Jump to content

[BBC News] Clarkson path inquiry under way


Recommended Posts

Personally, I am against any removal of rights of way, even when they are apparently fairly trivial, as in this case. If a precedent is established that people can tamper with rights of way at will, then I think that will be bad for the island.

 

As I understand it, he's not trying to have a right of way removed. His case is that there is no right of way. It's an important distinction.

 

 

Exactly.

 

As taken from the original Article in post one ;)

 

It centres on whether there is an established public right of way south-east of his property at Langness.

 

Mr Clarkson's representative said there had never been any rights of way across the land but opponents said people had been using paths there for decades.

 

Not being resident, I haven't commented on this topic, but have followed it since its commencement.

 

The outcome will be very interesting to say the least, and the debate that follows is likely to be even better :D

 

Kev

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 489
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

He probably actually said "Who dares wins".

Posted Images

There are some, however, who are directly affected by the changes which have been made at Langness who are not in favour of what is happening now, regardless of who owns the land.

 

 

Who can be affected apart from the Clasrksons? The loss of a very small part of a scenic walk can't be life changiing can it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
There are some, however, who are directly affected by the changes which have been made at Langness who are not in favour of what is happening now, regardless of who owns the land.

 

 

Who can be affected apart from the Clasrksons? The loss of a very small part of a scenic walk can't be life changiing can it?

 

Anyone who uses the area and whose route has been changed by the closure of a small section has been affected. I didn't say it was life-changing, things can affect you without changing your life. It rained a bit last night and the washing I'd left out got wet - that has affected me, but hasn't changed my life. Also, whilst acknowledging there are those who have been affected by the changes at Langness, I was in no way criticising the route alteration nor expressing any support for PROWL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you ashamed of people trying to protect rights of way? Is it what they are doing, or how they are doing it?

S

Purely because of the motivation behind this particular movement - which I still believe was started out of personal animosity rather than any duty to protect rights - and also they way they are doing it.

 

And the merits of the case? Or are there none, in your view?

S

 

If Mr and Mrs C had closed off the whole of their land I may, as someone who makes use of it, feel this was unreasonable and therefore be reacting differently. However, what they have done, to put it simply, is said please continue to enjoy making use of what is private land, but could you please divert behind a building, rather than in front of it (or in front of it rather than behind it depending on your point of view).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you ashamed of people trying to protect rights of way? Is it what they are doing, or how they are doing it?

S

Purely because of the motivation behind this particular movement - which I still believe was started out of personal animosity rather than any duty to protect rights - and also they way they are doing it.

 

And the merits of the case? Or are there none, in your view?

S

 

If Mr and Mrs C had closed off the whole of their land I may, as someone who makes use of it, feel this was unreasonable and therefore be reacting differently. However, what they have done, to put it simply, is said please continue to enjoy making use of what is private land, but could you please divert behind a building, rather than in front of it (or in front of it rather than behind it depending on your point of view).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you ashamed of people trying to protect rights of way? Is it what they are doing, or how they are doing it?

S

Purely because of the motivation behind this particular movement - which I still believe was started out of personal animosity rather than any duty to protect rights - and also they way they are doing it.

 

And the merits of the case? Or are there none, in your view?

S

 

If Mr and Mrs C had closed off the whole of their land I may, as someone who makes use of it, feel this was unreasonable and therefore be reacting differently. However, what they have done, to put it simply, is said please continue to enjoy making use of what is private land, but could you please divert behind a building, rather than in front of it (or in front of it rather than behind it depending on your point of view).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you ashamed of people trying to protect rights of way? Is it what they are doing, or how they are doing it?

S

Purely because of the motivation behind this particular movement - which I still believe was started out of personal animosity rather than any duty to protect rights - and also they way they are doing it.

 

And the merits of the case? Or are there none, in your view?

S

 

If Mr and Mrs C had closed off the whole of their land I may, as someone who makes use of it, feel this was unreasonable and therefore be reacting differently. However, what they have done, to put it simply, is said please continue to enjoy making use of what is private land, but could you please divert behind a building, rather than in front of it (or in front of it rather than behind it depending on your point of view).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The hotel and course have already been run down - speak to any player/ex member - he has already put in for planning permission for large accomodation which I think was refused - an 'executive' housing estate initially with views of a golf course would sell well (I wonder where the idea came from ?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

People have walked across the golf course for many, many years and there is no doubt in my mind that there are rights of way over it. Mind you, I think that PROWL would have a tougher job arguing against that particular "popular" owner who has allowed the hotel to become a shadow of itself (for what purpose?) and who has tried variously for planning permission for a mansion and, oops, then a housing estate possibly to recoup the money he spent buying the hotel and course?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the late 1800s there was much concern in Castletown regarding landowners closing down/diverting/blocking footpaths and public rights of way in the area. Further to a requisition, a meeting was convened by the High Bailiff at the time, and the Castletown Association for the Protection of Footpaths and Bye-ways was formed.

 

I suppose it was all not dissimilar to today's situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As I understand it, he's not trying to have a right of way removed. His case is that there is no right of way. It's an important distinction.

 

He claims it's not a ROW, but not everybody agrees. Until he proves it's not a ROW, it is best to assume that it is.

 

S

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...