[doganjo]

So does that mean they allow a tourer to be left, even if it is a self sufficient one?  I have a friend who would be interested in that.

[poppajohn]

I think a lot of it comes down to " ughh! they might be pikeys"! The countryside is out of bounds for anyone who doesnt ride. Likewise all mountain bikers own it. DO NOT get in the way of my offroading. " Dont you know quad bikes have priority". And God help you if you are a farmer, they have the cheek to use tractors on roads meant for 4x4s. If you shoot you are a terrorist for having a gun.

I usually live and let live, I increasingly find the reply "bollox" is managing to creep into my vocabulary. If you own the land its your bluddy business what you do with it.

[robert waddell]

it all comes down to interpretation by the council officials if it were as easy as just pulling any old caravan onto your land everybody would be doing it the planners are there for a reason and a very good one at that        an acre here a corner there shacks thrown up then sold for profit moving on to the next necessary for my livestock project    no proper drainage brown manilla's changing hands corners cut regulations not adhered to etc etc    don't get me started i have to live with the Shiite that these necessary developments create and spoil the landscape never mind the stink and flies in the summer

[doganjo]

My friend has been trying to get permission for 5 years to put a house on her 20 acres (it has a  huge barn, water and electrics already on site).  She has had a pig cut to bits for food while still alive and they had to put it out of it's misery when they found it screaming on her usual 6 am check of the hens and ponies.  She has had sheep and lambs stolen in the night - no trace, just gone.  And still they would only allow her point 7 of a person to live on the land!  When she had had enough heartache and sold the pigs and sheep, someone informed the planners and they took that back and she has to start all over again.  It seems to me there are no rules that a lay person can work out.  I just wondered if she could put a tourer up there and stay in it occasionally rather than drive back home exhausted at night.

[poppajohn]

I am fed up of one lot of planners saying one thing and in the next county a complete and different interpretation. We are living in a recession, it isnt going away for a long time. If we dont allow other folk to use land to live and work on, big ag will swamp whats left with factories, second homers grab what affordable housing there is, result? Dead villages full of older folk, vast arable and livestock concerns that employ very few, usually foreign labour. Then the dreaded pony paddock brigade. So what we lose is a working countryside, with small farms and all that goes with it. Diversity? Yep, we create a middle / upper class inhabited countryside with twee farm shops and art galleries. Instead of the broad based self sufficient local entities a lot of us grew up in and have watched disappear. Its only when we get rid of the nimby thinking that things will change.
The EU and Westminster via a lot of town halls want a theme park, I and a lot of others think otherwise. Just because somebody wants to site a van probably live there and eventually self build isnt the end of the world. Its actually a way forward, if we block these folk and many do, we will lose whats left of localism.

[Coley]

So does that mean they allow a tourer to be left, even if it is a self sufficient one?  I have a friend who would be interested in that.

Aye, but strictly speaking (according to the planning gadgy) it should be moved every 28 days
Saying that, it has been broken into a few times.

[Coley]

I usually live and let live, I increasingly find the reply "bollox" is managing to creep into my vocabulary. If you own the land its your bluddy business what you do with it.

I wish when we bought ours we had the countryside 'officer' on our backs for the first two years telling us there were 'agreements' in place for two footpaths and a seperate bridle way, we demanded to see these 'agreements' as our deeds didnt show anything more than a single footpath (a re-instatement) this went on for ages with lettters from the county solicitor etc we finally ended it when we were able to prove the original buyer had entered into no agreements whatsoever but it was a load of hassle at the time and it highlights the fact that petty officials from county have unlimited resources with which to hound those who 'cross them'

[poppajohn]

Oh Coley tell me about it! English Nature are my bane! Oh and English Heritage. One said cut The grass on the seabank ( my land of course ) The other said leave it for wildlife and stop folk walking their dogs on it. Of course they dont talk to each other do they? lol!
The locals have walked their dogs and ridden on it before either of these organisations existed, its a "historic monument" say Heritage, no its a public footpath say Nature. Its neither, even the tythe map proves it as it was church land until the war.
I threatened to level it with big plant and then fence it. They soon shutup.

[SallyintNorth]

English Nature are my bane! Oh and English Heritage. One said cut The grass on the seabank ( my land of course ) The other said leave it for wildlife and stop folk walking their dogs on it. Of course they dont talk to each other do they?

We rent fields owned by English Heritage with many public rights of way across them.  English Heritage put up signs asking the public to not all walk across the same bit of grass in order to reduce footpath erosion.  Then the English Heritage employee mows the path, thus inviting the public to all walk across the same bit of grass ...  Talk about the left and right hands...

[ambriel]

I know there have to be planning regulations else who knows what would happen but some of the rules seem deisgned just to annoy ordinary people and generate income for the local council.

For instance, I can put a shed in my garden - ordinary size, nothing massive - but if it's closer than 5m to the house then I have to put in a planning application which would cost more than the shed. Likewise if it's within 20m of a road, despite the fact that our land drops off quite steeply and so the roof of the shed would be below the height of the wall and so invisible from the road.

It's also the differences in the way the planning rules are interpreted between different councils, and how they tell people what they can or can't do. Argyll publish a very useful little booklet that gives very clear examples of what they consider to be permitted development. When I asked Highland if they had the same sort of thing they said no, every enquiry had to be dealt with individually.

[Coley]

seem deisgned just to annoy ordinary people and generate income for the local council.

Aye, even pre development advice now carries a charge, want to discuss your proposals with a planning office? that will be £200 please, you want to discuss and a site visit? £250 that before you put in an application  (at the minimum£365) no body would argue thqat planning permission is important but it is an area that is often misused, an applicatiion that the planning officers advise council meets all conditions and should be approved is often knocked back by councillors seeking to please their respective voters leading to great expense for the applicant (and ratepayers)

[robert waddell]

are the councilors realy representing the voters or are they jobs worth little farts that have jumped on the gravey train for there own benifit

[Coley]

The latter in many cases, the rot set in when it it became a profitable little sideline rather than a civic duty

[katie]

I thought you could have a mobile building - ie anything without foundations - on your land without PP for use as a site office, R&R room or farm building. We have a caravan to have our lunch in and stay overnight while lambing and even though our parish councillors are the most Nimby ion the world, they couldn't do a thing about it.Even agricultural workers are allowed to have somewhere dry to eat their sandwiches!

[Coley]

I think it boils down to permanent residence as opposed to amenity use, we have built a 40x5 mtr barn without much opposition but only because it doesnt have concrete foundations, saying that one end is slowly being converted to overnight use, what the buggers dont see wont hurt them