I think you can stay on any site or your own land for 28 days before planning permission would be required
Ahhhhhh now it is coming out Star. You believe the travellers have played the race card. This is just plain and simple planning law and they are using the mechanisms within that law to prolong the outcome.
You stated that only big business or minorities can use this law. Yet a member of this forum already stated that he had used it and he was not a traveller or big business. Any person can use it. Just look up your own councils planning portal and see how many residents have put in a retrospective planning application.
The land they moved onto was not greenbelt land.
Dave_Notts
I wish someone would give the needle a nudge cos i'm sure its got stuck on this particular record.
the whole thing is a 18 million pound mess neil.
" In a blow to the council, which had hoped to return the area to greenbelt land, the judge ruled that walls and fences must be left in place".
the issue on many ocasions was the green belt issue, and now the judge says that walls and fences cannot be removed. this whole problem has been made worse by a judicial system that frankly is in the dark ages. the issues should be much cleerer in that nobody can build on green belt land and if they do then the law can evict and knock down within a month.
i understand mr notts debates on this issue but things are not sometimes as clear as even mr notts seams to think they are. yes this was a planning issue about building on green belt land. one goes into the other.
if nothing else i hope that the councils out there recognise what has happened here and i am sure there are many other councils that have green belt areas, where travelers could buy up and just move on law needs to change to a degree where there are no grey areas. green belt land equals NO building on it.
This has so far been an interesting and entertaining debate.
In my local town, Asda are planning a new supper-store.
The thing here is that no planning permission has yet been granted, yet ground work and foundations have begun. To do this they must be very confident they will get their permission to build or not worried about loosing the money they have already invested. I suspect the later, they can afford to loose the money should the planning fall through.
Which in my view means that not all these loop holes are open to all, but only to those that can afford to loose such sums!
Ok they maybe open to all but only some can afford to exploit them
" This will give the owner 6 months to comply and failure to do so will result in the local authority carrying out the work themselves at the owner’s expense as well as issuing a fine of £25,000. Failure to pay the fine or the cost of the work can result in imprisonment."
i do not see any of the residents of dale farm being issued with any fines or any threat of being sent to prison, or the council carrying out the any works themselves.
in fact what i do see are a bunch of illegal peeple taking ten yeers to finally get given the red light. no prosecution, no prison and no fines at all.
funny how mr smith and mr jones of normal avenue out there, would get fined or the threat of prison or actual prison for simply building a wall or going six inches over with there garden shed. :twisted:
:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao:
;)
