Options
Gypsies. planning, councils?
oldhag
Posts: 2,539 Forum Member
✭✭✭
The only people who have been able to get planning in my area are gypsies. I have four sites within 200yds and now they've asked for planning for another six/twelve family homes on their field next door. The council are going to allow this I believe.
Several planning applications, by non-gysies, have been turned down on this same road for ONE static caravan to be used as a dwelling. Yet the gypsies get permission for six statics (more like huge chalets) and six touring caravans (lived in ) per plot of land.
Anyone any clue what's going on?
Several planning applications, by non-gysies, have been turned down on this same road for ONE static caravan to be used as a dwelling. Yet the gypsies get permission for six statics (more like huge chalets) and six touring caravans (lived in ) per plot of land.
Anyone any clue what's going on?
0
Comments
No but I'll give you a fiver for your house.
Cher's pimped her song.
Apparently, nationally there is a 10% chance that a person will be given retrospective planning permission for a building that they've already erected.
Within the gypsy community that rises to an 80% chance.
Just saying...
I saw that one of the main opponents of the dale farm eviction is now so fed up with the state of the site now, he's threatening to GIVE his land to the gypsies and move abroad - and he owns enough land in Basildon to give them a site much bigger than Dale Farm ever was.
Yes I think that's the problem. But they aren't scared to stand up to us non-gypsies. We could be more powerful if we'd stick together like they do. Obviously they are going to end up owning all of this area.
i think that's actually not a bad idea. if you could galvanize all the land owners in the immediate area together you could, for all intents and purpose, form some kind of collective or even hypothetical union.
I might not necessarily make a lot of difference, but i would have thought it would be better to have the collective power of many behind you rather than just one or two.
Not really sure what that'd achieve TBH.
I might be wrong but I get the impression that most of these "trouble spots" are actually public or local-authority land rather than privately owned land so I'm not sure what private citizens grouping together might achieve.
....unless you're suggesting we form up into pitchfork-wielding mobs?
Nah, the pitchfork mobs are reserved for DS
You probably wouldn't achieve much, if anything, to be fair - it was just a thought along the lines of 'strength in numbers', since the gypsies seem to operate under the same principle.
Helps to offset the cost when your shed gets kicked in and everything looted from it a week later
It's only the gypsies who quote these percentages. Councils throughout the land give in as they can't afford to fight.
They charge us double! They don't do favours for anyone.
Yes, one law for them. Totally different one for the settled community.
For example, if a non traveller had built a house without planning permission, it wouldn't have lasted a fraction of the time those illegal traveller dwellings on Crays Hill, lasted.
If we did that the fire would be put out and we'd be charged with arson and causing a public nuisance. But oh no not them! The fire brigade didn't dare put the fire out and were advised by the police not to or they risked a lynching !
Not even a caution was given. :mad:
Yip. Gypsies Tramps and Thieves, they live up to their name around where I stay!
So at night all the men will go around?
Yes, and did you really need that pedigree pet?
Interesting statistic. Where does it come from?
a planning application by the council appears set to be forced through to satisfy this 'demand',
despite strong local opposition including from members of the showman's guild who have a site across the road
in the same area the waiting list for social housing is in four figures
one wonders is this really an equitable use of public funds
It doesn't make me wonder - it makes me bloody furious!