Weymouth rescue centre operators fined over land use

IN COURT: Darren Hunt at the Pirates Cove Animal Rescue Centre

IN COURT: Darren Hunt at the Pirates Cove Animal Rescue Centre

First published in News Dorset Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Trainee Reporter

OPERATORS of a former animal rescue centre in Weymouth have been fined for breaching enforcement notices after a long-running dispute over land they own.

Father and son John and Darren Hunt, who operated Pirates Cove Birds of Prey and Animal Rescue Centre in Wyke Regis appeared at Weymouth Magistrates Court.

Both pleaded guilty earlier this month to breaching a notice issued on March 2, 2011, by West Dorset District Council that involved failing to stop using the land as a rescue centre.

As part of this notice, both men were asked to stop using the land for keeping birds of prey and to remove the structures holding them by December 25, 2012.

They were also required to stop using the land for residential occupation, to remove caravans from the land and any furnishings installed inside the barn.

In addition to this charge, John Hunt pleaded guilty to breaching another enforcement notice issued on the same date.

He admitted to failing to remove a timber building from the land, as well as dismantling and removing a wind turbine.

Helen Gardner, representing West Dorset District Council, provided district judge Stephen Nicholls with photos of the site.

She said: “It’s been more than 15 months since the site should have been cleared.”

Ms Gardner said the council had been unable to resolve the matter ‘informally’ and that the defendants had shown a lack of cooperation with the council during its investigation.

The pair appeared at court unrepresented.

Darren Hunt told he the court he knew he had ‘done wrong’ but suggested legal advice in the past had persuaded him not to act.

He said: “Obviously the advice I did get now I see was wrong.”

He added that the timber building and wind turbine were in the process of being removed and that the land was no longer being used as a place of residence.

Before sentencing, district judge Stephen Nicholls said this was a case that had gone for on for a number of years and had gone through various stages of the legal process. Both men were each given a £250 fine and ordered to pay costs of £300 towards the prosecution with regards to the first breach.

A victim surcharge of £25 was also issued.

Meanwhile, John Hunt received a £100 fine for the second enforcement notice he breached.

Summing up, Mr Nicholls said: “I considered these fines in respect of your financial situation.”

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:59am Tue 15 Apr 14

weydiva says...

absolutely disgusting! Somebody is doing something good and they put a stop to it. I enjoy walking through pirates lane to the beach and seeing the animals and birds happily milling around in there. What would the council prefer? caravans and tents? such a shame.
absolutely disgusting! Somebody is doing something good and they put a stop to it. I enjoy walking through pirates lane to the beach and seeing the animals and birds happily milling around in there. What would the council prefer? caravans and tents? such a shame. weydiva
  • Score: 39

10:11am Tue 15 Apr 14

Dog lover 11111 says...

I just walked by the gate
With the dogs at pirates lane
And there is a sign on the gate
Saying
' LAND for SALE '

So all the land is now up for sale in plots
and barns
and all the buildings
from £50

At this price the plots
may have lots of new owners

It says on the gate
' you can by land with full freehold title deeds from the land registry '

Maybe its time to buy a plot
as
all the local land
is being fenced off
and built on with tenting and holiday camps

I just heard
the council has spent
10's of thousands pounds
to shut down THIS
a family funded for FREE animal and wildlife rescue service

Does anybody remember Mr Hunt rescuing a stag-deer
in the children's infants school in Wyke Regis

he saved the children from being hurt and Released the stag Over the fleet nature reserve

I was told when this happened
that Mr Hunt had blood pouring out of his head because of the deer horns

the police would not turn up or the RSPCA for health and safety reasons

This beggars belief that the council have now shut him down

Mr hunt has had to stop Visiting hospitals
where children are dying and hospices with older people dying
with his animals

because
Westdorset and WEYMOUTH COUNCIL have classed
this as an illegal activity and planning breach

THE COUNCILS
HAVE GONE MAD

It's a sad day

You've only got a look at all the closed shops
in Weymouth town centre
because
of business rates etc ....

with a council
like this running free
And
Just lining Their own pockets full of expenses etc ....

It's about time the public voted
and changed and got new people into THE council
to bring WEYMOUTH back to how it used to be

proud and beautiful
I just walked by the gate With the dogs at pirates lane And there is a sign on the gate Saying ' LAND for SALE ' So all the land is now up for sale in plots and barns and all the buildings from £50 At this price the plots may have lots of new owners It says on the gate ' you can by land with full freehold title deeds from the land registry ' Maybe its time to buy a plot as all the local land is being fenced off and built on with tenting and holiday camps I just heard the council has spent 10's of thousands pounds to shut down THIS a family funded for FREE animal and wildlife rescue service Does anybody remember Mr Hunt rescuing a stag-deer in the children's infants school in Wyke Regis he saved the children from being hurt and Released the stag Over the fleet nature reserve I was told when this happened that Mr Hunt had blood pouring out of his head because of the deer horns the police would not turn up or the RSPCA for health and safety reasons This beggars belief that the council have now shut him down Mr hunt has had to stop Visiting hospitals where children are dying and hospices with older people dying with his animals because Westdorset and WEYMOUTH COUNCIL have classed this as an illegal activity and planning breach THE COUNCILS HAVE GONE MAD It's a sad day You've only got a look at all the closed shops in Weymouth town centre because of business rates etc .... with a council like this running free And Just lining Their own pockets full of expenses etc .... It's about time the public voted and changed and got new people into THE council to bring WEYMOUTH back to how it used to be proud and beautiful Dog lover 11111
  • Score: 46

10:37am Tue 15 Apr 14

ducatiwidow says...

appalling misuse of the taxpayers money as usual. What harm was there in having rescued birds of prey there? The land wasn't being used for commercial gain, and shock horror a wind turbine!! I thought we were all supposed to be looking for ways to be eco, green and save fossil fuels. I wish both Darren and his father the best of luck in whatever they do in the future.
appalling misuse of the taxpayers money as usual. What harm was there in having rescued birds of prey there? The land wasn't being used for commercial gain, and shock horror a wind turbine!! I thought we were all supposed to be looking for ways to be eco, green and save fossil fuels. I wish both Darren and his father the best of luck in whatever they do in the future. ducatiwidow
  • Score: 33

10:48am Tue 15 Apr 14

portlandboy says...

The council win a case! But what have they actually won?
They have succeded in preventing a very respectable family from performing a very honourable task. I have no doubt that in any other part of Britain, these people would have been nominated for an award for their work. But here the councils joined forces to find a way of prosecuting them for saving many animals over many years, simply because of a breach of planning regs.
I fully accept that they did breach the 'rules' yet they have been hounded and taken to court by the very same department who didn't have the sense or ability to draw up a local plan which could have prevented 100's of houses being built on town greens and open spaces.
It is shameful that the planning department's legal team wanted the FULL PENALTY of £20,000 PER CHARGE to be imposed on these two people, but it shows the ineptitude within the WDDC & WPBC legal teams who can only win easy battles,while spending £1,000's of tax payers money over a number of years to do so.
I have known Darren and John for some 40 years and I can say that, without a doubt, the area they own(ed) at Pirate's Cove will be far worse off without their presence. ..and so will the local wildlife.
A sad day indeed.
The council win a case! But what have they actually won? They have succeded in preventing a very respectable family from performing a very honourable task. I have no doubt that in any other part of Britain, these people would have been nominated for an award for their work. But here the councils joined forces to find a way of prosecuting them for saving many animals over many years, simply because of a breach of planning regs. I fully accept that they did breach the 'rules' yet they have been hounded and taken to court by the very same department who didn't have the sense or ability to draw up a local plan which could have prevented 100's of houses being built on town greens and open spaces. It is shameful that the planning department's legal team wanted the FULL PENALTY of £20,000 PER CHARGE to be imposed on these two people, but it shows the ineptitude within the WDDC & WPBC legal teams who can only win easy battles,while spending £1,000's of tax payers money over a number of years to do so. I have known Darren and John for some 40 years and I can say that, without a doubt, the area they own(ed) at Pirate's Cove will be far worse off without their presence. ..and so will the local wildlife. A sad day indeed. portlandboy
  • Score: 35

10:55am Tue 15 Apr 14

portlandboy says...

Just a note on the report.
The judges decision of the level of the fines imposed is based on the defendants financial situation. What is not made clear is that they have spent vast sums of their own money on medical needs and the food for the animals that they have rescued over the years. That is the reason for their current lack of funds. Only a well-meaning genuine person would spend their life savings on such things, yet the planning department see them as fully-fledged criminals and tried to present that view to the court!
Just a note on the report. The judges decision of the level of the fines imposed is based on the defendants financial situation. What is not made clear is that they have spent vast sums of their own money on medical needs and the food for the animals that they have rescued over the years. That is the reason for their current lack of funds. Only a well-meaning genuine person would spend their life savings on such things, yet the planning department see them as fully-fledged criminals and tried to present that view to the court! portlandboy
  • Score: 36

11:26am Tue 15 Apr 14

Dorset Mitch says...

So it is ok for certain members of the community who travel around with caravans to turn up where they like and live without permission, cause misery to the locals and the council don't do anything or give them land to stay on.

Also it is ok (for the council) for a wind farm to be built off the Dorset coast?!?

Why not work with the pair to make the rescue centre official?
So it is ok for certain members of the community who travel around with caravans to turn up where they like and live without permission, cause misery to the locals and the council don't do anything or give them land to stay on. Also it is ok (for the council) for a wind farm to be built off the Dorset coast?!? Why not work with the pair to make the rescue centre official? Dorset Mitch
  • Score: 34

11:37am Tue 15 Apr 14

portlandboy says...

Dorset Mitch wrote:
So it is ok for certain members of the community who travel around with caravans to turn up where they like and live without permission, cause misery to the locals and the council don't do anything or give them land to stay on.

Also it is ok (for the council) for a wind farm to be built off the Dorset coast?!?

Why not work with the pair to make the rescue centre official?
Given that the land will now have open access, it is highly likely that the next influx of travellers will pitch up there. And so will the next ones...and the next...
[quote][p][bold]Dorset Mitch[/bold] wrote: So it is ok for certain members of the community who travel around with caravans to turn up where they like and live without permission, cause misery to the locals and the council don't do anything or give them land to stay on. Also it is ok (for the council) for a wind farm to be built off the Dorset coast?!? Why not work with the pair to make the rescue centre official?[/p][/quote]Given that the land will now have open access, it is highly likely that the next influx of travellers will pitch up there. And so will the next ones...and the next... portlandboy
  • Score: 19

1:24pm Tue 15 Apr 14

livid99 says...

portlandboy wrote:
Just a note on the report.
The judges decision of the level of the fines imposed is based on the defendants financial situation. What is not made clear is that they have spent vast sums of their own money on medical needs and the food for the animals that they have rescued over the years. That is the reason for their current lack of funds. Only a well-meaning genuine person would spend their life savings on such things, yet the planning department see them as fully-fledged criminals and tried to present that view to the court!
This sad tale just proves what we all already know - WDDC & WPBC have absolutely no idea what to do to HELP the local communities they are supposed to look after. They do no good at all. The members of the council responsible for hounding the owners and then closing down this caring and valuable centre should be named so that the public can clearly see who in this case are caring and who is heartless.
To prosecute these good samaritans for running a centre which does some good, rare enough in these days, just shows the council is run by heartless, incompetent cretins who are slaves to the God of rules and beaurocracy.
RIP Weymouth
[quote][p][bold]portlandboy[/bold] wrote: Just a note on the report. The judges decision of the level of the fines imposed is based on the defendants financial situation. What is not made clear is that they have spent vast sums of their own money on medical needs and the food for the animals that they have rescued over the years. That is the reason for their current lack of funds. Only a well-meaning genuine person would spend their life savings on such things, yet the planning department see them as fully-fledged criminals and tried to present that view to the court![/p][/quote]This sad tale just proves what we all already know - WDDC & WPBC have absolutely no idea what to do to HELP the local communities they are supposed to look after. They do no good at all. The members of the council responsible for hounding the owners and then closing down this caring and valuable centre should be named so that the public can clearly see who in this case are caring and who is heartless. To prosecute these good samaritans for running a centre which does some good, rare enough in these days, just shows the council is run by heartless, incompetent cretins who are slaves to the God of rules and beaurocracy. RIP Weymouth livid99
  • Score: 23

1:45pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Dog lover 11111 says...

If you want to complain as I just have
To the boss of the council


I googled email address for
The chief executive David Clarke

d.clarke@westdorset-
weymouth.gov.uk
If you want to complain as I just have To the boss of the council I googled email address for The chief executive David Clarke d.clarke@westdorset- weymouth.gov.uk Dog lover 11111
  • Score: 16

2:08pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Workingfulltime&Skint says...

Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.
Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe. Workingfulltime&Skint
  • Score: 27

2:41pm Tue 15 Apr 14

livid99 says...

Workingfulltime&
Skint
wrote:
Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.
Yes, sounds like a personal vendetta by fekwitted useless jobsworths against someone who is actually doing something useful and worthwhile.
[quote][p][bold]Workingfulltime& Skint[/bold] wrote: Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.[/p][/quote]Yes, sounds like a personal vendetta by fekwitted useless jobsworths against someone who is actually doing something useful and worthwhile. livid99
  • Score: 24

4:34pm Tue 15 Apr 14

portlandboy says...

Workingfulltime&
Skint
wrote:
Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.
A personal vendetta indeed. I can say with much confidence that this particular vendetta was initiated by one Doug Hollings before he passed away. It is a vendetta that has been carried on in his name ever since.
Whatever the cost, financially or otherwise, they got their man and now they're happy.
But what price will the area pay as a result of this?
[quote][p][bold]Workingfulltime& Skint[/bold] wrote: Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.[/p][/quote]A personal vendetta indeed. I can say with much confidence that this particular vendetta was initiated by one Doug Hollings before he passed away. It is a vendetta that has been carried on in his name ever since. Whatever the cost, financially or otherwise, they got their man and now they're happy. But what price will the area pay as a result of this? portlandboy
  • Score: 21

7:28pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

portlandboy wrote:
Workingfulltime&

Skint
wrote:
Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.
A personal vendetta indeed. I can say with much confidence that this particular vendetta was initiated by one Doug Hollings before he passed away. It is a vendetta that has been carried on in his name ever since.
Whatever the cost, financially or otherwise, they got their man and now they're happy.
But what price will the area pay as a result of this?
I suspect it had as much to do with living on the land without proper planning for residential use? I know a few people the same sort of thing has happened too.
[quote][p][bold]portlandboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Workingfulltime& Skint[/bold] wrote: Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.[/p][/quote]A personal vendetta indeed. I can say with much confidence that this particular vendetta was initiated by one Doug Hollings before he passed away. It is a vendetta that has been carried on in his name ever since. Whatever the cost, financially or otherwise, they got their man and now they're happy. But what price will the area pay as a result of this?[/p][/quote]I suspect it had as much to do with living on the land without proper planning for residential use? I know a few people the same sort of thing has happened too. Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 13

7:30pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

"A victim surcharge of £25 was also issued."

Another ruse to extort money from people by the establishment.
"A victim surcharge of £25 was also issued." Another ruse to extort money from people by the establishment. Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 14

8:28pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Harpya Orkinus says...

Well, I'm VERY happy to be able to say that I agree with ALL the comments above, for once. I believe I met the youngster once, some years ago - I THINK he had a bird in the local library (or am I dreaming ??!!), and got into conversation with him about the charm of birds..
Well, I'm VERY happy to be able to say that I agree with ALL the comments above, for once. I believe I met the youngster once, some years ago - I THINK he had a bird in the local library (or am I dreaming ??!!), and got into conversation with him about the charm of birds.. Harpya Orkinus
  • Score: 11

9:34pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Dog lover 11111 says...

This beggars believe :-(

Mr hunt picking up litter and told off
By the council

http://youtu.be/yT1b
UUrJCH0
This beggars believe :-( Mr hunt picking up litter and told off By the council http://youtu.be/yT1b UUrJCH0 Dog lover 11111
  • Score: 11

10:15pm Tue 15 Apr 14

portland rebel says...

I really want to comment, but its all been already said, once again we pay for this pathetic excuse for a council, to waste our money, being so petty against the sort of people that are doing something that they should really be supporting in their deed........but our plastic politicians think they are gods.

so sorry guys.
I really want to comment, but its all been already said, once again we pay for this pathetic excuse for a council, to waste our money, being so petty against the sort of people that are doing something that they should really be supporting in their deed........but our plastic politicians think they are gods. so sorry guys. portland rebel
  • Score: 15

9:30am Wed 16 Apr 14

portlandboy says...

Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
portlandboy wrote:
Workingfulltime&


Skint
wrote:
Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.
A personal vendetta indeed. I can say with much confidence that this particular vendetta was initiated by one Doug Hollings before he passed away. It is a vendetta that has been carried on in his name ever since.
Whatever the cost, financially or otherwise, they got their man and now they're happy.
But what price will the area pay as a result of this?
I suspect it had as much to do with living on the land without proper planning for residential use? I know a few people the same sort of thing has happened too.
Yes, the case has been taken to court on the grounds of using the field for a dwelling, along with having a barn and caged enclosure used as a shelter for the rescued animals.
However, what seems difficult to understand is the council's lack of acceptance of the owners request to use the land for such purposes, when there is a very well established static caravan park (mobile homes) on the land to either side of theirs. That makes the council's pursuance of this case rather odd to say the least.
[quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]portlandboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Workingfulltime& Skint[/bold] wrote: Not so long ago the council were complaining about Mr Hunt, recked he was breaking somekind of law by picking up other peoples litter in pirates lane and putting it in a bin, that just happened to be a council bin. How ridiculous, atleast someone was taking the trouble to pick up the litter, don't see the council cleaning up the lane. Personal vendetta I believe.[/p][/quote]A personal vendetta indeed. I can say with much confidence that this particular vendetta was initiated by one Doug Hollings before he passed away. It is a vendetta that has been carried on in his name ever since. Whatever the cost, financially or otherwise, they got their man and now they're happy. But what price will the area pay as a result of this?[/p][/quote]I suspect it had as much to do with living on the land without proper planning for residential use? I know a few people the same sort of thing has happened too.[/p][/quote]Yes, the case has been taken to court on the grounds of using the field for a dwelling, along with having a barn and caged enclosure used as a shelter for the rescued animals. However, what seems difficult to understand is the council's lack of acceptance of the owners request to use the land for such purposes, when there is a very well established static caravan park (mobile homes) on the land to either side of theirs. That makes the council's pursuance of this case rather odd to say the least. portlandboy
  • Score: 10

11:44am Wed 16 Apr 14

Dog lover 11111 says...

There is to holiday camps one either side of the rescue centre that was

Both of these holiday camps are within a few hundred metres either way of the land at Pirates Cove

After looking at the land details of both of these holiday camps on the Internet this morning

They are both triple SSSI Registered to protect the land yet they have two holiday camps on these plots of land
Either side of the once rescue centre

So the annals and wildlife of dorset
Lose
There is to holiday camps one either side of the rescue centre that was Both of these holiday camps are within a few hundred metres either way of the land at Pirates Cove After looking at the land details of both of these holiday camps on the Internet this morning They are both triple SSSI Registered to protect the land yet they have two holiday camps on these plots of land Either side of the once rescue centre So the annals and wildlife of dorset Lose Dog lover 11111
  • Score: 4

7:19pm Wed 16 Apr 14

Dog lover 11111 says...

Duck

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=PIyJAydna
uQ
Duck http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=PIyJAydna uQ Dog lover 11111
  • Score: 2

1:05pm Mon 21 Apr 14

JamesYoung says...

portlandboy wrote:
The council win a case! But what have they actually won?
They have succeded in preventing a very respectable family from performing a very honourable task. I have no doubt that in any other part of Britain, these people would have been nominated for an award for their work. But here the councils joined forces to find a way of prosecuting them for saving many animals over many years, simply because of a breach of planning regs.
I fully accept that they did breach the 'rules' yet they have been hounded and taken to court by the very same department who didn't have the sense or ability to draw up a local plan which could have prevented 100's of houses being built on town greens and open spaces.
It is shameful that the planning department's legal team wanted the FULL PENALTY of £20,000 PER CHARGE to be imposed on these two people, but it shows the ineptitude within the WDDC & WPBC legal teams who can only win easy battles,while spending £1,000's of tax payers money over a number of years to do so.
I have known Darren and John for some 40 years and I can say that, without a doubt, the area they own(ed) at Pirate's Cove will be far worse off without their presence. ..and so will the local wildlife.
A sad day indeed.
And presumably the two fellows concerned, now deprived of a home, will end up on a council house waiting list.
Idiotic judgement.
[quote][p][bold]portlandboy[/bold] wrote: The council win a case! But what have they actually won? They have succeded in preventing a very respectable family from performing a very honourable task. I have no doubt that in any other part of Britain, these people would have been nominated for an award for their work. But here the councils joined forces to find a way of prosecuting them for saving many animals over many years, simply because of a breach of planning regs. I fully accept that they did breach the 'rules' yet they have been hounded and taken to court by the very same department who didn't have the sense or ability to draw up a local plan which could have prevented 100's of houses being built on town greens and open spaces. It is shameful that the planning department's legal team wanted the FULL PENALTY of £20,000 PER CHARGE to be imposed on these two people, but it shows the ineptitude within the WDDC & WPBC legal teams who can only win easy battles,while spending £1,000's of tax payers money over a number of years to do so. I have known Darren and John for some 40 years and I can say that, without a doubt, the area they own(ed) at Pirate's Cove will be far worse off without their presence. ..and so will the local wildlife. A sad day indeed.[/p][/quote]And presumably the two fellows concerned, now deprived of a home, will end up on a council house waiting list. Idiotic judgement. JamesYoung
  • Score: 2

3:12pm Tue 22 Apr 14

martie1673 says...

I am in agreement with the council’s enforcement of a decision made twelve months ago. Mr Hunt is a wonderful manipulator of local opinion but the truth is he has (over the past ten years) systematically disregarded all local planning processes designed to protect his land from inappropriate development. When he built his residential property on his land, he did so without planning permission and then retrospectively applied for permission when confronted by the local council. The local council did not make their decision arbitrarily but were informed by national policy, the local plan, numerous local objections and a history of refusals and illegal works associated with the land. The two caravan parks highlighted in previous post have both been in place for over 30 years and therefore irrelevant to current planning applications and local plan.
Speaking as someone who has lived in close proximity to Mr Hunt’s land for many years, during his ownership I have seen his field change from a pleasant pasture much like the adjacent fields to something akin to a traveller’s camp.
I am in agreement with the council’s enforcement of a decision made twelve months ago. Mr Hunt is a wonderful manipulator of local opinion but the truth is he has (over the past ten years) systematically disregarded all local planning processes designed to protect his land from inappropriate development. When he built his residential property on his land, he did so without planning permission and then retrospectively applied for permission when confronted by the local council. The local council did not make their decision arbitrarily but were informed by national policy, the local plan, numerous local objections and a history of refusals and illegal works associated with the land. The two caravan parks highlighted in previous post have both been in place for over 30 years and therefore irrelevant to current planning applications and local plan. Speaking as someone who has lived in close proximity to Mr Hunt’s land for many years, during his ownership I have seen his field change from a pleasant pasture much like the adjacent fields to something akin to a traveller’s camp. martie1673
  • Score: -5

8:48am Sat 26 Apr 14

Dog lover 11111 says...

martie1673 wrote:
I am in agreement with the council’s enforcement of a decision made twelve months ago. Mr Hunt is a wonderful manipulator of local opinion but the truth is he has (over the past ten years) systematically disregarded all local planning processes designed to protect his land from inappropriate development. When he built his residential property on his land, he did so without planning permission and then retrospectively applied for permission when confronted by the local council. The local council did not make their decision arbitrarily but were informed by national policy, the local plan, numerous local objections and a history of refusals and illegal works associated with the land. The two caravan parks highlighted in previous post have both been in place for over 30 years and therefore irrelevant to current planning applications and local plan.
Speaking as someone who has lived in close proximity to Mr Hunt’s land for many years, during his ownership I have seen his field change from a pleasant pasture much like the adjacent fields to something akin to a traveller’s camp.
So you say nothing said about all the wildlife and creatures they have rescued

But now the land is being all sold off in little plots from £50 upwards

These freehold plots will have much more going on than the rescuing of animals

Also You say nothing about the new development on the farm ' swallows rest '

Where you now see hundreds of campers and Caravans

Yet 'swallows rest' is next door to the land at pirates cove
And is a SSSI site of nature
But you do not complain about that
[quote][p][bold]martie1673[/bold] wrote: I am in agreement with the council’s enforcement of a decision made twelve months ago. Mr Hunt is a wonderful manipulator of local opinion but the truth is he has (over the past ten years) systematically disregarded all local planning processes designed to protect his land from inappropriate development. When he built his residential property on his land, he did so without planning permission and then retrospectively applied for permission when confronted by the local council. The local council did not make their decision arbitrarily but were informed by national policy, the local plan, numerous local objections and a history of refusals and illegal works associated with the land. The two caravan parks highlighted in previous post have both been in place for over 30 years and therefore irrelevant to current planning applications and local plan. Speaking as someone who has lived in close proximity to Mr Hunt’s land for many years, during his ownership I have seen his field change from a pleasant pasture much like the adjacent fields to something akin to a traveller’s camp.[/p][/quote]So you say nothing said about all the wildlife and creatures they have rescued But now the land is being all sold off in little plots from £50 upwards These freehold plots will have much more going on than the rescuing of animals Also You say nothing about the new development on the farm ' swallows rest ' Where you now see hundreds of campers and Caravans Yet 'swallows rest' is next door to the land at pirates cove And is a SSSI site of nature But you do not complain about that Dog lover 11111
  • Score: 6

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree