40 motorhome owners taken to court.

Jaws

LIFE MEMBER
Sep 26, 2008
22,648
52,448
Thetford Norfolk
Funster No
4,189
MH
C class, Chieftain
Exp
since 2006 ( I think ! )
All very interesting but one statement stands out like a sore thumb..

"If they want to ignore the court process and not pay their fines, we will go back to the courts to get an injunction, [HI]and I will go as far as seizing their vehicles[/HI]."

Oh no he won't !

Such action has already been deemed draconian and illegal within EU countries
A test case was brought against the French police a few years ago who were seizing motorcycles from German and Brit riders when caught speeding.

Someone took the matter to Strasbourg and the ruling was very clear.
The 'punishment' exceeded that which was the maximum allowed for the offence and was therefore illegal..

Matey tries to seize motorhomes for a parking fine and he could end up bankrupting the council he works for with legal fees

Don't get me wrong, not being a local resident I cannot comment on the rights and wrongs of the situation ( other than to say Woman and I would not visit the area unless it was absolutely necessary ) ... I merely point out that the man making that statement is someone who likes to pontificate and make wild statements. His employers would be well minded to reign in his verbalisations to the press !!

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Feb 16, 2013
14,777
26,249
uttoxeter
Funster No
24,713
MH
ambulance conversion
Exp
50 years
That strangeway guy is doing more harm than good, if councils think they going to have to put up with some one like him and class all moterhomers in the same mould there's no way they are going to allow it
 

freelanderuk

Free Member
Sep 24, 2009
1,020
534
Saltfleet/Lincolnshire
Funster No
8,600
MH
c class
Exp
4
i am local to the area , and the council have been in consultation with the secretory of state over this problem( as was mentioned on one of the local news reports) , and at the moment strangways and his band of followers are doing more harm than good with all the publicity that this is getting , this has been going on for 4 years and these councilors are adamant on stopping whats happening , local businesses and residents have had enough and want to see it stopped and i dont blame them :thumb:
 

GJH

LIFE MEMBER
Aug 20, 2007
28,634
36,137
Acklam, Teesside, originally Glossop
Funster No
127
MH
Burstner t625 Harmony
Exp
Since 2006
All very interesting but one statement stands out like a sore thumb..

Oh no he won't !

Such action has already been deemed draconian and illegal within EU countries
A test case was brought against the French police a few years ago who were seizing motorcycles from German and Brit riders when caught speeding.

Someone took the matter to Strasbourg and the ruling was very clear.
The 'punishment' exceeded that which was the maximum allowed for the offence and was therefore illegal..

Matey tries to seize motorhomes for a parking fine and he could end up bankrupting the council he works for with legal fees

Don't get me wrong, not being a local resident I cannot comment on the rights and wrongs of the situation ( other than to say Woman and I would not visit the area unless it was absolutely necessary ) ... I merely point out that the man making that statement is someone who likes to pontificate and make wild statements. His employers would be well minded to reign in his verbalisations to the press !!
Point of clarification. The man making the statement "If they want to ignore the court process and not pay their fines, we will go back to the courts to get an injunction, and I will go as far as seizing their vehicles." was a councillor (politician) not an employee of the council.

It would, of course, be possible for the council to apply for seizure of the vehicles (presumably it would probably have got to a stage far beyond simple non-payment of a fine by then) and the court would have to take the EU ruling into account in making its decision.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

scotjimland

Free Member
Jul 25, 2007
0
8
.
Funster No
15
MH
.
Exp
.
Not being a legal eagle.. could the vans not be seized under this act


Vehicles used in manner causing alarm, distress [HI]or annoyance[/HI]

Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002 – Vehicles used in manner causing alarm, distress or annoyance (Section 59 gives the police power to deal with the anti-social use of motor vehicles on public roads or off-road. It includes (under subsections (1) and (3)) powers to stop and to seize and to remove motor vehicles where they are being driven off-road contrary to section 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 or on the public road or other public place without due care and attention or reasonable consideration for other road users, contrary to section 3 of the 1988 Act).

https://sites.google.com/site/ronbarkercrimlaw/police-power-to-seize-vehicles
 

Jaws

LIFE MEMBER
Sep 26, 2008
22,648
52,448
Thetford Norfolk
Funster No
4,189
MH
C class, Chieftain
Exp
since 2006 ( I think ! )
Quite possibly but certainly not for failure to pay a fine

And as this is a civil matter I doubt very much the police will want to get involved in a potential powder keg situation
 
Feb 16, 2013
14,777
26,249
uttoxeter
Funster No
24,713
MH
ambulance conversion
Exp
50 years
How does clamping, and towing cars away for parking come into this then, that's only a parking fine surely, no difference that I can see

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Jun 10, 2011
451
358
Yorkshire (nr. Leeds)
Funster No
16,820
MH
C Class
Exp
Since 2011 (so a bit of a newbie)
Sorry, I am being totally dumb, but was just wondering what harm these motorhomers were doing.

Are they leaving litter and trashing the place, or playing loud music, or taking up parking spaces that other people are wanting to use?

The BBC article says:

"They should not be subjected to intimidation from a small group of freeloaders who are simply here intent on not paying for anything."

I'm sure there's a good reason why they shouldn't be doing what they're doing, but it just didn't seem clear from the BBC article.
 

freelanderuk

Free Member
Sep 24, 2009
1,020
534
Saltfleet/Lincolnshire
Funster No
8,600
MH
c class
Exp
4
They have been using the carpark as a permanent camp site with some staying the whole of the summer , and others stopping the winter , one was running a car repair shop from there, emptying of cassette's in the dunes and all the rubbish left, hight barriers have been put in place 3 times now to stop this but once erected that are destroyed
 
Last edited:
Apr 19, 2008
7,592
4,356
East London
Funster No
2,222
MH
C Class
Exp
well over 5 years
They have been using the carpark as a permanent camp site with some staying the whole of the summer , and others stopping the winter , one was running a car repair shop from there, emptying of cassette's in the dunes and all the rubbish left, night barriers have been put in place 3 times now to stop this but once erected that are destroyed


sounds like the usual story of a few spoiling it for the many

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

jonandshell

Free Member
Dec 12, 2010
5,485
8,295
Norfolk
Funster No
14,648
MH
Not got one!
Exp
Since 2006
Maybe Grommit, being an IT buff, can make a new website called 'andystrangewaysisaknobanddoesntrepresentmostmotorhomers.com.

On it, maybe we can express OUR views on the subject and not be associated with the views and actions of some militant moron.:Angry:
 

Allanm

Free Member
Jun 30, 2013
5,437
9,167
Cotes d'armor, France
Funster No
26,730
MH
Burstner Harmony TI 736 G
Exp
Since 1987
They should take away the barriers, install ticket machines and reclassify it as a paying parking area, then make some money out of them.
Bit like what they do in other countries. In France they are called aires...........

Allan
 

GJH

LIFE MEMBER
Aug 20, 2007
28,634
36,137
Acklam, Teesside, originally Glossop
Funster No
127
MH
Burstner t625 Harmony
Exp
Since 2006
They should take away the barriers, install ticket machines and reclassify it as a paying parking area, then make some money out of them.
Bit like what they do in other countries. In France they are called aires...........

Allan

Nice if it could happen but I think LCC has already considered it. However, money would only be made if the cost of installing the infrastructure, managing collection of charges and managing the behaviour of the users were low enough.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Jaws

LIFE MEMBER
Sep 26, 2008
22,648
52,448
Thetford Norfolk
Funster No
4,189
MH
C class, Chieftain
Exp
since 2006 ( I think ! )
How does clamping, and towing cars away for parking come into this then, that's only a parking fine surely, no difference that I can see

So if you get clamped you loose the car ?
The difference is you can reasonably expect to get it back..
There is the inference that the council will seize the vehicle instead of a person paying the fine.. In other words he has chosen to INFER the MH will be lost to the owners..

Typical politician .. no idea of that which he utters but quite happy to offer vague threats to folk who do not know the law

If he had said seize the vehicle until such times as fines are paid that would be a different matter

And with the new laws governing clamping, even that is incredibly dodgy ground
 
Aug 27, 2009
19,542
20,714
Hertfordshire
Funster No
8,178
MH
Van Conversion
Exp
30 years
Does Lincolnshire not have any sites where they can pay and stay or do they have an aversion to paying for site services.:Smile:
 

scotjimland

Free Member
Jul 25, 2007
0
8
.
Funster No
15
MH
.
Exp
.
Does Lincolnshire not have any sites where they can pay and stay or do they have an aversion to [HI]paying for site services.[/HI]:Smile:

:Eeek::Eeek::Eeek::Eeek::Eeek:

paying.. did you say paying.. ?

wash you mouth out with carbolic soap.. paying is for mugs :yeah:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Wildman

Free Member
May 30, 2008
0
8,556
Ilfracombe, Devon
Funster No
2,913
MH
Amazon Ambassador
Exp
since 1967
it is not about paying or not paying its about discrimination, if you park there in a car its free if parking in a motorhome its illegal?? Get real and see the discrimination.
So some are parking all summer and some all winter so where do they go to buy their food, do their washing etc., someone locally must be making money from them or is that conveniently forgotten. If fulltimers can park for free why would they not. If I want to park up and fish all night then kayak during the day on other days how is that wrong? why can I not step out of my motorhome and use the amenity. Why should I have to drag my kayak a mile to beach just because I don't have a car. Discrimination is what is at the back of it. If some are dumping their waste in the dunes then maybe it is time facilities to dump were provided it would cost less than the legal bills and height barrier replacement. Just because not all motorhomers are gypsies should not mean we don't have certain rights We all pay taxes and council tax, water bills at home why should we pay twice.
The are people who don't use sites so as to avoid people or to be in a certain place it does mot make us all freeloading tossers and I for one am getting pig sick of the accusation from people who stay on sites all the time for no other reason than they think it somehow demeaning to wildcamp/wild park or whatever.
Time I registered as a gypsy though a bloodline I will in time remember then this discrimination will end:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Jun 10, 2011
451
358
Yorkshire (nr. Leeds)
Funster No
16,820
MH
C Class
Exp
Since 2011 (so a bit of a newbie)
They have been using the carpark as a permanent camp site with some staying the whole of the summer , and others stopping the winter , one was running a car repair shop from there, emptying of cassette's in the dunes and all the rubbish left, hight barriers have been put in place 3 times now to stop this but once erected that are destroyed

Sounds outrageous. That's not motorhoming is it?

You'd think there'd be some way of specifying a maximum stay (e.g. 2 nights in any fourteen) and then enforcing that rigidly.

As OP have rightly said, it just spoils it for the 99% of motorhomers who wouldn't dream of behaving in such a way.
 

GJH

LIFE MEMBER
Aug 20, 2007
28,634
36,137
Acklam, Teesside, originally Glossop
Funster No
127
MH
Burstner t625 Harmony
Exp
Since 2006
it is not about paying or not paying its about discrimination, [HI]if you park there in a car its free if parking in a motorhome its illegal[/HI]?? Get real and see the discrimination.
So some are parking all summer and some all winter so where do they go to buy their food, do their washing etc., someone locally must be making money from them or is that conveniently forgotten. [HI]If fulltimers can park for free why would they not.[/HI] If I want to park up and fish all night then kayak during the day on other days how is that wrong? why can I not step out of my motorhome and use the amenity. Why should I have to drag my kayak a mile to beach just because I don't have a car. Discrimination is what is at the back of it. If some are dumping their waste in the dunes then maybe it is time facilities to dump were provided it would cost less than the legal bills and height barrier replacement. Just because not all motorhomers are gypsies should not mean we don't have certain rights [HI]We all pay taxes and council tax, water bills at home why should we pay twice.[/HI]
The are people who don't use sites so as to avoid people or to be in a certain place it does mot make us all freeloading tossers and I for one am getting pig sick of the accusation from people who stay on sites all the time for no other reason than they think it somehow demeaning to wildcamp/wild park or whatever.
Time I registered as a gypsy though a bloodline I will in time remember then this discrimination will end:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Two points Roger.
1. It's habitation not parking.
2. Does the parking for free and not paying twice apply to CLs as well?

Tongue firmly in cheek I hasten to add ::bigsmile:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

GJH

LIFE MEMBER
Aug 20, 2007
28,634
36,137
Acklam, Teesside, originally Glossop
Funster No
127
MH
Burstner t625 Harmony
Exp
Since 2006
Sounds outrageous. That's not motorhoming is it?

[HI]You'd think there'd be some way of specifying a maximum stay (e.g. 2 nights in any fourteen) and then enforcing that rigidly.
[/HI]
As OP have rightly said, it just spoils it for the 99% of motorhomers who wouldn't dream of behaving in such a way.

There most probably is - but the cost of doing so might not be economically viable. On previous threads about Huttoft I've asked anyone who knows any way in which such a scheme would pay to put forward their evidence. I'm still waiting :Sad:
 
Jun 10, 2011
451
358
Yorkshire (nr. Leeds)
Funster No
16,820
MH
C Class
Exp
Since 2011 (so a bit of a newbie)
it is not about paying or not paying its about discrimination, if you park there in a car its free if parking in a motorhome its illegal?? Get real and see the discrimination.
So some are parking all summer and some all winter so where do they go to buy their food, do their washing etc., someone locally must be making money from them or is that conveniently forgotten. If fulltimers can park for free why would they not. If I want to park up and fish all night then kayak during the day on other days how is that wrong? why can I not step out of my motorhome and use the amenity. Why should I have to drag my kayak a mile to beach just because I don't have a car. Discrimination is what is at the back of it. If some are dumping their waste in the dunes then maybe it is time facilities to dump were provided it would cost less than the legal bills and height barrier replacement. Just because not all motorhomers are gypsies should not mean we don't have certain rights We all pay taxes and council tax, water bills at home why should we pay twice.
The are people who don't use sites so as to avoid people or to be in a certain place it does mot make us all freeloading tossers and I for one am getting pig sick of the accusation from people who stay on sites all the time for no other reason than they think it somehow demeaning to wildcamp/wild park or whatever.
Time I registered as a gypsy though a bloodline I will in time remember then this discrimination will end:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Some totally valid points there. Many of which I agree with, particularly the bit about being sick of being accused of being a freeloader if you wildcamp.

I just think in this case - and others like it - a line has to be drawn. It can't be right that motorhomers, whether gypsies or fulltimers, can just pitch up for an unlimited period and not be expected to move on at some point and let other people use the facilities. That just seems fair.

As for councils providing drains, water, etc - here, here. I'd gladly pay a small fee to use such amenities.
 

magicsurfbus

Free Member
Oct 11, 2010
4,685
10,158
NW England
Funster No
14,057
MH
Bessacarr Coachbuilt
Exp
Since 1997
It beats me why anybody wants to spend more than a day by the beach at Huttoft - odd choice of place for Motorhome martyrdom.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Wildman

Free Member
May 30, 2008
0
8,556
Ilfracombe, Devon
Funster No
2,913
MH
Amazon Ambassador
Exp
since 1967
Two points Roger.
1. It's habitation not parking.
2. Does the parking for free and not paying twice apply to CLs as well?

Tongue firmly in cheek I hasten to add ::bigsmile:
not paying twice does apply to CL's, however it is not a free carpark and hence no discrimination against motorhomes who pay a measly £7 for the facilities and space I provide.
The habitation or parking does not make sense to me either. When in my car I inhabit it and do the same with my motorhome. I am aware of the need to keep within the van and leave nothing but footprints behind. It would be unusual for me to stay two nights in the same place let alone a week so maybe I'm not typical.
What is the biggie about habitation anyway, I'd much rather see motorhomes than a bunch of louts in a carpark or doggers in a layby.
As long as waste (of any sort) is disposed of responsibly I don't see a problem. Legislation needs to penalise those who dump irresponsibly rather than everyone. What law is there that says I must give someone a living, I'm retired and done with that. I buy what I need where I need it same as I do at home. It is not my job to decide who's income needs topping up only to get the best value for my diminishing wealth.
Fulltimers are on the whole dodging a lot of taxes and have less outgoings than most of us, however we are not all fulltimers and a lot more taxes are evaded by immigrants, ladies of the night and large companies. Not to mention the squandering of public resources by elected officials via fraudulent expense claims. It would appear freeloading tossers carry the blame for everything that's wrong in this country.
The problem is its the wrong bunch of freeloading snout in the trough tossers.
 
Last edited:

Allanm

Free Member
Jun 30, 2013
5,437
9,167
Cotes d'armor, France
Funster No
26,730
MH
Burstner Harmony TI 736 G
Exp
Since 1987
Nice if it could happen but I think LCC has already considered it. However, money would only be made if the cost of installing the infrastructure, managing collection of charges and managing the behaviour of the users were low enough.

It's not always about making money ( except in the UK of course) but saving it. I wonder how much money the council has already wasted with renewal of barriers, cleaning up, legal fees, councillors expenses etc etc etc.
it's this countries narrow minded views and aversion to people actually going out and enjoying theirselves that help lead to situations like this.
Allan
 

freelanderuk

Free Member
Sep 24, 2009
1,020
534
Saltfleet/Lincolnshire
Funster No
8,600
MH
c class
Exp
4
it is not about paying or not paying its about discrimination, if you park there in a car its free if parking in a motorhome its illegal?? Get real and see the discrimination.
So some are parking all summer and some all winter so where do they go to buy their food, do their washing etc., someone locally must be making money from them or is that conveniently forgotten. If fulltimers can park for free why would they not. If I want to park up and fish all night then kayak during the day on other days how is that wrong? why can I not step out of my motorhome and use the amenity. Why should I have to drag my kayak a mile to beach just because I don't have a car. Discrimination is what is at the back of it. If some are dumping their waste in the dunes then maybe it is time facilities to dump were provided it would cost less than the legal bills and height barrier replacement. Just because not all motorhomers are gypsies should not mean we don't have certain rights We all pay taxes and council tax, water bills at home why should we pay twice.
The are people who don't use sites so as to avoid people or to be in a certain place it does mot make us all freeloading tossers and I for one am getting pig sick of the accusation from people who stay on sites all the time for no other reason than they think it somehow demeaning to wildcamp/wild park or whatever.
Time I registered as a gypsy though a bloodline I will in time remember then this discrimination will end:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:


and if this was happening in very close proximity to your site would you still be happy for it to happen and the council do nothing , this is not wild camping or wild parking as you put it and they are certainly not there to avoid people when there was up to 40 motorhomes at one point, just because we have motorhomes does not give us the right to park and pitch up and stay for as long as we like

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

GJH

LIFE MEMBER
Aug 20, 2007
28,634
36,137
Acklam, Teesside, originally Glossop
Funster No
127
MH
Burstner t625 Harmony
Exp
Since 2006
It's not always about making money ( except in the UK of course) but saving it. I wonder how much money the council has already wasted with renewal of barriers, cleaning up, legal fees, councillors expenses etc etc etc.
it's this countries narrow minded views and aversion to people actually going out and enjoying theirselves that help lead to situations like this.
Allan
I have no idea of the figures but, hopefully, the cost of maintaining barriers will be less long term than the cost of dealing with the illegal campers on an ongoing basis.

As regards people going out and enjoying themselves, in the Huttoft case that is one of the main points. The illegal campers have been preventing other people from doing just that.
 

GJH

LIFE MEMBER
Aug 20, 2007
28,634
36,137
Acklam, Teesside, originally Glossop
Funster No
127
MH
Burstner t625 Harmony
Exp
Since 2006
not paying twice does apply to CL's, however it is not a free carpark and hence no discrimination against motorhomes who pay a measly £7 for the facilities and space I provide.
Exactly Roger. Your land and you decide what can and cannot be done and the cost. The same principle applies to Huttoft's owner, LCC.

The habitation or parking does not make sense to me either. When in my car I inhabit it and do the same with my motorhome.
It doesn't have to make sense. There are all sorts of legislative provisions about which people could say the same - because they seek to provide for the overall public interest not for every single individual.

I am aware of the need to keep within the van and leave nothing but footprints behind. It would be unusual for me to stay two nights in the same place let alone a week so maybe I'm not typical.
What is the biggie about habitation anyway, I'd much rather see motorhomes than a bunch of louts in a carpark or doggers in a layby.
As long as waste (of any sort) is disposed of responsibly I don't see a problem. Legislation needs to penalise those who dump irresponsibly rather than everyone.
All very nice in theory but the reports over the years demonstrate that too many of the people involved do not act in that manner.

What law is there that says I must give someone a living, I'm retired and done with that. I buy what I need where I need it same as I do at home. It is not my job to decide who's income needs topping up only to get the best value for my diminishing wealth.
Fulltimers are on the whole dodging a lot of taxes and have less outgoings than most of us, however we are not all fulltimers and a lot more taxes are evaded by immigrants, ladies of the night and large companies. Not to mention the squandering of public resources by elected officials via fraudulent expense claims. It would appear freeloading tossers carry the blame for everything that's wrong in this country.
The problem is its the wrong bunch of freeloading snout in the trough tossers.
Those points might well be true but not relevant to the specific argument. Their solutions are for other discussions.
 

ShiftZZ

LIFE MEMBER
Feb 19, 2008
20,757
60,451
Dark Side of the Moon
Funster No
1,546
MH
Lowline
Exp
Since 2007
Roger
Question..

You have a site and the terms by which people can park on your site are that they abide by the ‘rules’ that you have and pay a fee.
What would you do if someone drove onto your site, pitched up and stayed for two weeks, using your facilities and refused to pay, i.e. in breach of your terms and conditions, also they just dumped whatever anywhere.
Firtsly, you could call the Old Bill and I suspect under current laws there is very little they could or would do. If you took direct action yourself then you could be in deep water. Your only legal course of action is to go to court, and that would be funded by yourself at great expense.
That’s no different, in principle as to what these people are doing.
The, they buy local so they must be supporting the local economy, is possibly right, but more than likely they will be travelling to buy the cheapest.
yorkieman
“As for councils providing drains, water, etc - here, here. I'd gladly pay a small fee to use such amenities.”
Right, the cost of supplying and maintaining the above would never ever be covered by your ‘small fee’, the cost of planning, design and implementation would be huge, along with its maintainance. Let me give you as similar scenario. In Australia they had at one time rest areas on the highways and they had electric BBq’s set up to be used by travellers, they were on a coin operated system. Great idea. But, the coin operated system was constantly being attacked by vandals and thieves, so those in charge decided that the cost v benefits of the coin system could not be sustained so they decommissioned the coin system and made them FREE. Another great idea, but, as the system was FREE then everyone was using them and not bothering to clean them after use, so you can guess the rest.
Councils would have great difficulty in being able to justify spending locally collected taxes for the benefit of those who do not live locally and do not pay tax locally. Yes it may fill the pockets of a local shop, or pub, but that’s it.
Can you imagine the local taxpayers, they have a council spending our money for the benefits of some who come here for say 7 days, spend very little and benefit from out hard earned taxes.
The UK as it stands has a number of issues. There are to name a small number.
a) We have laws that protect the travelling community which is being abused and costly to rectify. Having an Aire system would be music to their ears.
b) We have had an explosion of numbers of individuals who have bought Motorhomes and have this romantic idea of wild camping. That may have been fine when Wildman or similar were going around surfing in the 1960’s in the self conversion or VW, but that was then. Now it’s an 8m fully fitted house on wheels , daily showers and other daily waste.
c) Funding or the political will is not there, you could argue that’s being catered for by the traditional campsites.
d) This ‘freeloading’ is fine, but at the end of the day someone has to pick up the cost, nothing is actually free.
e) As with most things, a small number will abuse it and the rest will suffer.

Lastly the issue of seizing the motorhome, I can see no reason why the Council could not enforce the debt by requesting a Warrant of Execution to enforce a Court Order. If the defendant has been given enough time to pay and still refuses to pay after due process, then if the only asset of the defendant is a motorhome then I can’t see why it can’t be seized, sold and the residue given back to the owner. They had a choice, they court found against them then let the process of law continue. The council has a legal duty remember.
If your unhappy with the Law then change it.; This pillock with his legal crusade will push Motorhomes further to the fringe and may well make the general public think that they are more akin to Gypsies and travellers.



Romantic freeloading campers your call..

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Top