Dale Farm

13 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
P.S.
I am Star, in awe of your creative editing abilities .... which paper do you work for ???

cannot possibly say mr staggers but you do talk a load of shite on your telephone
:rascal::rascal:
Come the revolution, I suspect Staggs will not be hanging any pikeys , however, news paper editors could well be on a sticky wicket!! lol

13 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
sorry mr notts it is not my fault if you fail to grasp my argument.:small-print:

I accept your apology.

Quote by starlightcouple
can you show us some examples of this?

An example would be a business moves into a premise with no planning permission. It then builds up its business and starts affecting those living near them. These residents then complain and it comes to the attention of the Planning Officers at the local council. These then take action and the business then puts in a retrospective planning permission and keeps trading. This eventually gets rejected but it could be months or years to be rejected. Then they appeal and drag it out again, and keep trading. This gets rejected at the appeal. They then go for judicial review and drag it out again, and keep trading. They then get told to move but are given a time scale. In the last week they then move. In all that time they keep trading.

Quote by starlightcouple
once again have you any evidence of this at all or is it just your opinion?

This happens all the time. Is it reported in the papers? Not really as the only people it affects are those living near it.
It is a tactic that business uses to keep trading until they can find another premise to work from. I have seen my clients use it numerous times. It is a part of the process so it is not illegal.

Quote by starlightcouple
they have used slippery lawyers and intimidation tactics to remain there for ten yeers.

They are not slippery lawyers. It is the huge wide loop holes left in the planning legislation. It could be used by anyone if they felt like it.

Quote by starlightcouple
i think it is about time that this law and the law of squatters should be dealt with within 48 hours by the courts.

They can be on private land. When it is public land there are lots of conditions that the Local Authority has to abide by to even start the process.
Dave_Notts

14 Sep 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
sorry mr notts it is not my fault if you fail to grasp my argument.:small-print:

I accept your apology.
:laughabove:

Quote by Dave_Notts
can you show us some examples of this?

An example would be a business moves into a premise with no planning permission. It then builds up its business and starts affecting those living near them. These residents then complain and it comes to the attention of the Planning Officers at the local council. These then take action and the business then puts in a retrospective planning permission and keeps trading. This eventually gets rejected but it could be months or years to be rejected. Then they appeal and drag it out again, and keep trading. This gets rejected at the appeal. They then go for judicial review and drag it out again, and keep trading. They then get told to move but are given a time scale. In the last week they then move. In all that time they keep trading.

Quote by Dave_Notts
once again have you any evidence of this at all or is it just your opinion?

This happens all the time. Is it reported in the papers? Not really as the only people it affects are those living near it.
It is a tactic that business uses to keep trading until they can find another premise to work from. I have seen my clients use it numerous times. It is a part of the process so it is not illegal.
I can corroborate what Dave says here. I used the tactic once. The LA were totally unreasonable and unhelpful and the new Planning Enforcement Officer was trying to make a name for himself (having already been 'slapped down' earlier by us when by inexperience he tried to enforce something unenforceable - because it was quite legal rolleyes

).
When push comes to shove, the law is there to protect individuals and business from idiots like the person we encountered. We eventually moved to larger premises with fantastic support from a neighbouring LA who were keen to have our business in their District.

14 Sep 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
An example would be a business moves into a premise with no planning permission. It then builds up its business and starts affecting those living near them. These residents then complain and it comes to the attention of the Planning Officers at the local council. These then take action and the business then puts in a retrospective planning permission and keeps trading. This eventually gets rejected but it could be months or years to be rejected. Then they appeal and drag it out again, and keep trading. This gets rejected at the appeal. They then go for judicial review and drag it out again, and keep trading. They then get told to move but are given a time scale. In the last week they then move. In all that time they keep trading.

ah right mr notts. so no actual examples then.:doh: name me an actual business that backs up your claim.

Quote by i again
once again have you any evidence of this at all or is it just your opinion?

Quote by you then
This happens all the time. Is it reported in the papers? Not really as the only people it affects are those living near it.
It is a tactic that business uses to keep trading until they can find another premise to work from. I have seen my clients use it numerous times. It is a part of the process so it is not illegal.

once again i see you fail to give any examples of this.:doh:
most things are reported in the papers and i am sure that if businesses were openly flounting planning laws that the media would pick up on it.
i twice asked you for proof of these businesses flouting planning laws and getting away with it. I have also tried to google any examples but failed to find anything at all.
one more time i shall ask you to provide documented proof that businesses have flouted planning laws in the same way these travellers have on dale farm please. and name the business and the dates.

14 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
name me an actual business that backs up your claim.

Two there I think.

14 Sep 2011

Quote by Ben_Minx
name me an actual business that backs up your claim.

Two there I think.
I see what you did .... stop trying to baffle us with facts .... this is a conjecture and speculation thread

14 Sep 2011

Quote by Ben_Minx
name me an actual business that backs up your claim.

Two there I think.
thank you ben.
hardly on the scale of dale farms planning laws, but an example all the same. :thumbup:

14 Sep 2011

I gave an example too.. me!

14 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
most things are reported in the papers and i am sure that if businesses were openly flounting planning laws that the media would pick up on it.
i twice asked you for proof of these businesses flouting planning laws and getting away with it. I have also tried to google any examples but failed to find anything at all.
one more time i shall ask you to provide documented proof that businesses have flouted planning laws in the same way these travellers have on dale farm please. and name the business and the dates.

Your knowledge of planning legislation or the ability to read my written example shines through.
By following what I said they are not breaking any law.........they are working within it. Exactly the same as the travellers. By using retrospective planning applications, appeals and judicial review allows business and traveller to extend their ability to stay at the site. Eventually, they exhaust all avenues and then move on or out.
Why do you think business is not prosecuted? Thats because they have not broken the law. They will only break it if, after the final decision, they fail to move out. They are smarter than that.........they wait until the end and then pick another place.
Now do you understand? Its not that hard to grasp..........and thousands use it each year.
Dave_Notts

14 Sep 2011

Quote by GnV
I gave an example too.. me!

Of course you did G .... searches in vain for silly

at on head:

14 Sep 2011

Most travellers sites are very very clean, because they dump thier rubbish elsewhere..............

14 Sep 2011

Quote by browning
Most travellers sites are very very clean, because they dump thier rubbish elsewhere..............

you should see the site in Star lane in orpington kent.
lovely country lanes until you get about half a mile from what is the biggest pit on earth. there are burnt out cars and sofas and all other kinds of rubbish.
i went past there last yeer and i am not suprised that the police will not go there after dark. i would not go there in the day time. it truly is a dredful place and certainly mopre rubbish down the lanes than the council could cleer in a week.
clean? oh yes as they obviusly dump there rubbish down the nice lanes.

14 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
Most travellers sites are very very clean, because they dump thier rubbish elsewhere..............

you should see the site in Star lane in orpington kent.
lovely country lanes until you get about half a mile from what is the biggest pit on earth. there are burnt out cars and sofas and all other kinds of rubbish.
i went past there last yeer and i am not suprised that the police will not go there after dark. i would not go there in the day time. it truly is a dredful place and certainly mopre rubbish down the lanes than the council could cleer in a week.
clean? oh yes as they obviusly dump there rubbish down the nice lanes.
And of course only travellers are guilty of fly tipping aren't they .... oh to be judgemental, the world must be so easy to manage

14 Sep 2011

Good and bad, just like the rest of society, however, of late there does seam to be a high, in the reports of organised crime from these camps (as hinted at earlier in this thread);
In March, 20 people were reportedly rescued from a site in Staverton, Gloucestershire, eight from a site in Enderby, Leicestershire, and seven from a site in Pleasley, Derbyshire. In June, a large group of men were rescued from a site in Hampshire
From here;

15 Sep 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
And of course only travellers are guilty of fly tipping aren't they

i never said that, you did.
i have done a little bit of homework regarding areas where travellers are and let me tell you that the dumping of rubbish is a major problem.
of course you cannot acuse them of dumping rubbish as they now fall under new legislation of which i am sure they would use at the drop of a big hat.

but this is typical of what i meen.

i could supply a hundred links but even you can see my point here. but of course the average person who pays there taxes breaks into private land and dumps there caravans there for weeks. along the way they have to leave there rubbish somewhere poor peeple that they are.
then they use the surrounding area as one big toilet and when the council or the private person has spent money to get them evicted some poor bugger has to cleen up the mess. still they have rights don't they :twisted:
send me your adress in a pm and i will send the next lot we have around here to yours, where i am sure you will give them a warm welcome. toast and tea and a room for the night and then you can with the help of your neighbours, help them to set up home on your local green for a few weeks. being the ever so helpful person that you are.

15 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
send me your adress in a pm

Star I wouldn't send you my address on a fucking bomb ..... sometimes they don't detonate

15 Sep 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

send me your adress in a pm

Star I wouldn't send you my address on a fucking bomb ..... sometimes they don't detonate
awwww mr staggers i am deeply upset. :upset::upset:
still i am safe in the knowlege that you would of course invite these peeple into your home and your area.
yeah like fuck you would.
:kissmyarse: loon

15 Sep 2011

Star anyone is welcome in my home as long as they don't abuse my hospitality ... no pre-judgements based on racial/cultural stereotypes here
Anyone is welcome into the public places in my area, again as long as they don't abuse them
Is it really that difficult to understand ?? I believe in measuring someone by WHO they are not WHAT

15 Sep 2011

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Star anyone is welcome in my home as long as they don't abuse my hospitality ... no pre-judgements based on racial/cultural stereotypes here
Anyone is welcome into the public places in my area, again as long as they don't abuse them
Is it really that difficult to understand ?? I believe in measuring someone by WHO they are not WHAT

yea of course they are mr staggers, of course they are.
if you keep saying it i am sure some peeple will end up beleeving you. innocent

well you seam to have convinced your self anyway.

15 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
Star anyone is welcome in my home as long as they don't abuse my hospitality ... no pre-judgements based on racial/cultural stereotypes here
Anyone is welcome into the public places in my area, again as long as they don't abuse them
Is it really that difficult to understand ?? I believe in measuring someone by WHO they are not WHAT

yea of course they are mr staggers, of course they are.
if you keep saying it i am sure some peeple will end up beleeving you. innocent

well you seam to have convinced your self anyway.

18 Sep 2011

Seen as how these "Travellers" are fighting so hard to remain in one place, should they not be re-named to refect this?
Perhaps................"Stagnants" may be a good description.
J & S

18 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
Star anyone is welcome in my home as long as they don't abuse my hospitality ... no pre-judgements based on racial/cultural stereotypes here
Anyone is welcome into the public places in my area, again as long as they don't abuse them
Is it really that difficult to understand ?? I believe in measuring someone by WHO they are not WHAT

yea of course they are mr staggers, of course they are.
if you keep saying it i am sure some peeple will end up beleeving you. innocent

well you seam to have convinced your self anyway.
Why is that so hard to believe? dunno

It's pretty much the philosophy by which I live my life too.

18 Sep 2011

Quote by mr staggers
Star anyone is welcome in my home as long as they don't abuse my hospitality ... no pre-judgements based on racial/cultural stereotypes here
Anyone is welcome into the public places in my area, again as long as they don't abuse them
Is it really that difficult to understand ?? I believe in measuring someone by WHO they are not WHAT

i understand what he is saying nola, it is just that i doubt the honesty of the post.

Quote by noladreams
Why is that so hard to believe?
It's pretty much the philosophy by which I live my life too.

so you are both saying that ANYONE is welcome into your home as long as that person does not abuse that hospitality?
ok then what about ian huntley? ian bradey? Anders Behring Breivik? you know that man that just killed all those children? what about the killers of james bulger?
what about the local thief who has just burgled your best friend? the examples are endless but i beleeve which is my opinion that you would not welcome ANYONE into your home.
are you still saying you would welcome them into your home and your area? no pre- judgements mr staggers has said.
maybe some peeple would many certainly would not.
think this has gone slightly off topic tho.
i did notice though nola that you did say " pretty much " which leeds me to beleeve that you have exceptions to that and that you would not except anyone into your home.

18 Sep 2011

still getting back on topic, there is only a few hours to go before the evictions start.
the travellers are asking where these familys will go. as some one pointed out on the television last night that maybe they should of thought of that the day that the set up home ilegally on private land.
but often in the past the system is so slow to react that they end up staying only this time the council have decided not to give up and will start evicting from 6am on monday morning.
i feel for the young children who are inocent in this, but have no sympathy at all for the adults who knew from the start that what they were doing was ilegal.
as far as i know basildon council have offered these peeple another place to go? i have not heard if this is true or not.

18 Sep 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
Star anyone is welcome in my home as long as they don't abuse my hospitality ... no pre-judgements based on racial/cultural stereotypes here
Anyone is welcome into the public places in my area, again as long as they don't abuse them
Is it really that difficult to understand ?? I believe in measuring someone by WHO they are not WHAT

i understand what he is saying nola, it is just that i doubt the honesty of the post.

Quote by noladreams
Why is that so hard to believe?
It's pretty much the philosophy by which I live my life too.

so you are both saying that ANYONE is welcome into your home as long as that person does not abuse that hospitality?
ok then what about ian huntley? ian bradey? Anders Behring Breivik? you know that man that just killed all those children? what about the killers of james bulger?
what about the local thief who has just burgled your best friend? the examples are endless but i beleeve which is my opinion that you would not welcome ANYONE into your home.
are you still saying you would welcome them into your home and your area? no pre- judgements mr staggers has said.
maybe some peeple would many certainly would not.
think this has gone slightly off topic tho.
i did notice though nola that you did say " pretty much " which leeds me to beleeve that you have exceptions to that and that you would not except anyone into your home.
I doubt very much if any of those you named are ever likely to visit but my statement holds true

13 Oct 2011

Residents at the UK's largest travellers' site have lost a High Court challenge to halt their eviction.
The group from Dale Farm in Essex had tried to stop the process with three applications for judicial review.
But Mr Justice Ouseley has refused all three saying it was "astonishing" that residents had delayed their legal action almost to the day of eviction.
The travellers have been fighting eviction for 10 years but have said they will lodge a further appeal.
Mr Justice Ouseley ruled they had delayed too long in challenging Basildon Council's decision to take direct action against them.
He also ruled the council's actions were not "disproportionate" and travellers were breaking criminal law on a daily basis by remaining on the site.
Their removal was necessary to avoid "the criminal law and the planning system being brought into serious disrepute", he added.
and it took 10 yes 10 yeers for the legal twits to come to that conclusion? it surely should have only taken ten days to know that they were breaking the law on a daily basis and had it of been anyone else except a bunch of " travelers " this would never have gone on this long.
i wonder who is going to pay the " travelers " huge legal bill? the taxpayer i bet. what a shameful way to carry on when the rest of the population would have been given a week to move out.
plus they aint out yet and we know that there are euroes on the loose ready to fight the human right cause. what happened to Great Britain? it was sold down the river so a few peeple could make a few million extra pounds.

13 Oct 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
and it took 10 yes 10 yeers for the legal twits to come to that conclusion? it surely should have only taken ten days to know that they were breaking the law on a daily basis and had it of been anyone else except a bunch of " travelers " this would never have gone on this long.

Quote by starlightcouple
what a shameful way to carry on when the rest of the population would have been given a week to move out.

It goes on all the time by travellers, business, private residents..........in fact anybody who plays the game by the rules that are set.
99% of the time they lose but they drag it out that long they achieved their desires.
It would be good to have a level playing field for all of the people, but there is no desire by the lobbyists i.e. business
Dave_Notts

14 Oct 2011

it may well go on all the time mr notts with big business as you keep telling me, but i am interested in these " travelers " who have openly flouted the process of law. the same laws that me and you as indeviduals would have to apply to.
the topic of the thred is dale farm mr notts as i am sure you are aware.
i will look forward to monday morning hoping the bailiffs and bull dozers move in. holding my breath though is not something i am very good at.

14 Oct 2011

They have played the game and become one of the 99%. Therefore they have not been treated any different than anybody else.........except they are still there and playing the game.
Me and you could if we desired play the game, the law is there to be used. However you and I choose not to. Just because we do not choose to, does not mean that the law will be closed to us. It is there for everyone to use if they so wish.
Dave_Notts

15 Oct 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
Me and you could if we desired play the game, the law is there to be used. However you and I choose not to. Just because we do not choose to, does not mean that the law will be closed to us. It is there for everyone to use if they so wish.
Dave_Notts

ah right then mr notts.
so if i got together a couple of friends and took our caravans to a nice little bit of green belt land this morning and put down the anchors, that we would still be there in ten yeers time?
ok maybe not ten yeers, what about five yeers? think not.
ok lets be a bit realistic here. you are saying that if i desired to play the game then i could play the same game that the " travelers " have played. right so i have established that ten and five yeer periods would not happen if i moved onto green belt land this morning with a couple of friends,
i reckon at a push we would last three weeks no matter how hard we wanted to play the game. if i had a bit of money and the local council took me to court the judge would kick my arse out of there no questions asked.
ah right i would say but this man said i could play the game and that the law was there for me to use to allow me to stay.
he would look at me with contempt and offer a few nights in the cells if we refused to leeve the site at once.
no mr notts the law on the planning issue is not a game that every one can play, certainly not little indeviduals like me. the " travelers " got away with it because they now fall into a protected part of our comunity being a minority. big business if you are right do it because they have clever lawyers and lots of money. the little man on the street that is the majority have not a chance of playing this so called game you think is afordable to us all mr notts. it is not. i am not protected or have no money , and am certainly being a white british man, not in the catagory of a minority.
the only laws available out there are the ones that use the race or minority cards, they are most of the time the winners. me and you mr notts certainly cannot play that game and you and me certainly cannot rely on those same laws that should be there to protect everyone of us. they do not as my time on green belt land, breaking planning laws would be ended in a blink of an eye mr notts. everyone can see that except your good self it seams.:notes:
moving onto green belt land this morning i think i would last three weeks if that, before the bailiffs came knocking, and there is nothing to stop that from happening to me no matter what game i thought i was playing mr notts.
laws there for everyone? laws treat everyone the same? i would only beleeve that if i never went out the house or never watched any news. certainly the laws are there to protect certain members of the comunity, unfortunatly i do not fall into that catagory.