Parking Caravan on Driveway
oscarfaber
local bylaws.As I live on a modern residential estate, with vans etc parked
in driveways , this seems most unfair. My caravan cannot even be seen from
the estate road as it is tucked at the side of my garage. Has anyone had
similar experiences or challenged such a ruling ?
Seth
"oscarfaber" <oscar...@ic24.net> wrote in message
news:u5v7cpq...@corp.supernews.com...
Is it definitely a local bylaw? How did you hear about it - from a
neighbour who hates caravans?
There are often covenants in the house deeds where the property is leasehold
that prevent you keeping a caravan on your drive. House builders tend to
take the view that caravans can make house sales on a partially completed
estate more difficult. They lose interest when the estate is complete -
although the covenant is still there, no one would police it. If this is
the case, the solution might be either to forget about it all - - or maybe
to buy the freehold on the property.
Cheers
S.
Dudley Simons
oscarfaber wrote:
who has told you that you cannot leave the caravan where it is?
If its something you have discovered by accident whilst having a read of your
house deeds, - wait until an official looking letter arrives asking you to
remove it (in the meantime sort out a contingency plan just in case).
If you have already had a letter, presumably from the local council, the
chances are - given that your caravan is out of site, that someone has reported
you. You can probably narrow down the list of potential snitches to neighbours
either side of you, neighbours directly opposite. How do you get on with your
neighbours? Does your caravan cause them any inconvenience - ie they have to
look at it out of their kitchen or living room window. Of course you wouldnt
dream of loading up your caravan at 5.00am every saturday morning closely
followed by much revving of engine and shouting of directions as you hitch up,
the whole procedure being reversed when you return at midnight on Sunday - not
saying that you do this, but having lived next to someone not entirely
dissimilar I would have gladly torched him, his wife and his bloody caravan -
all efforts to ask them to keep the noise down a bit resulted in a tirade of
abuse which boiled down to 'mind your own f'ing business, I'll do what I like'
It was a satisfying day when not long after he lost his job the bailiffs
arrived to repossess the caravan, his jet ski, the monumental home
entertainment centre, leather suite and anything else he had on 'tick'. They
sold up not long after and peace and quiet was once more restored. - anyhow you
get the picture!
Also has anyone else in your road had to remove a caravan from their driveway -
possibly where it was in full view? Having to remove their own caravan because
they were daft enough to make it an eyesore (either to the council or their set
of neighbours) they have decided that it is grossly unfair for you to keep your
caravan on your property. People are like that.
Not much help I'm afraid.
ASExec
provided the caravan was not actually in the drive (eg: forward of the house)
it didnt seem to matter, much of it being what the estate developers said at
the time of building and not local laws . I know of a chap whose neighbour
complained about him parking his motor home in the drive - solution, park it on
the road (its legal) it has a road fund licence ! neighbour soon changed his
mind.
Ian Dinsdale
wrote:
>I have just learnt that I may no longer park my tourer on my driveway due to
>local bylaws.
Who told you this?
I believe there was a ruling in the House of Lords that such by-laws
were too restrictive, and as such are not enforcable. I think a lot of
local councils rescinded them because of this. Can't find the details
at the moment, but either the CC or the C&CC should be able to help if
you're a member (or maybe if you aren't).
It's different if there's a covenant in the property deeds which
prohibits it. These are enforcable, but it is sometimes possible to
get them amended. However I think it can be difficult without the
agreement of neighbours who are probably bound by the same covenant,
if the houses were all built by the same firm.
If it was a neighbour who complained, as seems possible, then there's
very little chance of them agreeing to a removal of any restriction.
I don't think there's any other way that your right to park the
caravan where you want on your own property can be challenged. The
only safety hazard there could be is the danger from the gas bottles,
and it's easy enough to remove them while stored, if that's a factor.
The 'right to light' which is often quoted, is a non-starter as the
grounds for an objection.
If the clubs can't or won't help, try the Citizens Advice Bureau. A
short consultation is free, and tthey're very good.
Cheers
Ian D
D and M
> Is it definitely a local bylaw? How did you hear about it - from a
> neighbour who hates caravans?
>
> There are often covenants in the house deeds where the property is leasehold
> that prevent you keeping a caravan on your drive. House builders tend to
> take the view that caravans can make house sales on a partially completed
> estate more difficult. They lose interest when the estate is complete -
> although the covenant is still there, no one would police it. If this is
> the case, the solution might be either to forget about it all - - or maybe
> to buy the freehold on the property.
>
> Cheers
> S.
Restrictive covenants have nothing to do with leasehold or freehold
status of property. They are very common on estates full stop. Usually
they have a time limit on them 15/20/25 years. Buying the freehold of a
property will not release you from the restrictive covenants.
I agree with you that it's extremely unlikely anyone would police them or
even attempt to enforce them, although if it is an anti-caravan neighbour
complaining, they could have the covenant upheld (if it's still in
place).
The original poster needs to get a copy of the covenants (they should
have been with the house deeds of which he should have a copy if it is
freehold), and read them.
Usually asking your immediate neighbours if they have any objection to
your caravan and getting their agreement to park it on your drive is
sufficient. Although of course when you ask, you must be prepared to act
responsibly if one objects - otherwise there's no point asking.
Regards,
Dave.
--
Remove the capital from address to reply by email.
Diana
unaware that covenants just expired with time, I thought unless receded they
went on for ever.
Diana
"D and M" <dan...@london.cs.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.16c9d5459...@news.btclick.com...
Seth
> Restrictive covenants have nothing to do with leasehold or freehold
> status of property.
> Buying the freehold of a
> property will not release you from the restrictive covenants.
Covenants are part of an agreement between the property developer (original
freeholder & Lessor) and the property purchaser (Lessee). In my house
deeds, the actual text is:
"THE Lessee HEREBY COVENANTS with the Lessors at all times hereafter during
the term granted: - - - - - " (the term granted is 999 years)
Further on, there is all sorts of stuff about not erecting porches, garages,
sheds, greenhouses e.t.c. without the written permission of the Lessors. I
can't see anything about caravans, though parking of heavy goods vehicles is
prohibited. There is also lots of stuff about planting trees & the heights
of hedges and so on.
Further on :
"All rights and obligations of the Lessors and Lessee respectively under
these presents shall be incident to and devolve with the reversion
expectanton this Lease and the leasehold interest hereby created
retrospectively and shall accordingly be enjoyed and observed and performed
by the person or persons body corporate in whom such reversion and
leasehold interest respectively shall for the time being be vested"
This means that either you or they can sell your (or their) interest in the
agreement to someone else - and that the agreement will continue with the
new Lessor or Lessee. It is very common for developers to sell freeholds
to property management companies whose income derives from the leases they
(as Lessor) own, after an estate is completed.
If you buy the freehold of the property yourself, you also become 'Lessor'
and you (as Lessor) would have to sue yourself (as Lessee) to enforce any
coventants.
For all practical purposes, the covenants have been nullified - - - and,
providing that you do not breach planning regulations or local authority
bylaws, you can put whatever you like on your drive.
Regards
S.
D and M
> Covenants are part of an agreement between the property developer (original
> freeholder & Lessor) and the property purchaser (Lessee). In my house
> deeds, the actual text is:
<Snip>
Yours is just one example of many restrictive covenants placed on
properties. I am not disputing anything in YOUR restrictive covenants and
YOUR relationship with the builders or owners of your property.
All I am saying is that yours are just one example and the original
posters could be, and most likely are, very different. I say again,
purchasing the freehold of a leased property does not guarantee to remove
you from any restrictive covenants placed on the land. Even in your case,
were you to purchase the freehold of your property it is most likely that
the restrictive covenants would be placed on you under your new
relationship.
Hopefully we can agree on this. Quite simply the original poster needs to
get a copy of his restrictive covenants and read what applies to him.
mhlife
"Seth" <se...@nospam.org> wrote in message > For all practical purposes, the
covenants have been nullified - - - and,
> providing that you do not breach planning regulations or local authority
> bylaws, you can put whatever you like on your drive.
>
> Regards
____________
Sorry, this is incorrect - and has the potential to lead anyone believing it
into fruitless (and expensive) litigation.
I can tell you from my own experience that these Covenants are enforceable
by EVERY party subscribing to the agreement.
In the case of a development, this means your neighbours - and not
necessarily your immediate neighbours.
The Developer always retains the right to 'Waive, Vary of Modify' covenants
on the land - this enables him to change the site layout/building types, etc
as he sees fit.
It is possible (but usually very difficult) to get a developer to vary
restrictive covenants AFTER a sale. The trick is ALWAYS to insist upon such
a modification (which, incidentally, will not benefit any subsequent owner
of the property) BEFORE exchanging contracts.
If a restrictive covenant, forbidding caravans, is already in place than,
frankly, you are stuffed if one of the neighbours chooses to assert their
right to enforce it.
They WILL win in court - no matter how petty or unreasonable their objection
might be.
The Court can ONLY look at the terms of the Covenant - and if you are in
breach of it, they WILL rule against you, no matter how sympathetic they
might be about your plight.
AS always, it comes down to 'Will anyone actually feel strongly enough about
the matter to pursue it in court'?. As Britain becomes ever more litigious,
the sad answer is that there will probably be 'someone' who cannot resist
asserting their right to ban caravans/commercial
ehicles/trailers/boats -or whatever is prohibited by the Covenant - even if
it causes them no personal inconvenience whatsoever.
Ian Dinsdale
wrote:
>
>
>For all practical purposes, the covenants have been nullified - - - and,
>providing that you do not breach planning regulations or local authority
>bylaws, you can put whatever you like on your drive.
>
That is just plain wrong.
Covenants in general have been far from nullified, and as long as
we're still talking touring caravans and not permanently fixed
structures, planning regs don't apply, and I'm pretty sure local
authority bylaws have been superceded by High Court or H-o-Lords
rulings.
It is possible for a touring caravan to be regarded as a fixed
structure, but as far as I can recall, this depends on the usage. It
can be used as temporary accomodation for guests, but I think there
are pretty well defined limits on this.
I don't suppose it matters too much if we're just indulging in
speculation, but I'd hate to think that anyone would act on any of the
opinions posted here (including mine) without seeking legal advice
from an accredited source.
Cheers
Ian D
oscarfaber
don't have much of a case - don't you just love this country !!
Ian Dinsdale
wrote:
>Thanks for all the good advice, it would seem that in my case I probably
>don't have much of a case - don't you just love this country !!
So is it a restriction imposed by a covenant, or are the local
authorities trying to bully you into it?
Because if it's the latter I'd definitely fight them.
Cheers
Ian D
Bill Delue
If its at the side of your garage its not on your drive way as surely
it is behind the front building line of the property. Can't you fence
it at the side and gates across the front so it becomes part of your
rear garden? or get it into the rear garden and have you found out
who is causeing the agrvation and talk politely to them?
I presume you have had an official letter regarding this and have
looked at all the suggestions before giving in.
Please post more information as this subject affects many owners and
a workable solution must be found.
just don't let the B----rd's grind you down
Bill Delue
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
mhlife
> Thanks for all the good advice, it would seem that in my case I probably
> don't have much of a case - don't you just love this country !!
_________
I fully agree and wish you luck.
This is a problem that I may have to face, as we're considering moving
house.
Unless we buy another new property (and, as we found when looking
previously, not all developers are willing to waive the covenenant - even to
gain a sale) we will face a minefield of existing prohibitions.
It's all very well saying "OK, I'll park my motorcaravan on the road" - does
anyone *really* want to keep an expensive vehicle on a public highway?
It's becoming a very sad country - everyone concerned with looking for ways
to prosecute and/or sue everyone else!
Anthony
Yes but you can get ridiculous covenants removed. It just needs a
little thought and research
D and M
wrote...
> Yes but you can get ridiculous covenants removed. It just needs a
> little thought and research
If the body responsible for setting your covenants, no matter how
ridiculous they are, is not prepared to remove them, or in some cases
even discuss the possibility then you have absolutely no right or legal
standing on which to get them removed.
To suggest otherwise is plain wrong. You may be lucky, but there is no
precedence or guarantee that it is possible.
Jan
wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Feb 2002 08:54:57 +0000, Anthony of a...@poggo.freeserve.co.uk
> wrote...
>
> > Yes but you can get ridiculous covenants removed. It just needs a
> > little thought and research
>
> If the body responsible for setting your covenants, no matter how
> ridiculous they are, is not prepared to remove them, or in some cases
> even discuss the possibility then you have absolutely no right or legal
> standing on which to get them removed.
>
> To suggest otherwise is plain wrong. You may be lucky, but there is no
> precedence or guarantee that it is possible.
Hi Dave,
You're right. These covenants are often the evidence of conditions
imposed by the local authority when granting planning permission for the
development. And we should know that council officers will move heaven
and earth to avoid changing anything. <g>
To suggest that so-called "ridiculous covenants" can be removed with "a
little thought and research" is a clear sign of someone who does not
think much and whose research is dubious at best.
--
Best regards,
Jan
David A Baxter
<a...@poggo.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>>
>Yes but you can get ridiculous covenants removed. It just needs a
>little thought and research
regards
--
David A Baxter
Neil Cairns
wrote:
>I have just learnt that I may no longer park my tourer on my driveway due to
I supose one could go the way of the europeen courts, restrictions on
civil liberties ect. but how long would it take and could you aford
it?
Neil
Peter
news:amm56u8lnquslt2pr...@4ax.com...
But who's civil liberties? Only yours for wanting to park a caravan but not
your Neighbours who have to look at it?
Why agree to buy a home that has the restrictions which everyone on the
estate or whatever has agreed to and they go back on your agreement after
the event.
Caravans parked infront of homes may be convenient to the owner but can be
an eyesore in the main and a nuisance to a neighbour who has to look at it
day after day from inside their home.
--
Regards
Peter
pe...@august1946.fsnet.co.uk
Jan
<Pete...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> But who's civil liberties? Only yours for wanting to park a caravan but not
> your Neighbours who have to look at it?
> Why agree to buy a home that has the restrictions which everyone on the
> estate or whatever has agreed to and they go back on your agreement after
> the event.
> Caravans parked infront of homes may be convenient to the owner but can be
> an eyesore in the main and a nuisance to a neighbour who has to look at it
> day after day from inside their home.
Exactly right, Peter.
--
Best regards,
Jan
frisket
> > Caravans parked infront of homes may be convenient to the owner but can
be
> > an eyesore in the main and a nuisance to a neighbour who has to look at
it
> > day after day from inside their home.
>
>
> Exactly right, Peter.
Yes, and ask if your choice of paint on your window frames is acceptable
too, not to mention the shape/style/designer of your washing on the line.
What a crock of s*$t !! If you've laid out your good money to purchase a
house and piece of land you should be able to do with it as you like and SOD
the neighbours. If the family next door want to paint their lawn pink and
wear hamsters as earrings so what? it won't affect me one jot and good luck
to them. The interference by sad sack busy-bodies in our lives is beyond a
joke and it ought to stop before it gets worse. Perhaps the nanny state
could run a "Get a life" course for these poor souls. Richard
Jaybee
> Yes, and ask if your choice of paint on your window frames is acceptable
> too, not to mention the shape/style/designer of your washing on the line.
> What a crock of s*$t !! If you've laid out your good money to purchase a
> house and piece of land you should be able to do with it as you like and
SOD
> the neighbours. If the family next door want to paint their lawn pink and
> wear hamsters as earrings so what? it won't affect me one jot and good
luck
> to them. The interference by sad sack busy-bodies in our lives is beyond a
> joke and it ought to stop before it gets worse. Perhaps the nanny state
> could run a "Get a life" course for these poor souls. Richard
>
>
run to rack and ruin, with several old bangers in the process of being
spread all over the lawn, the odd sofa and mattress left dumped to rot, all
within your view, you'd soon get sick of that wouldn't you?
I remember in the early 80's buying a new house and part of the agreement
was that you couldn't erect a shed in the back garden for 5 years. Now that
was a silly rule, and few paid attention to it anyway, but the fact is that
we were told about it.
Jayne
J L Williams
from "Peter" <Pete...@btinternet.com> contains these words:
Hi there.
> But who's civil liberties? Only yours for wanting to park a caravan but not
> your Neighbours who have to look at it?
We bought our c'van knowing there were no restrictions with our property.
> Why agree to buy a home that has the restrictions which everyone on the
> estate or whatever has agreed to and they go back on your agreement after
> the event.
> Caravans parked infront of homes may be convenient to the owner but can be
> an eyesore in the main and a nuisance to a neighbour who has to look at it
> day after day from inside their home.
We have the space to park our c'van on our front garden grass between
the pavement and our garden wall. We thought this would be an eyesore
for all our neighbours. So I knocked down a suitable portion of the
6ft wall and reversed the c'van inside. I wanted to ratify this and
drew up plans to alter the wall/garden and gates to accomodate the
change. The local planning peeps said "you don't need to do that!
Just put it on the grass outside"!
Oh gawd!
Jim
> --
> Regards
> Peter
> pe...@august1946.fsnet.co.uk
D and M
wrote...
> Yes, and ask if your choice of paint on your window frames is acceptable
> too, not to mention the shape/style/designer of your washing on the line.
> What a crock of s*$t !! If you've laid out your good money to purchase a
> house and piece of land you should be able to do with it as you like and SOD
> the neighbours. If the family next door want to paint their lawn pink and
> wear hamsters as earrings so what? it won't affect me one jot and good luck
> to them. The interference by sad sack busy-bodies in our lives is beyond a
> joke and it ought to stop before it gets worse. Perhaps the nanny state
> could run a "Get a life" course for these poor souls. Richard
You're just going from the sublime to the ridiculous, but then perhaps
that demonstrates well your upbringing and level of intelligence. Yes, I
know that makes me sound snobbish, but it's people like you that make
somewhere a far worse place to live - and have the unbelievable gall to
imagine you are right and it must be everyone else that's wrong.
This "I can do what I like and stuff everyone else" attitude is at the
root of most that is going wrong with society today. It shows a total
lack of respect and caring which probably is rampant throughout your
entire existence. What you are too dense it appears to realise is that if
we did all have respect and care for each other, there would be no need
for rules, and the nanny state would be unheard of - unfortunately it's
exactly because of people like you that it is an absolute necessity. The
more decent people can be protected against the actions of the reckless
and uncaring minority like you, the better an area will be for the decent
majority.
Thankfully, you're not my neighbour.
Peter
views by reverting to abuse, so be it but it speaks volumes as to your state
of mind where the community and neighbours stand.
I frankly am very pleased that I don't live near you let alone alongside you
if you revert to the gutter when you are challenged on a view.
Please post a list of where you are planning to go on holiday in this van of
yours so we can all go somewhere else and give you the peace and quiet you
deserve let alone us? Don't tell me you don't like Adult sites, don't
believe that the Customs have any rights to search you for booze and believe
your children should play anywhere else except near you.
Don't bother to reply you are already in the Zap list.
--
Regards
Peter
pe...@august1946.fsnet.co.uk
"frisket" <fri...@dickndell.co.uk> wrote in message
news:u65v7hr...@corp.supernews.com...
Anthony
wrote:
>On Thu, 07 Feb 2002 08:54:57 +0000, Anthony of a...@poggo.freeserve.co.uk
>wrote...
>
>> Yes but you can get ridiculous covenants removed. It just needs a
>> little thought and research
>
>If the body responsible for setting your covenants, no matter how
>ridiculous they are, is not prepared to remove them, or in some cases
>even discuss the possibility then you have absolutely no right or legal
>standing on which to get them removed.
>
But in a lot of cases the person who set the restrictive covenant is
dead !
>To suggest otherwise is plain wrong. You may be lucky, but there is no
>precedence or guarantee that it is possible.
Really ? In 1991 I had a restrictive covenant removed.
The place I owned used to be owned by the chapel which used to be next
door to my property (It was demolished 10 years previously) there was
a covenant placed giving the right of access across the rear of my
land to the users of the chapel. There was also a covenant giving me
(or the owners of my property) a right of access across the rear of
the chapel property.
When builders bought the land, they wanted their restrictive covenant
giving me access removed. I agreed on the basis of their having my
restrictive covenant removed. All of this was handed to the solicitors
who sorted it out to the satisfaction of both parties
Anthony
<da...@davidabaxter.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <hle46uotea8fp627g...@4ax.com>, Anthony
><a...@poggo.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>Yes but you can get ridiculous covenants removed. It just needs a
>>little thought and research
>And Money
Oh yes !!!
Anthony
Errmm sorry. I have a degree in Land Admin/Housing/Estate Management
and a member of the ISVA.
Now what are your qualifications dear ?
Bill Delue
news:a3uo5n$g44$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
You seem to miss the point, you can park a double decker bus on
your drive and not move it for years or even a box trailer or
leave scrap vehicles on the drive but not a caravan!
now that is affecting your rights.
Do you object when you neighbour across the road has his
curtains open and is watching Manchester United on the TV when
you are a Manchester City Fan?
Do you object because he drives a Lada and you a Ford?
the answer is No so why object because we have a
caravan parked on the drive?
In this case it is parked at the side of his garage and obviously
shielded from full view so what is the problem.
I presume those who object take their foreign holdays out of a brochure,
spend their money aboard but have never visited a quarter of the country
that is on their doorstep and yet complain about the unemployment
in this country. I know their answer "we earn the money and will spend
it as we wish" Well so do caravaners.
Go out and see this country and support the local bussiness.
Jan
wrote:
> Yes, and ask if your choice of paint on your window frames is acceptable
> too, not to mention the shape/style/designer of your washing on the line.
> What a crock of s*$t !!
Thank you for so 'eloquently' proving my point.
--
Best regards,
Jan
Peter
swear on line. Yes. That I am cognisant of having Neighbours who have rights
as well. Yes that one too? Don't care what colour you paint your home
frankly but if its zebra stripped I might suggest you reconsider because
with you inside it you don't look at it all day. Finally there is a thing
called planning permission that does not cover colour of windows and nether
replacement windows. Just drive down any terraced Victorian row and see the
complete mess that no controls brings. But then no doubt your house is stone
clad. lovely!
--
Regards
Peter
pe...@august1946.fsnet.co.uk
"Jan" <j...@tesco.net> wrote in message
news:apd76u88hp8kc7bmv...@4ax.com...
oscarfaber
obtaining a copy of my house deeds and lease agreement to fully examine the
small print. It would appear that this 'bylaw' is actually a 'restrictive
covenant' which wasn't relevant to me at the time of purchase.
The geometry of my property actually places my drive to the rear of the
house, with my garage to one side of the original drive - I'm not sure if
this makes a difference but will keep you posted.
"Ian Dinsdale" <idin...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:18e26uo6j3bcmmrs7...@4ax.com...
Peter
Bill
> > But who's civil liberties? Only yours for wanting to park a caravan but
not
> > your Neighbours who have to look at it?
> > Why agree to buy a home that has the restrictions which everyone on the
> > estate or whatever has agreed to and they go back on your agreement
after
> > the event.
> > Caravans parked infront of homes may be convenient to the owner but can
be
> > an eyesore in the main and a nuisance to a neighbour who has to look at
it
> > day after day from inside their home.
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> > Peter
> > pe...@august1946.fsnet.co.u
>
> You seem to miss the point, you can park a double decker bus on
> your drive and not move it for years or even a box trailer or
> leave scrap vehicles on the drive but not a caravan!
> now that is affecting your rights.
But I would not impost that on anyone and it shows the need for guidline.
Even Bylaws.
Thats why it is now an offence to polute your neiboughs with noise. They was
a overwelming need to do something.
> Do you object when you neighbour across the road has his
> curtains open and is watching Manchester United on the TV when
> you are a Manchester City Fan?
Wrong shaped ball for me. Never ever watched a game of football on TV.
But then supporters of my game don't riot, throw bottles on the pitch or go
out looking for a fight.
We do like a pint though.
> Do you object because he drives a Lada and you a Ford?
> the answer is No so why object because we have a
> caravan parked on the drive?
Wrong Car Not a Ford. Land Rover to tow with and WV for work.
But could not care what a chap drives. You see as long as it is taxed and
insured its his choice.
> In this case it is parked at the side of his garage and obviously
> shielded from full view so what is the problem.
Same as mine. But i have a 9 foot evergreen hedge round it and 6 foor double
timber gates
to the side all behind the building line and in the country covered by a
green caravan cover.
But I would not do that in a town estate if ever i live on one.
> I presume those who object take their foreign holdays out of a brochure,
> spend their money aboard but have never visited a quarter of the country
> that is on their doorstep and yet complain about the unemployment
> in this country. I know their answer "we earn the money and will spend
> it as we wish" Well so do caravaners.
> Go out and see this country and support the local bussiness.
Had a Caravan for over 25 years. Traveled all over this country walking the
most of the fells and hills from cornwall to scotland for 40 years and I am
reasonalby sure i have been to more of this countries heritage inlandscape
than some. Traveled most of western europe from southern Itly to the
pyrinies last year and off to poland this.
But if you mean do i use CC or CCC sites No i leave those to the people who
want to swap one estate for another. Bring the TV Vidio and of course the
sat dish and never go more than 20 mins from their car. or van. You see I
dont impose myself on others out of consideration to others. But that is a
old fassiond treat these days.
Next.
Peter
oscarfaber
forfeiture of lease' from my local council relating to my non-compliance
with the 'restrictive covenant'. This effectively requires me to move out of
my home by a date in March !!! I should point out that my house is 'shared
ownership' whereby I own a proportion and the housing association (local
council) own the remainder for which I pay rent.
The particular covenant reads :
'Not on that part of the property that is between the highway and a line
drawn along the principal facade of the property so as to intercept the
boundaries of the property :
to permit to remain thereon any caravan or trailer or boat for a period or
periods exceeding in total 28 days in any period of 12 months '
"oscarfaber" <oscar...@ic24.net> wrote in message
news:u5v7cpq...@corp.supernews.com...
Bill Delue
The caravan does not make noise and I presume you would ban all vehicles
from driveways!
The shape of the ball is irrevelant and all supporters of rugby are
not angels it was only an example (I don't follow either shaped ball)
Missed point again the make of car is only an example
(I have a Land rover but I don't object to the clapped out old banger
across the road that hasn't moved from his driveway for 18 months!
But you say bye laws are needed so lets cut your hedge back to 6ft
and we will all move to the country! ( I keep mine in storage most of
the time and under a green cover so what!)
Congratulations on your many travels but the point was if you are a
caravaner
why are you complaining about looking at one we all can't live in the
country
or afford storage fees or travel the world and I didn't means just club
sites I meant any site but some people do like to
use the club sites to visit the area and not sit in their vans all day
but if they do I am sure you would impose yourself on others and
make a bye law to stop them!!!!
Bill Delue
> As an update to my original posts, I have now received a 'notice of
> forfeiture of lease' from my local council relating to my non-compliance
> with the 'restrictive covenant'. This effectively requires me to move out of
> my home by a date in March !!! I should point out that my house is 'shared
> ownership' whereby I own a proportion and the housing association (local
> council) own the remainder for which I pay rent.
>
> The particular covenant reads :
> 'Not on that part of the property that is between the highway and a line
> drawn along the principal facade of the property so as to intercept the
> boundaries of the property :
> to permit to remain thereon any caravan or trailer or boat for a period or
> periods exceeding in total 28 days in any period of 12 months '
>
"oscarfaber"
I wish I could offer a solution to big brothers actions but I can't
There are many caravaners out there hoping you solve this problem and
also most importantly keep your home.
IS THERE NOT A SOLICITOR READ THESE MAILS WHO COULD OFFER ADVICE
Good luck
Jan
wrote:
>
> Errmm sorry. I have a degree in Land Admin/Housing/Estate Management
> and a member of the ISVA.
Wow. You're not just an *ordinary* shark then.
--
Best regards,
Jan
Jan
<Pete...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> What point? Than I don't agree with you. Please I confirm that. That I don't
> swear on line. Yes. That I am cognisant of having Neighbours who have rights
> as well. Yes that one too? Don't care what colour you paint your home
> frankly but if its zebra stripped I might suggest you reconsider because
> with you inside it you don't look at it all day. Finally there is a thing
> called planning permission that does not cover colour of windows and nether
> replacement windows. Just drive down any terraced Victorian row and see the
> complete mess that no controls brings. But then no doubt your house is stone
> clad. lovely!
Thanks, yes, it is lovely. It's listed Grade II
in a Conservation Area, and it is stone built.
--
Best regards,
Jan
Peter
"Bill Delue" <musk...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dd6d2d5803ea97d6c29...@mygate.mailgate.org...
>
>
> The caravan does not make noise and I presume you would ban all vehicles
> from driveways!
Read it any way you want I did not say vans made noise as you well know.
What I said is when a nuisance becomes big enough it is legislated against
as with noise. If they is a covenant that says don't why try and if you do
expect the people who comply with the agreement they have agreed to to
complain. I would not hesitate.
> The shape of the ball is irrevelant and all supporters of rugby are
> not angels it was only an example (I don't follow either shaped ball)
Wrong again its cricket. But then you do tend to make up your mind based
upon what you think and not what the facts are.
> Missed point again the make of car is only an example
> (I have a Land rover but I don't object to the clapped out old banger
> across the road that hasn't moved from his driveway for 18 months!
If the covenant does not mention a car broken or not then you have no reason
to object. And nor would I. But then have you seen the number of
refrigerators being dumped. No rules their either.
> But you say bye laws are needed so lets cut your hedge back to 6ft
> and we will all move to the country! ( I keep mine in storage most of
> the time and under a green cover so what!)
The hedges around here are in the main over 20 foot high quickthorne and
the like. Mine is a tiddlier and has been cut down But then I don't have
neighbours that object as I do nothing to cause then to notice me. But then
the nearest house is some 120 yards away anyway.
> Congratulations on your many travels but the point was if you are a
> caravaner
> why are you complaining about looking at one we all can't live in the
> country
> or afford storage fees or travel the world and I didn't means just club
> sites I meant any site but some people do like to
> use the club sites to visit the area and not sit in their vans all day
> but if they do I am sure you would impose yourself on others and
> make a bye law to stop them!!!!
No one made a bylaw after the event here. It seems that here a bylaw or
covenant exists and so to contravene it lays your self open to both the
neighbours and the law. In the long term its a waist of time and only brings
the offender in to conflict with his neighbours.
> Bill Delue
Regards
Peter
pe...@august1946.fsnet.co.uk
Bill Lord
<musk...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Do you object when you neighbour across the road has his
>curtains open and is watching Manchester United on the TV when
>you are a Manchester City Fan?
Nothing to object to in this, now if it were the other way
round.................................................................
Bill Lord
wrote:
>As an update to my original posts, I have now received a 'notice of
>forfeiture of lease' from my local council relating to my non-compliance
>with the 'restrictive covenant'. This effectively requires me to move out of
>my home by a date in March !!! I should point out that my house is 'shared
>ownership' whereby I own a proportion and the housing association (local
>council) own the remainder for which I pay rent.
Get yourself down to the Citizens advice bureau and seek their help.
This amounts to eviction and they cannot do that without a court
order. As long as you pay your rent it would be very unlikely that a
court would grant such an order providing you promised not to break
this covenant in the future.
You need proper legal advice on this and need it quickly.
Bill Delue
Well Peter
I can honestly say I am very pleased for you not to have neighbours
and I can see why you don't have neighbours
and I am even more please that I you are not one of mine.
Bill
Ps next time at the cricket please don't invade the pitch!!!!!!!!!!!
OH of course you wouldn't do a thing like that.
Its time I left you alone in your perfect would of no neighbours
and bye laws and the sound of leather on willow.
Anthony
wrote:
>As an update to my original posts, I have now received a 'notice of
>forfeiture of lease' from my local council relating to my non-compliance
>with the 'restrictive covenant'. This effectively requires me to move out of
>my home by a date in March !!! I should point out that my house is 'shared
>ownership' whereby I own a proportion and the housing association (local
>council) own the remainder for which I pay rent.
Its only a notice of forfeiture. Its a frightener. They would have to
go to court to enforce it. They cant just issue notices and then chuck
people out.
Your problem is the other half owners, who might take exception to
your actions
>
>The particular covenant reads :
>'Not on that part of the property that is between the highway and a line
>drawn along the principal facade of the property so as to intercept the
>boundaries of the property :
>to permit to remain thereon any caravan or trailer or boat for a period or
>periods exceeding in total 28 days in any period of 12 months '
Which means you can leave it there for 27 days, then take it out on
the road for a day then bring it back etc etc etc
Though that's probably a PITA.
Peter
> Well Peter
>
> I can honestly say I am very pleased for you not to have neighbours
> and I can see why you don't have neighbours
> and I am even more please that I you are not one of mine.
Now I didn't say that either. I just said I didn't have any near and in this
village people treat each other with consideration.
The diverse community and we have is a great one. It revolves around the
village green where we play cricket during the summer. The Pub on the green
by the pond and the Church that I don't attend myself. You could well call
it an old fashioned village and be right.
What we don't seem to have is vandalism, abandoned cars and loud music or
massed car washing on a Sunday. But a lot of dirty landrovers.
We know we are lucky to have is a mixed community of all types jobs and
backgrounds who enjoy where they live and want to keep it that way. A
community that is considerate of the plan fact that what one does normally
effects another. And here it is unlikely that anyone from a farm worker or a
banker would want to spoil someone else's outlook by looking at a caravan
sitting outside his window week on week. This is a wide community and I
therefore believe that on a estate it must be far more annoying to have
caravans parked in a manner that the environment was not designed and
planned for.
We have quite a few caravans and motor homes and while they are there they
are not obvious. Most are out of the way or in barns on some local farm. It
would come as no surprise to you to know I would have all caravans and
un-roadworthy cars controlled by statute. I have a caravan for one purpose.
To go walking as often as I can to out of the way places. But I would rather
not use a CC site well run as they are. But what puzzles me is that if a
chap wants to park outside his house to the annoyance of his neighbours! why
does he submit to the Gestapo rules of a CC site.
Finally I would like to see a MOT for caravans, third party insurance being
compulsory and even a road tax for funding more storage sites. After all
they do take up the road. It would get rid of some of the very un-roadworthy
death traps we all see being towed at 70 MPH loaded to the gunnels swinging
down the M? towards wherever. Opps you may not agree to that or do you?
> Bill
> Ps next time at the cricket please don't invade the pitch!!!!!!!!!!!
Never been know in this club.
>OH of course you wouldn't do a thing like that.
Dead right there but then I don't swear on line either. It achieves nothing
does it. Well only to set a standard that marks you out?
> Its time I left you alone in your perfect would of no neighbours
> and bye laws and the sound of leather on willow.
Agreed. Lets hope the chap sees sense and abides by the rules and does not
lose his home. But I bet his neighbours will be glad to see the back of it.
Keith Simpson
Keith
"Bill Delue" <musk...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a36143e703445b833b3...@mygate.mailgate.org...
Bill Lord
<Pete...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>why
>does he submit to the Gestapo rules of a CC site.
Since you have said that you do not use them how would you know. I use
them most of the time and to be honest don't see what you imagine
happens.
Peter
time. Also have done the odd deal with the CC in building their facilities
for them in the past. so yes I do know. But why do people use them. Its like
being on a estate. Terraced caravans. Not my sort of thing at all. Now
French municipal sites are another thing all together. No parking on the peg
and mops in the washroom. But also no kids on bikes riding round and round.
I also prefer ADULT ONLY sites. Oh now that will bring the massed ranks of
labour supporters down on me now.
--
Regards
Peter
pe...@august1946.fsnet.co.uk
"Bill Lord" <wally...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:66ta6us0psg9c6f21...@4ax.com...
frisket
"D and M" <dan...@london.cs.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.16cd1e5bc...@news.btclick.com...
> You're just going from the sublime to the ridiculous, but then perhaps
SNIP...long rant on my parentage and education
To suggest you have over-reacted to my post is an understatement. I was
trying to express an opinion but obviously in your ideal world that is not
allowed. On the planet Earth where we live a view opposed to our own does
not make the holder of the view either bad mannered or stupid. As we can see
this is not the case on planet Snob where you apparently reside with your
neighbours Hyacinth Bucket and Margot Leadbetter.
> Thankfully, you're not my neighbour.
>
> Dave.
At least we agree on something. Richard
frisket
"Jaybee" <bart...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:101312090...@eurus.uk.clara.net...
> I don't agree with you at all. If you had neighbours who let their garden
> run to rack and ruin, with several old bangers in the process of being
> spread all over the lawn, the odd sofa and mattress left dumped to rot,
all
> within your view, you'd soon get sick of that wouldn't you?
>
> I remember in the early 80's buying a new house and part of the agreement
> was that you couldn't erect a shed in the back garden for 5 years. Now
that
> was a silly rule, and few paid attention to it anyway, but the fact is
that
> we were told about it.
>
> Jayne
Sorry if my view seemed a little extreme but one of the problems with NG's
is the difficulty in getting humour across without resorting to emoticons. I
don't paint my windows strange colours and my neighbours don't abuse
hamsters (as far as I'm aware) but I do feel it's a little unfair if you
can't park your caravan on your drive especially if it's to the side or rear
of your house.
Regards, richard
Bill Lord
<a...@poggo.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>The particular covenant reads :
>>'Not on that part of the property that is between the highway and a line
>>drawn along the principal facade of the property so as to intercept the
>>boundaries of the property :
>>to permit to remain thereon any caravan or trailer or boat for a period or
>>periods exceeding in total 28 days in any period of 12 months '
>
>Which means you can leave it there for 27 days, then take it out on
>the road for a day then bring it back etc etc etc
>Though that's probably a PITA.
>
>
Sorry to disagree, but the covenant says a total of not more than 28
days in any 12 months, so if you leave it for 27 days then when you
return you have at the most 1 day to remove it and not put it back
there until a year after the first date you parked there. Sad really
that people should feel it necessary to restrict things like this but
that's life.
Does anyone know if there is any legistlation which prevents you from
parking the van on the road outside the house. If my memory serves me
right the only restriction is that in theory they could insidt upon
you showing lights to the front and rear whilst it is parked there,
but I'm not certain.
Bill Lord
<Pete...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>Terraced caravans. Not my sort of thing at all
Now this I agree with but not all CC sites are like this, and if I
come across one I do not visit it again. To be honest I see far more
privately owned sites that lokk like this than I see CC sites.
Roy
............................. But also no kids on bikes riding round and
round.
> I also prefer ADULT ONLY sites. Oh now that will bring the massed ranks of
> labour supporters down on me now.
> --
> Regards
> Peter
Not this fully paid up supporter.
Roy
Martin
> "oscarfaber" <oscar...@ic24.net> wrote in message
> news:u67k5lm...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> > As an update to my original posts, I have now received a 'notice of
> > forfeiture of lease' from my local council relating to my non-compliance
> > with the 'restrictive covenant'. This effectively requires me to move
out of
> > my home by a date in March !!! I should point out that my house is
'shared
> > ownership' whereby I own a proportion and the housing association (local
> > council) own the remainder for which I pay rent.
> >
> > The particular covenant reads :
> > 'Not on that part of the property that is between the highway and a line
> > drawn along the principal facade of the property so as to intercept the
> > boundaries of the property :
> > to permit to remain thereon any caravan or trailer or boat for a period
or
> > periods exceeding in total 28 days in any period of 12 months '
> >
line running from the front facade of your house, so covenant does not apply
if I misread your posts can you move the van to the side of the house or
behind the house, as it would appear then that you have fulfilled the terms
of your covenant. It appears to only relate to a caravan parked IN FRONT of
your house. However get yourself down to the CAB armed with a drawing of
your house surrounding road and where you park your caravan and a copy of
the covenant. Similarly get down to the housing association and talk to
someone, it may be a misunderstanding, or malicious reporting of incorrect
facts but do not just leave it to drift on. Otherwise you could find
yourself facing a repossession order, it may be worth moving the van whilst
this is sorted out. Martin
GrahamW
Are you not able to get it down the side of the house behind the
building line as described in the covenant? All they are trying to do
is stop you parking in front of the house and blocking peoples view.
Graham
Ian McFarlane
I agree with your interpretation of the 28 days in total in any year. But
the the first part of the restriction refers to a line drawn along the
principal facade of the property to the boundaries. I take that to mean that
you cannot park a caravan in front of the house which is a reasonably common
restriction but it should not prevent parking the caravan at the side. The
use of the word principal suggests to me that there can only be one facade
that meets this criteria. This would normally be, in a conventional box
shaped house the wall facing the road. So if the caravan does not stick out
in front of that wall you should be OK. If the house were on a corner I
would suggest that there can still only be one principal facade so that you
would be OK putting a caravan between say the side wall and the side road if
that was not the principle facade.
I note in an earlier post it was said that the caravan sits alongside the
garage so it might be worth questioning just what constitutes the principal
facade?
Ian
GwendolineLetley
that some people have very good constructive advise and some people just
like to be abusive and enjoy using the ng to do so.
We have just put our caravan on our front drive of our house, the neighbour
came over and complained he could not see our front window?
Why should he want to see into our front window I wonder?
He did not complain when we had our old caravan on the front of our house
for eight years, but than he could see into our front window. Now our new
caravan blocks his vision, what does this say about neighbours I wonder.
I have phoned the local council and asked where I stand on this matter and
they asked is it being used to live in, no, than you can have it on your
front drive.
I believe we should be allowed to have civil liberties in this country and
as long as I do not murder, rob, harm or cause any one else to lose their
job or rights of liberty, than what harm am I doing having the one thing
that gives my husband and I so much pleasure within eye sight.
Please can I also ask people not to let this ng to go the way of so many
others and become a board for nothing more than a abusive slanging match,
lets help each other and be nice.
Gwen
"Ian McFarlane" <imcfa...@toebigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3c670...@news.teranews.com...
oscarfaber
It is difficult to describe the layout of my property, but essentially my
house sits on the corner of a cul-de-sac with its front elevation at approx
10 o'clock i.e. facing away from the junction. I f the 'principal facade'
was my front elevation, then the location of my caravan would clearly be
outside the zone of influence. I shall be taking further advice regarding
this aspect and will keep you posted.
"Ian McFarlane" <imcfa...@toebigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3c670...@news.teranews.com...
>
oscarfaber
I would also point out that after having one expensive caravan stolen from a
'secure' commercial site compound (next to the wardens lodge), and one
awning taken down and stolen (from another site), I am not keen to store my
caravan anywhere other than my own property.
"GwendolineLetley" <let...@themill21.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a4agff$ap4$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
Bill Thomas
"GwendolineLetley" <let...@themill21.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a4agff$ap4$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> as long as I do not murder, rob, harm or cause any one else to lose their
> job or rights of liberty, than what harm am I doing having the one thing
> that gives my husband and I so much pleasure within eye sight.
I generally agree with the above but your definition of 'harm' may not be
the same as someone else's. If you are doing something that adversely
affects someone else's quality of life then you 'are' harming them. While I
personally would not object to a neighbour parking their caravan outside
their own house I can understand why some people would object. Covenants
such as the one being discussed in this thread don't get thought up just
because some planner was bored. They are usually based on past experience
of the problems that can arise if carte blanche is allowed. Civil liberties
are fine, but they should be balanced by civil responsibilities - and both
should be enforceable in law. Or does that sound unfair?.
Bill
D and M
angle...@another.com says...
> I generally agree with the above but your definition of 'harm' may not be
> the same as someone else's. If you are doing something that adversely
> affects someone else's quality of life then you 'are' harming them. While I
> personally would not object to a neighbour parking their caravan outside
> their own house I can understand why some people would object. Covenants
> such as the one being discussed in this thread don't get thought up just
> because some planner was bored. They are usually based on past experience
> of the problems that can arise if carte blanche is allowed. Civil liberties
> are fine, but they should be balanced by civil responsibilities - and both
> should be enforceable in law. Or does that sound unfair?.
> Bill
Very well said. The whole purpose for such covenants and laws is to
protect the innocent people from the 'I can do what I like' brigade.
There's nothing wrong with 'I can do what I like' except when it does
affect other people. As I said earlier in the thread, if more people
cared and had real consideration for everyone, not just themselves, then
there would be no need for such restrictions. Unfortunately, we all have
to live in the real world.
I parked our caravan on our drive for the last four years. A week before
we brought the first one home I called at every neighbour who would be
able to see it and asked if they would object. I was fully prepared for
just one to object in which case I would not have argued and would have
put it into storage. Once it was home, I then called at them all again
and asked if they wanted to change their minds. Extremely fortunately,
none of them minded in the slightest, but my point is there's no point
asking, if you're not prepared to act responsibly on the answers.
So, the alternative? Don't ask, exercise your God given right to do what
you like and potentially end up in unnecessary arguments with your
neighbours. Whether a caravan on your drive is acceptable or not is a
purely subjective argument based entirely on the emotions of each party.
Unfortunately in such a situation, there is no right and wrong -
result... who can shout the loudest? Who can throw the strongest punches?
Who has the best lawyers? etc. And all could be completely avoided with a
little care and consideration.
Now I can hear the 'I can't afford to store my caravan' people
proclaiming that that's not fair. Well, as tough as it may sound, and
this doesn't mean I'm not unsympathetic but, if you can't and you should,
then you can't afford a caravan in the first place and you should give it
up. But hang on a minute, that doesn't play fair with 'I can do what I
like'... and so on and so on...
Care and consideration folks... that's all it takes.
Regards,
Dave.
Bill Lord
wrote:
>I parked our caravan on our drive for the last four years
I have parked my van on the front by the side of the drive in a very
quiet little cul de sac for 9 years now, I did not ask my neighbours
before I put it there but because I had had to build an area to put it
o they had all become aware of what I was going to do. My next door
neighbour was not really happy with it but now has no objections. I
put it there because when I bought it I put it in storage and within
three months the van had been broken into and damaged and I was not
prepared to leave it there for more damage to be done. My attitude to
anyone stealing the van is if that's what they want then they are
going to take it, but if they do I don't want to see it again, unless
it is returned virtually immediately. That's why I insure my van, and
comply with the security the insurers demand.
Jenny and John and Brook the dog
After reading this one I think i have seeing them all up till now?,
I ask our Planning:-
Q/ Is the bye-laws the same for Parking your Caravan at your house and
Driveway in Scotland the same as in Northern Ireland and Wales and England
??,
I answer is "NO" by our planning department,
And I was told that Scotland has not got the same By-Laws as England and
Wales and Northern Ireland on Parking a Caravan at your home in Scotland as
the rest of the UK ?,
Each area of Scotland has it own Bye-Laws?,
So if you stay in Scotland then ask your Planning Department about your
area,
"BUT" it is the same law for all of us in the UK if you left your caravan
"PARKED" on the road out side you home or a la-bye all the time?,(it will be
towed away if left on the queens Hi-ways i was told )
Then why can it not be the same bye-laws for all of us?, As it is all the
"ONE" U.K ?.
(our is it???)
Yours
Jenny and John and Brook the dog
"GwendolineLetley" <let...@themill21.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a4agff$ap4$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
Jan
wrote:
> I have parked my van on the front by the side of the drive in a very
> quiet little cul de sac for 9 years now, I did not ask my neighbours
> before I put it there but because I had had to build an area to put it
> o they had all become aware of what I was going to do.
That seems to be a remarkably selfish approach. In fact it is exactly
the approach that Dave suggested we should try strenuously to avoid.
I'm glad you aren't one of my neighbours. I think I'd be a lot happier
to be one of Dave's.
--
Best regards,
Jan
Ian McFarlane
> You have highlighted the, seemingly, only practical argument in my favour.
> It is difficult to describe the layout of my property, but essentially my
> house sits on the corner of a cul-de-sac with its front elevation at
approx
> 10 o'clock i.e. facing away from the junction. I f the 'principal facade'
> was my front elevation, then the location of my caravan would clearly be
> outside the zone of influence. I shall be taking further advice regarding
> this aspect and will keep you posted.
>
Glad to be of help and I must say I like to think that helping each other is
the purpose of this newsgroup and not just taking the opportunity to throw
abuse at those we disagree with.
Unless your house is of a very unusual design then I would argue that the
principle facade is the main elevation and the fact that the house may be
set at an unusual angle to the road does not alter that fact. The wording of
the restriction is designed to prevent the parking of a caravan in front of
the house. There can only be one front and the fact that parking the caravan
to the side may make it more visible to others does not alter that.
If I was in your position I would send them (the council or whoever is
threatening you) a plan of your house and garden, indicating the front
elevation as the principle facade, drawing the line along that to the
boundaries. Mark on the plan the position of the caravan, which sounds to me
as behind this line, and ask them to explain why therefore they believe you
are in breach of the rule. It may well be that some inexperienced official
has not understood what the principal facade is. If that does not convince
them ask them to suggest which they think the principal facade is and see
where that leaves you as to suitable parking, you might find an alternative
that they will be happy with and if not you can always disagree and stick to
the argument that the front elevation must be the principal facade.
Good luck,
Ian
(to reply direct remove the TOE from BIGFOOT)
Bill Lord
>That seems to be a remarkably selfish approach. In fact it is exactly
>the approach that Dave suggested we should try strenuously to avoid.
If you read my message you would see that initially I stored it to
avoid the problem, all my neighbours were aware of what I was doing
and all came and talked about it. But they could all see a badly
damaged van sitting there and everyone understood that putting the van
there was second choice. After a very short time not a single on was
in the least upset by it, what I said was that I didn't ask permission
which is a lot different from not talking to people about it. If
someone had come with really strong objections and some other solution
I would have been quite willing to give it a try. It was not a selfish
decision simply Hobsons choice.
Gwen Letley
shame that people can not openly discuss a topic without being abusive to
each other.
We are all caravaners, we are the people who are supposed to enjoy life
touring in our vans and meeting other people with the same like.
But if we cannot discuss and help each other on the NG with out getting
abusive, than what are we becoming. I always say to new caravanners, you
can always ask for help from another caravaner because that's the sort of
people we are, but are we?
We don't live in a perfect world, but let's keep caravanning friendly, and
even if we don't agree with other, at least let's be civil about it.
Gwen
"Ian McFarlane" <imcfa...@toebigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3c6ad...@news.teranews.com...
Peter
with a large piece of heavy-duty green plastic covering just the front
half of the van, including the front windows. So perhaps he couldn't get
a large enough piece, just as Kev warns about. It went up and over the
van, covering about half the roof. It was windy yesterday and this set
me to thinking that the flapping plastic must surely be marking the van
roof and sides.<<
Saw this on another post but it sums up my view re this subject. Bad enough
having to look at a van sitting outside your neighbours house but covered on
a bit of green flapping plastic making a row is another problem.
Peter.
Gary R.
Seriously, I think the only problem comes when your property deeds have
covenants protecting your neighbours. My deeds specifically stop me storing
a caravan on my drive. This was pointed out to me when I purchased the house
and was not negotiable. I spoke to my new neighbours who all have similar
covenants. They had no objections to my van, (one of them also stores his
van on his drive). My van has been there for six years now but the important
thing is that my neighbours are all aware that I sought their approval
first. Any new neighbours would be entitled to object and I would have no
choice but to comply with the covenant in my deeds if they chose to take
action.
I am considering moving my van to a storage site as we were recently burgled
while away in the van. I think that the absence of the van on the drive drew
attention to the empty house.
Like Gwen I am surprised at the tone of some posts in this ng. I am sure
that we would not be so rude face to face, would we? Perhaps we should post
our car registration numbers so we can be rude to each other in person when
we are washing up on site.
Yours in a caring, caravanning sort of way
Gary.
"GwendolineLetley" <let...@themill21.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a4agff$ap4$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
mhlife
"Gary R." <gw_ru...@NOSPAM.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1mtb8.44179$YA2.6...@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...
Perhaps we should post
> our car registration numbers so we can be rude to each other in person
when
> we are washing up on site.
__________________
Excellent idea!
I'll go first... TRO 1L
moggymiaow
on the drive - on ne side they have a van on their drive twice the side of
mine, on the other, well they would have objected , but then he objected
when I decided to paint my house window frames brown rather than cream, and
in fact he objected when I painted my dining rooms chairs pink and had one
outside for a couple of hours whilst standing on it, and he objected when I
hadn't swept half a dozen leaves from my drive. and he didn't like..... etc
etc you get the picture.
Kat
"Bill Lord" <wally...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:mvsl6uo5p5ro97cmd...@4ax.com...
Mary Fisher
> It is difficult to describe the layout of my property, but essentially my
> house sits on the corner of a cul-de-sac with its front elevation at
approx
> 10 o'clock i.e. facing away from the junction. I f the 'principal facade'
> was my front elevation, then the location of my caravan would clearly be
> outside the zone of influence. I shall be taking further advice regarding
> this aspect and will keep you posted.
I've only just seen this thread and read your contributions and the replies
of posters I know.
While I can't offer any help or advice I do hope that your problem is
resolved satisfactorily and soon. Yours is a nightmare situation, I'm sure
that we all feel for you.
Do let us know what happens. It's not curiosity, but your experience might
well be relevant to others in the future.
I'm moving your posts to a personal folder in case this question arises
again.
Warmest wishes,
Mary>
Bill Delue
How is the fight going?
I hope you are winning?
Keep us updated.
Bill Delue
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
oscarfaber
I have taken the issue up with a solicitor, who tells me that I have a
reasonable case. This is only due to the unique orientation of my house
which technically puts my drive (where the caravan is parked) behind my
'principle facade' line.
I have also written back to the leaseholder (local council) attaching a plan
of my property marked up with the above restrictive zone, asking precisely
why they feel I am in contravention. I have received no response to date.
In order to protect my position, I have moved the caravan into storage
pending the outcome of the above.
If the council do not agree with my interpretation, I have to decide whether
to risk the costs associated with the legal proceedings that would follow.
Unfortunately, the outcome of my situation is probably not helpful to the
majority of caravan owners in similar situations, as it seems most unlikely
that the terms of a restrictive covenant would be changed, and it only takes
one individual to complain to the leaseholder to trigger the events that I
have experienced. The leaseholder in my case have stated (informally) that
they would not have taken any action against me if they had not received a
complaint.
I'll keep you posted of any further development.
"Bill Delue" <musk...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:56ddf22c6ed87cfbdf2...@mygate.mailgate.org...
Bill Delue
Thanks for the update and I hope you succeed in your quest.
Bill Delue
Ps Don'I would love to see the face of the complainer when you win and
return the caravan!
have a camara ready
oscarfaber
My immediate neighbours swear that it was not them, and that they have no
problem with my caravan.news:044a8933dcb75f38c37...@mygate.mailgate.org...
Bill Delue
Bill
"oscarfaber" <oscar...@ic24.net> wrote in message
> If only I knew who it was !!