be no offence committed.
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
What made me laugh is that the couple now want to overturn the abatement notice. Unfortunately, it is not like dropping the charges with the police. The notice has been served and if the church breaches the notice then they are put before the local beak to explain why. This may be what the church actually needs.............their day in court. If they get the rest of the village to turn up as witnesses to say that it does not effect them, then there will be no offence committed.
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
well i would agree with you but, one persons news is not always someone elses news.
because a person deems that a news article does not make them sit up, another group of peeple will find it interesting. obviously you do not find it interesting, but bluefish obviously did as he would not have posted it otherwise.
horses for course it would seem mr notts on this occasion. :thumbup:
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
Tough for the church I am afraid. Their excuse that the computer software cannot be re-programmed is a load of tosh. The church is one of the richest institutions within the UK so a few hundred quid to reprogramme is do-able.
What made me laugh is that the couple now want to overturn the abatement notice. Unfortunately, it is not like dropping the charges with the police. The notice has been served and if the church breaches the notice then they are put before the local beak to explain why. This may be what the church actually needs.............their day in court. If they get the rest of the village to turn up as witnesses to say that it does not effect them, then there will be no offence committed.
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
does news have to be sensational to be news then dave :undecided:
I'm afraid far to much news is overlooked in favour of good old fashion tripe, gutter type news like Victoria beckham seen eating a whole big mac or something :silly:
tis the reason i don't purchase or read news papers
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
Tough for the church I am afraid. Their excuse that the computer software cannot be re-programmed is a load of tosh. The church is one of the richest institutions within the UK so a few hundred quid to reprogramme is do-able.
What made me laugh is that the couple now want to overturn the abatement notice. Unfortunately, it is not like dropping the charges with the police. The notice has been served and if the church breaches the notice then they are put before the local beak to explain why. This may be what the church actually needs.............their day in court. If they get the rest of the village to turn up as witnesses to say that it does not effect them, then there will be no offence committed.
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
Of coarse from a legal stand point you are quite correct.
However, for me that does not make it correct or right
The thing that always gets my goat Dave, is there may be many more who enjoy hearing the bells, but one compliant can stop them, very one sided I feel.
For many years in the village I grew up in, for a two week period over Christmas the church was eliminated from dark until midnight. It looked stunning and all the villagers loved to see our beautiful Church light up this way. A new person moved in near the church, complained, out went the lights and the rest of the villagers suffered for the views of one!
Sex God
Quote by Lizaleanrob
Tough for the church I am afraid. Their excuse that the computer software cannot be re-programmed is a load of tosh. The church is one of the richest institutions within the UK so a few hundred quid to reprogramme is do-able.
What made me laugh is that the couple now want to overturn the abatement notice. Unfortunately, it is not like dropping the charges with the police. The notice has been served and if the church breaches the notice then they are put before the local beak to explain why. This may be what the church actually needs.............their day in court. If they get the rest of the village to turn up as witnesses to say that it does not effect them, then there will be no offence committed.
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
does news have to be sensational to be news then dave :undecided:
I'm afraid far to much news is overlooked in favour of good old fashion tripe, gutter type news like Victoria beckham seen eating a whole big mac or something :silly:
tis the reason i don't purchase or read news papers
It was blown out of all proportions, she never finished it all
Quote by Bluefish2009
Tough for the church I am afraid. Their excuse that the computer software cannot be re-programmed is a load of tosh. The church is one of the richest institutions within the UK so a few hundred quid to reprogramme is do-able.
What made me laugh is that the couple now want to overturn the abatement notice. Unfortunately, it is not like dropping the charges with the police. The notice has been served and if the church breaches the notice then they are put before the local beak to explain why. This may be what the church actually needs.............their day in court. If they get the rest of the village to turn up as witnesses to say that it does not effect them, then there will be no offence committed.
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
Of coarse from a legal stand point you are quite correct.
However, for me that does not make it correct or right
The thing that always gets my goat Dave, is there may be many more who enjoy hearing the bells, but one compliant can stop them, very one sided I feel.
For many years in the village I grew up in, for a two week period over Christmas the church was eliminated from dark until midnight. It looked stunning and all the villagers loved to see our beautiful Church light up this way. A new person moved in near the church, complained, out went the lights and the rest of the villagers suffered for the views of one!
This is the news but no news style of reporting Blue. If the journos had really wanted a story they could have looked into the legal part of it. A noise nuisance has to be investigated by the local council if a member of the public complains to them, it is within the statute. However, there are defences to this.
In this instance, if what the paper states is true, then they have a defence. The "news" would have been finding out why the church rolled over instead of fighting it. Perhaps they didn't want to pay the bill to change the software, perhaps they want the money to fund a cathedral in a city and not a village church, perhaps a lot of things that is more news worthy........but perhaps investigative journalism is a thing of the past. Perhaps they should stick to the big mac and churches stop ringing bells stories, as it is easier to fill the pages.
As for the lights on the church. Once again it is a roll over. Without the Lux readings within the bedroom of the person affected then nobody knows the real story behind this. However, there have been very few legal proceedings for light nuisance in the UK. You have to have direct glare into the house to succesfully win a complaint. Now if the church had spotlights shining directly at the complainants house then that would be a different matter, but the church in question is not that stupid...........or are they? you may be able to enlighten us.
Dave_Notts
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
Tough for the church I am afraid. Their excuse that the computer software cannot be re-programmed is a load of tosh. The church is one of the richest institutions within the UK so a few hundred quid to reprogramme is do-able.
What made me laugh is that the couple now want to overturn the abatement notice. Unfortunately, it is not like dropping the charges with the police. The notice has been served and if the church breaches the notice then they are put before the local beak to explain why. This may be what the church actually needs.............their day in court. If they get the rest of the village to turn up as witnesses to say that it does not effect them, then there will be no offence committed.
Must have been a no news day for this to get in the papers
Dave_Notts
Of coarse from a legal stand point you are quite correct.
However, for me that does not make it correct or right
The thing that always gets my goat Dave, is there may be many more who enjoy hearing the bells, but one compliant can stop them, very one sided I feel.
For many years in the village I grew up in, for a two week period over Christmas the church was eliminated from dark until midnight. It looked stunning and all the villagers loved to see our beautiful Church light up this way. A new person moved in near the church, complained, out went the lights and the rest of the villagers suffered for the views of one!
This is the news but no news style of reporting Blue. If the journos had really wanted a story they could have looked into the legal part of it. A noise nuisance has to be investigated by the local council if a member of the public complains to them, it is within the statute. However, there are defences to this.
In this instance, if what the paper states is true, then they have a defence. The "news" would have been finding out why the church rolled over instead of fighting it. Perhaps they didn't want to pay the bill to change the software, perhaps they want the money to fund a cathedral in a city and not a village church, perhaps a lot of things that is more news worthy........but perhaps investigative journalism is a thing of the past. Perhaps they should stick to the big mac and churches stop ringing bells stories, as it is easier to fill the pages.
As for the lights on the church. Once again it is a roll over. Without the Lux readings within the bedroom of the person affected then nobody knows the real story behind this. However, there have been very few legal proceedings for light nuisance in the UK. You have to have direct glare into the house to succesfully win a complaint. Now if the church had spotlights shining directly at the complainants house then that would be a different matter, but the church in question is not that stupid...........or are they? you may be able to enlighten us.
Dave_Notts
This depends very much on your view point. I believe that news worthiness is a little like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder, or reader in this case. This journalist has reported this story from the human angle, just as I would have. Unlike your self, many of us are not that interested in what the legal bods believe or have to say, its more about how it effect the people on the ground who are involved. So many times many suffer the loss of some thing they love because of a selfish few.
As for the light pollution, this only reached Parish Council level where they buckled under the pressure and out went the lights. But the result was just the same, many suffer the loss of some thing they loved because of one individual.
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
does news have to be sensational to be news then dave :undecided:
No, but it should be investigated instead of filling a few lines of half truths.
Dave_Notts
again dave modern day reporting another reason to not but a news paper
Master of Sex
try putting a huge speaker on your roof and blast out ding dongs every 15 mins all how long you get away with it.
why should churches get away with it?apart from which,what's the point of it?
what would jeebus do lol
why should churches get away with it?apart from which,what's the point of it?
what would jeebus do lol
Quote by annejohn
try putting a huge speaker on your roof and blast out ding dongs every 15 mins all how long you get away with it.
why should churches get away with it?apart from which,what's the point of it?
what would jeebus do lol
if a church suddenly in the middle of the night starting ringing its bells i would agree with you a million per cent. BUT these bells and the churches were here long long long before these residents were in many cases. these peeple must have known about the church bells, and in a court of law i would say they would probably lose there case. as has already been pointed out on here about a race circuit. if you dont want to hear racing cars/bikes racing around on a sunday afternoon, then dont buy a house close to a racing circuit that has been there for years.
you dont want to have your head bitten off, then dont put it into a lions cage.
Quote by starlightcouple
try putting a huge speaker on your roof and blast out ding dongs every 15 mins all how long you get away with it.
why should churches get away with it?apart from which,what's the point of it?
what would jeebus do lol
if a church suddenly in the middle of the night starting ringing its bells i would agree with you a million per cent. BUT these bells and the churches were here long long long before these residents were in many cases. these peeple must have known about the church bells, and in a court of law i would say they would probably lose there case. as has already been pointed out on here about a race circuit. if you dont want to hear racing cars/bikes racing around on a sunday afternoon, then dont buy a house close to a racing circuit that has been there for years.
you dont want to have your head bitten off, then dont put it into a lions cage.
But the bells are computerised, that's cheating in my books.
Quote by Bluefish2009
This depends very much on your view point. I believe that news worthiness is a little like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder, or reader in this case. This journalist has reported this story from the human angle, just as I would have. Unlike your self, many of us are not that interested in what the legal bods believe or have to say, its more about how it effect the people on the ground who are involved. So many times many suffer the loss of some thing they love because of a selfish few.
As for the light pollution, this only reached Parish Council level where they buckled under the pressure and out went the lights. But the result was just the same, many suffer the loss of some thing they loved because of one individual.
The human angle is just sensationalism in my view. I am not interested in the law but in the truth of a story. To not include the law then this story is on a par with Victoria Beckham with a Big Mac.
The noise and light issue are red herrings. Why aren't the churches fighting these cases? These are the people who have turned off the lights and bells, not the complainee. The people who this effects should be angered, but not just with the complainee but with the spineless parish council and church elders. Shame on them.
Dave_Notts
Quote by starlightcouple
if a church suddenly in the middle of the night starting ringing its bells i would agree with you a million per cent. BUT these bells and the churches were here long long long before these residents were in many cases. these peeple must have known about the church bells, and in a court of law i would say they would probably lose there case. as has already been pointed out on here about a race circuit. if you dont want to hear racing cars/bikes racing around on a sunday afternoon, then dont buy a house close to a racing circuit that has been there for years.
you dont want to have your head bitten off, then dont put it into a lions cage.
It doesn't quite work like that Star. A person moving to a place can have a noise complaint, even if the noise emittors have been doing it for years.
For example, the previous tenants were deaf or didn't mind the noise. Just because there was a reason before it doesn't mean the next has to be subject to a noise nuisance.
However, it all depends on each circumstance. For example, a church ringing its bells for centuries could be looked at as the natural background noise of the location and should be expected in this location. It is upto those that have had the notice served on them to go to court and appeal this notice. The people who served the notice have to establish a statutory nuisance only before issueing the notice. Only the court can decide if it should stand or be overturned. This is where the church has lost the bottle. I would think that they have a good case, but it would depend on the evidence they bring to court i.e. the rest of the population of the village saying it doesn't effect them is a good start.
Dave_Notts
Sex God
Quote by GnV
To not include the law then this story is on a par with Victoria Beckham with a Big Mac.
What's wrong with Posh wearing a big mac then Dave, pride of Britain and all that?
I think she'd look quite sexy in one to be honest :lavisicious slavering icon:
seconded :lickface:
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
This depends very much on your view point. I believe that news worthiness is a little like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder, or reader in this case. This journalist has reported this story from the human angle, just as I would have. Unlike your self, many of us are not that interested in what the legal bods believe or have to say, its more about how it effect the people on the ground who are involved. So many times many suffer the loss of some thing they love because of a selfish few.
As for the light pollution, this only reached Parish Council level where they buckled under the pressure and out went the lights. But the result was just the same, many suffer the loss of some thing they loved because of one individual.
The human angle is just sensationalism in my view. I am not interested in the law but in the truth of a story. To not include the law then this story is on a par with Victoria Beckham with a Big Mac.
The noise and light issue are red herrings. Why aren't the churches fighting these cases? These are the people who have turned off the lights and bells, not the complainee. The people who this effects should be angered, but not just with the complainee but with the spineless parish council and church elders. Shame on them.
Dave_Notts
I, on the other hand see nothing wrong with this kind of reporting
Shame on the complainer, I say
Quote by Bluefish2009
I, on the other hand see nothing wrong with this kind of reporting
Shame on the complainer, I say
The freedom of this country is be able to enjoy your home without outside interference. The complainer was exercising their right under british law. However, the church have not exercised their right to appeal. The shame is on the church, not the complainant.
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
It doesn't quite work like that Star. A person moving to a place can have a noise complaint, even if the noise emittors have been doing it for years.
Dave_Notts
but in this case mr notts the new peeple issued a complaint and then tried to stop that complaint. it seems once in motion that complaint cannot be stopped.
so they move there, get annoyed by the bells, issues a complaint, and then when it naturally pisses all there new neighbours off they then try to rescind the original complaint.
i hope the peeple who have been there for years, send these snivelling brits to coventry. :rascal:
