|
Post by kangooroo on Sept 6, 2013 21:42:57 GMT
Spot checks are made at typical mealtimes and to ensure there is no gas supply to the cooker. This will not happen in reality as in the case I have said about it would have taken half a dozen police cars accompanying any council official which after 10 years they really got fed up with ! They do. I was present at one last year!
|
|
|
Post by X on Sept 6, 2013 22:54:56 GMT
[/quote]They do. I was present at one last year! [/quote] Ok I agree they might work with Mr and Mrs average but most people who get themselves into this kind of position do not play by the rules and are not at all afraid of confrontation or authority !
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Sept 7, 2013 0:53:04 GMT
They do. I was present at one last year! [/quote] Ok I agree they might work with Mr and Mrs average but most people who get themselves into this kind of position do not play by the rules and are not at all afraid of confrontation or authority ![/quote] You simply have your main gas bottle disconnected and have another hidden one. Or just be using the stove for heating the van. Myself, I would just ignore anyone knocking on the house as I have done quite a few times. And lay low in the van with a black out. They can't force entry or prove anyone is in the van
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 8, 2013 10:48:09 GMT
In the Sixties, the legislation spelled the end off the road for many of us. In the Ninteties, i just couldn't believe the bills they brought in, but, optimistically, believed they couldn't be as bad as they seemed.
The increasingly confrontational style of rulers and ruled has shown that I was being far too fair to the legislators and enforcers. This latest stuff is as draconian as the Enclosure Acts of old. Now we're heading back to rulers being able to do whatever they think will forward their interests. Basically all land in GB is owned by someone or some group, yet, things are even worse, in that the rulers can now treat private land just as their own. Take-over by stealth. For centuries, possession was nine tenths of law. Now the slimy wrigglers have legislated a way round that.
They can smash up private homes on private land; churn up concrete and rubble ( that they dumped themselves when using scrapyards for their own storage in so-called "greenbelt"), and then have the cheek to try invoice the owners for the cost of inflicting the damage, and, believe it or not, for the cost of future clean-up works!
'Tis all a bit daft and as ridiculous as if the Syrian gassers ( whoever they were) were to send a huge bill to the 2 million plus refugees,together with an order, telling them to pay for all the carnage!
A. Ball (Basildon), and Pickles ( kind of minister) will do anything to try curry favour with their rulers at HQ in London. Why Pickles is still bothering at his age is anyone's guess, but I suppose there is no accounting for vanity and greed.
sean rua.
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Sept 8, 2013 11:30:01 GMT
They are playing a game, Sean, called King of the Hill. They vie to be bigger, better, stronger, cleverer, sexier, more dominant, more alpha...or just plain "more" than their rivals.
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Sept 8, 2013 11:41:00 GMT
They get a bit aggressive now and again, but I reckon things will die down. Fringe camping is kind of tolerated in many places provided you don't stay too long and don't leave waste/rubbish. The police and the local authorities have got more important things to look at.
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 8, 2013 17:42:28 GMT
No-no s seem to be:
# being mob-handed ( frightens folk)
# sleeping the night(s)( upsets and frightens folk)
#cooking. ( not sure what the objection is here, but possiblt "environmental")
I suppose these could be classed as issues of "neighbourhood security" and "environmental health and safety". The concerns are quite easy to understand, imo.
In all honesty, I think very few residents, anywhere, would welcome any uninvited group of people doing just this on their doorstep or backyard.
For instance, already around Syria, the earlier refugees are not particularly welcoming to those who continue to flood in/out, and the hospitality of neighbouring countries is being stretched to an uncomfortable point.
On another forum, members continue to baffle me with their ideas of wildcamping. There is discussion of parking restrictions in a place that seems to be overlooked by nearby houses. I'm afraid I cannot see that this bears any relationship to "wildcamping". A question of definition, no doubt.
sean rua.
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Sept 8, 2013 18:13:55 GMT
"A question of definition, no doubt"
Or perspective. There is a mindset (which I share) of wanting aires, but I try to avoid parking in front of people's houses.
The other side of the coin is...why ban people sleeping in a van in carpark? There is the argument of the mess some leave, but they already have a law against that. A lot of it, I am convinced, is pure prejudice on the part of a minority who make a loud noise. You can't have people living differently to everyone else, it just isn't cricket!
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Sept 8, 2013 21:29:11 GMT
Widespread aires will never happen in the UK; just my personal opinion based on a lot of different factors.
As for wild camping, to me it's just free camping, wherever it is, though I try not to do it outside residences if I can at all help it.
It's strange, I can sleep and cook in my van most places without people having a clue, but if they knew, I'm sure many irate NIMBY's would be on the phone to someone or other, thinking some crime has been committed.
|
|
|
Post by kangooroo on Sept 9, 2013 18:42:00 GMT
"The other side of the coin is...why ban people sleeping in a van in carpark? There is the argument of the mess some leave, but they already have a law against that. A lot of it, I am convinced, is pure prejudice on the part of a minority who make a loud noise. You can't have people living differently to everyone else, it just isn't cricket! The other Council issue is the loyalty towards camp sites paying high business rates for their site licence for just a very short season. Understandably they want campers to use their own sites to recoup some of their outlay. It isn't an issue here: although not actively promoted, overnighting in council car parks is not disallowed but access to some is restricted by height barriers.
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 9, 2013 19:36:43 GMT
I'm pretty sure the legal eagles will say that it's much to do with "change of use" and planning issues. The Sixties legislation was totally aimed against the Travelling peoples, BUT, these folk such as Ajax and maureenandtom do not seem to understand its implications, imo.
Fact is the legisalation has made things difficult for the councils and government. They cannot be seen to apply the law to travellers only, but exempt these motorhome folk. Yes, a being might say, well , let's change the law then, but as Firefox points out, this just ain't going to happen. The latest legislation, and that from the Nineties, simply reinforces and strengthens the horrendous powers of restricion that the rulers have.
I would agree that the situation is far from ideal, but in truth we have gone way past the tipping point, imo.
Fair play to Ajax for saying he will take up the baton when he returns to Blighty" Imo, However, he hasn't a snowball's chance in hell and will not succeed on this one.
Why, for one thing, how will his aires police deal with all these here Roma and Bulgarians who, according to other supporters of the Far Right, are set to flood in shortly?
FFS, there is already enough aggro trying to make radar keys work for the disabled to use the lavatory, without organising all the drainage requirements for these dudes in big vans! One lady suggests hiring an extra traffic warden! Lord bless us and save us!!
How do they imagine all this is going to be paid for? Council tax is already far too high with all the daft requirements. The State is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, with higher taxes being an unacceptable political football that no political party will want to touch, imo.
sean rua.
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Sept 9, 2013 19:37:13 GMT
I am not sure that is the case, Karen.
I had an email from the Chair of the Transport,Environmental and Community Services committee for the Highlands in which he said, in part:- "...indeed I understand that it would be unlawful to adopt a policy to drive trade to a commercial business..."
I think there is line between adopting policies to support council tax payers and local businesses and actually driving tourists to a business. If there is, then I don't understand how that line is defined.
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 9, 2013 19:48:07 GMT
Yes, for many in business, it's all a bit like insisting that everybody who needs one must have a waste carriers license and then, in the next breath saying, Oh, 'tis OK for you, jack, just flytip in a corner of our land and we'll say no more about it. This is when the pantomime begins. That's the trouble with law - its ramifications are extensive, and, in time, it takes a highly developed and expensive legal profession to unravel the implications and actual meaning. Once this problem has become compounded, as in an old state like the UK, the purpose of the original legislation can be totally lost. Sometimes the wrong people appear to benefit, and almost everybody tends to feel that his particular interests are not catered for. This leads to folk feeling hard-done-by. We are not the only ones who do it. sean rua.
|
|
|
Post by X on Sept 9, 2013 20:04:49 GMT
Good luck to those who are trying but still a complete waste of time and effort in my opinion !! The mindset is just not there for a reasonable uptake if any aires are opened ,as I think most are conditioned to campsites ? I like to wild so would not use an aire as I would then feel I had to abide by rules ! Also it would mean paying and I would never pay for a carpark in some hick town ! Our local cess pit (Ooops town ) Now charges £1.00 an hour and the clever people at the council wonder why it is now half empty ?? They have done the out of town shops a big favour ? Just thinking about the maths here ? Maybe 100,000 motorhomes used regularly ? My guess is 80 percent would never wild 10 percent might use an aire on their way to or from a campsite so perhaps 2 nights for 10,000 motorhomes a year ? divided by approx 2,000 towns in the uk ? That gives them 10 nights each ? Never going to happen !
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Sept 9, 2013 20:27:01 GMT
I think I probably agree if we are talking about England and Wales, they are too crowded and uptight. Not so sure about Scotland...Scotland is quite European in a lot of ways. Northern Ireland, I think, has a couple of new aires.
I think it is hard to generalise...even in Europe, if you want to park in a coastal town or tourist trap, they will take money off you. But inland, it is a different story. For me, mostly, it is about getting rid of all the ridiculous signs and, at the same time, having some provision for water and waste...if there is a toilet block already providing water and waste, it is a small step at the planning stage to change the format to accomodate wilding visitors. The benefit to the town/village of providing services is that people won't need to fly dump. And if they provide a designated area to park, they will get less inappropriate parking.
Ack, it has been a long day...I am too tired to type it all out. You probably already know what I am thinking, eh?
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Sept 9, 2013 20:40:27 GMT
Spot on with the numbers - well there are foreign tourist vans but we don't have the climate for a long tourist season like France or Spain. The fact of the matter is far more of our vans will get off to the continent than we'll get back in their vans. For many, bad weather will ruin a camping holiday, it's too risky a proposition for us to develop a tourist industry based on aires. This applies doubly to Scotland or Northern Ireland.
The "aire" I saw near Blackpool that everyone was raving about wanted £5 a night for a parking space. If you wanted to stay the day it was extra, to the tune of £12 a day total. Facilities: tarmac. There wasn't even taps or waste disposal offered. People are going to use CL's at those prices, and our councils are bankrupt. They are not going to start giving parking away - if anything the move seems to be towards 7 day a week 24 hour parking charges now - they are desperate to generate income because of shortfall in Gov subsidies.
And it isn't as though the Gov can afford to pay anyway. The nation is bankrupt living on credit, staggering under a huge welfare and pensions bill. If international money lending rates go up, we'll be totally shafted backwards and sideways. We've little means to generate any income, just a nation of retail parks now. Loads of foreign goods to buy and no real money to pay for them. I wonder if we will need shale gas just to shore things up for a few years despite the risks and damage if wells go wrong.
|
|
|
Post by kangooroo on Sept 9, 2013 21:00:04 GMT
I am not sure that is the case, Karen. I had an email from the Chair of the Transport,Environmental and Community Services committee for the Highlands in which he said, in part:- "...indeed I understand that it would be unlawful to adopt a policy to drive trade to a commercial business..." I think there is line between adopting policies to support council tax payers and local businesses and actually driving tourists to a business. If there is, then I don't understand how that line is defined. It's probably only a small part of it but with a Council Tourism/Planning background I can confirm there is pressure on councils from businesses paying business rates who want to get some sort of service for their money and with cutbacks alongside rising rates, these pressures increase. Local to you and I and historically, if 'our' council spent any of its funds promoting neighbouring council areas even if via joint ventures, then there could be a local uproar (details available via PM, rather than publicly). Some changes have been made but the pressures are still there. Camping and camp sites generally are often not welcomed by local residents who often fear campers are noisy, rowdy and they fear trouble. Although nothing could be further from the truth, still this fear remains unless the sites are completely remote. I've been involved in setting up 3 camp sites, one of which took over 2 years due largely to fears from local residents. The other was relatively isolated and a much easier proposition. All are now thriving businesses although their site licences are for only a small season. There are, of course, other issues re wilding, eg old bylaws, change of use of land etc. Re a policy of driving trade to a commercial business, this is exactly what council-run Tourist Information Centres do as a service to visitors and earn a commission from this eg via the Book-a-Bed Ahead scheme, which also operates in Scotland! This is a service which tourism operators want and expect in return for their Business Rates.
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Sept 10, 2013 13:00:50 GMT
I am not a fan of our local council. I worked for them for two years (mobile library) and have several friends who either used to or still do work from them...I don't hear any praise. I am also loosely associated with a councillor (not my own), and his campaign to restore the area back to residents, through whom I hear things that dismay me.
I suspect your experience is more relevant than mine, but I have always been one for challenging the status quo, where I think it is wrong. Just a troublemaker, really.
|
|
|
Post by kangooroo on Sept 10, 2013 22:21:40 GMT
I'm no great fan either. I've worked in the same tourism/planning capacity with 6 other councils but no longer have any formal contact with our local one but have occasional informal contact with a few officers but strive to keep this to a minimum.
I'm also still in touch with several tourism operators though who keep me updated on the tourism issues because I do a little tourism consultancy and promotion work.
I'm also regularly updated on the legal/planning positions re using a touring caravan as additional domestic accommodation having been involved in this for the last two years but was unable to say so earlier in this thread. (Yes, these can be used but planning permission is required and no cooking must take place in the caravan.)
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Sept 11, 2013 10:50:43 GMT
Councils are under a lot of pressure at the moment. Their central subsidy has been cut and they are expected to provide the same level of services. Staff numbers and salaries are down. Under these conditions, aires du camping car provision in truth, is going to be the last thing on their agenda.
|
|
|
Post by channa on Sept 11, 2013 11:26:04 GMT
I must admit I have speed read all this, and in my mind we have a no win situation,
The long term picture arguing IMHO induces legislation that kills the job.Conversely why should we be bullied by ill informed gavvers and council officials ?
Subscription to either side of the coin will potentially change things going forward.
There seems to be an inherent psychology amongst a lot of British that there needs to be rules, distill this further there seems to be those who need rules and those for reasons best explained by themselves need to rule, then we have the "free Spirits", wish no harm to anyone and just want to live without impeding their prescence upon others.
A very complicated recipe, where someone will feel aggrieved.
I cant offer any slaient answer, merely an observation sadly
Channa
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 11, 2013 12:35:13 GMT
Whether we like it or not, what you say is a very realistic appraisal, Channa, imo. 'Twill be interesting to see how A-JAX fares, when he returns to the UK and sets about getting the aires problem sorted. I very much think he'll be still arguing with Derek long after the whole scheme is shelved. And then we'll get flak from others for pissing in the bushes and ruining it for everybody. Imo, you are correct to say keep a low profile. All this crap about Skegness or Scarborough ain't helping anyone that I can see. And, if the Canterbury model is so good, how come some folk don't motor down there and learn all about the ins and outs of the thing?
I think some folk just love rules and some just love arguing. Actually, this is where Derek could be useful, as he's so rich ( could put Ajax in his back pocket, etc, so he says). Lets see him get down to Kent and get all the gen for all the rest of them who think this is a big issue.
Btw, not long for you to wait for the baby now! One of mine is expecting another in October too. The fuss nowadays is unbelievable!
sean rua.
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Sept 11, 2013 13:25:11 GMT
I'm a bit lost as to who Ajax is!
|
|
|
Post by X on Sept 11, 2013 13:37:47 GMT
Was it bog cleaner ? Or scouring powder ?
|
|
|
Post by robmac on Sept 11, 2013 17:22:30 GMT
I'm a bit lost as to who Ajax is! Ajax is Wintonian - referring to his Air Jacks business.
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Sept 11, 2013 17:50:25 GMT
Oh I see. I thought it may have been him with the reference of coming back from abroad, but wasn't sure!
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 11, 2013 17:53:37 GMT
Spot on, Robmac!
Hence, the " Aires Jaques, aires jaques" ditty.
Fair play to the man, btw, if he feels he can repeal or alter the Sixties legislation. Many have been trying since then, but all we've had is an extension and increase in the state's power to restrict travelling about by making it danged hard to find anywhere legal to stop.
sean rua.
ps
Yes, I realise people like Ajax think travellers should just keep travelling and travelling and never stop, but this is because he doesn't really understand.
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Sept 11, 2013 19:24:28 GMT
Wintonian is trying to get the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 changed?
I think most of the problem towns are coastal...similar problems exist or existed in French coastal towns...they tend to be the most expensive. But because they do provide aires, it is easier to enforce controlled parking in those towns. There are exceptions, of course, like La Rochelle and Grand Fort Phillipe.
I also tend to think of Scotland separately from the the rest of the UK...despite problems in places like Dornoch and Durness, and the plethora of unlawful signage, I feel welcome in most places. Scotland somehow feels a lot more European than England...perhaps it has the space for it.
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 11, 2013 19:54:07 GMT
I'll go in there ( the other place) and try to find his exact words. I think it may even be on a thread about "Grey Water".
Yes, I think there is a lot different about Scotland. Something to do with the way they use space efficiently, I think. The top half of the country seems to have much more space than many other places in GB.
sean rua.
|
|
|
Post by seanrua on Sept 11, 2013 20:23:18 GMT
"" It looks like a simple matter then: get the law (S1(4) of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960) amended to reflect the existence of Motor Homes as distinct from Caravans (under which category Motor Homes are currently defined) because they did not exist in 1960. A Motor Home is, according to VOSA, classed the same as a private car, so should not be classified as a caravan as well.
Perhaps energies would be better used in this direction which would move the issue away from individual councils and onto central government. If it hasn't been done by the time I get back to England, I will have a go at it! I love a challenge and have beaten the government before. ""
---
That's what Ajax said. I'm not sure of the rights or wrongs of quoting from another website, but, imo, I am not being critical of the man, so I see no harm. In fact, I think I said earlier "fair play" to him, if he's able to get anything changed.
|
|