msg	Sender	lines	Subject
1	TimLARA@aol.com	40	Masters history
2	USER [john.o'reilly@virg	41	Case Law.
3	Don Scott [Donald_Scott@	12	Land Rover World Article
4	Peter Bradley [hm50@dial	91	Council Vans and Tractors
5	Charlietrf@aol.com	16	Re: Dangerous walks
6	Brian Lewis [brian@limb.	19	Re: Council Vans and Tractors
7	Brian Lewis [brian@limb.	43	Re: NYCC
8	TimLARA@aol.com	11	Tractors & such
9	Chris Marsden [Byway@com	64	obstructions-again
10	Chris Marsden [Byway@com	20	Re: Masterful
11	Chris Marsden [Byway@com	13	Council Vans and Tractors
	Majordomo		About the digest

------------------------------ [ Message 1 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970405 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 03:54:27 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Masters history

Information for those who are not aware of the sorry tale behind Mrs Masters
and her RUPP:
About three years ago TRF members (including me) used the route and found
hedges and the route ploughed out (illegal, but not on Mrs M's land but next
door), and gates wired up. This was reported and eventually Somerset CC took
the landowner to court for 'failure to reinstate' (when they should have done
him for ploughing a highway which is not a footpath or bridleway).
Subsequently the landowner shot himself (financial difficulties were
suggested) and Mrs M is reported as having 'blamed the TRF for his death'.
The SCC then brought the reclassification of the lane forward, and Mrs M
claimed that the route should not be on the DM at all. Both matters were
considered at the same public inquiry (because some of the same evidence &
witnesses were relevant to both). 
The inspector's decision is not yet out, and I understand this to be in
consequence of the double decision - should it have been on the map at all,
and if so is it a BOAT or Bridleway. The Sec of State has 'called-in' the
decision and will make it himself, so that any court case about it is for him
and not the inspector. So nothing can happen now until after May 1.
Until the Inspector has reported and the DM is altered, the lane remains a
RUPP with conclusive horse-riding rights AT LEAST. Anyone using the route is
advised to tell the local police beforehand, not to go alone, and to ensure
that vehicles remain well apart but in full view of each other, with a
camcorder in both. Take lots of film... 

BOAT decision are exaggerated.)

Re - the Police and their inactivity. I wonder how effective TROs can be if
the police are known not to respond to complaints of assault, action likely
to cause breach of the peace, offensive weapons, as seen on TV.

Perhaps I will from now on refer to 'Mrs Masters as seen on TV'.

Cheers, tim
What me, provocative?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 11:50:58 +0000
From: USER <john.o'reilly@virgin.net>
Subject: Case Law. 

Hi all 

This was sent to me by Andy Milner who unfortunately not on the net.
Any other little gems he picks up he will pass to me to put on to the 
list.

Vanderpant v Mayfair Hotel Co (1930) 1 Ch. 138 at 152 it was said,
"An encroachment on a highway is by common law a public nuisance. It is 
no defence that the obstrustion is made on a part of a highway which is 
not habitually or ordinarily used for passage. It is no defence that the 
obstructionis in other ways productive of public benefit, and however 
reasonable may be the use of a highway by an owner of adjoining premises 
the public right is a higher right than his and he must yield to the 
public right."

Harvey v Turo Rural Council (1903) 2 Ch.638 by Joyce J. who in his 
judgement said "in the case of an ordinary highway running between 
fences, although it may be of varying and unequal width, the right of 
passage or way prima facie, and unless there be evidence to the contary, 
extends to the whole space between the fences, and the public are 
entitled to the entire of it as a highway, and are not confined to the 
part which may be metalled. All the ground that is between the fences is 
presumably dedicated as a highway unless the nature of the ground or 
other circumstances rebut that presumption.... It is an established 
maxim that 'once a highway, always a highway'. The public cannot release 
thier rights. Mere disise of a highway cannot deprive the public of 
thier rights. Where there was once been a highway no lenth of time 
during which it may not have been used will preclude the public from 
resuming the exercise of the right to use it if and when they think 
proper. Even if the highway authority had actually consented to any 
obstruction or encroachment upon the strip being part of the highway, 
such consent could not legalise that which was otherwise illegal."....

Good reading I think and potentialy useful as quote to CC's.

Cheers John.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 08:06:29 -0500
From: Don Scott <Donald_Scott@compuserve.com>
Subject: Land Rover World Article

Owen

Excellent article  
well worth the price of the mag
Most informative

Don

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 18:23:05 +0000
From: Peter Bradley <hm50@dial.pipex.com>
Subject: Council Vans and Tractors

When I left school I decided to get a couple of "fill in"
jobs before settling down to a proper career, which subsequently
turned out to be in the thrilling world of plastics.  The first
position I was lucky enough to secure was that of bill poster for
Harrogate Borough Council.  Now I know what you're thinking ....
... what the hell has this got to do with Rights of Way ?  Well,
not a lot I'll grant you, but there may be a tenuous link in a
minute.

First day at work and I was introduced to "my" van, an old Commer,
and Peter, the bloke who was going to show me where all the poster
sites were.  We did a grand tour of them all and I did my best to
commit them to memory.  On arriving back at the depot I was
instructed to visit the boss.  "Right lad, can y' remember where
they all are ?".  "I think so, but one thing puzzles me.  How do
I get close enough to them, with the van ?  I mean, some of them
are stuck in the middle of parks and public gardens and such".  
"Lad, you've got a Council van.  You can take it ANYWHERE !".

Next morning, with those words still ringing in my ears, I set 
off on my exciting new quest:  To boldly go where no van had 
gone before.  

In the following three weeks I discovered that it was indeed true.
I flouted every minor traffic law and local bylaw.  I parked for
ages on double yellow lines, I drove along the pavement, I parked
wholly on the pavement, I drove across the Stray (ancient common
parkland where everything is prohibited), I drove up paths through
ornamental public gardens.  I even drove the van through the full
length of the famous Valley Gardens, scattering toddler-laden 
mothers and old age pensioners who lay in my path.  

Not that I was driving aggressively though, oh no, there was no 
need for that.  As soon as Joe Public spotted that majestic 
Harrogate Borough Council crest on the side of the van, they 
most willingly moved to one side.  My reason for being in these
ridiculous places, with such a vehicle, was never questioned.  
You see, it was perceived that I clearly "had a right to be 
there", and I was merely "going about my business".

The situation is not dissimilar on the green lanes in the 
Yorkshire Dales, except that a Council van won't take you very 
far.  What you need is a tractor.  It seems to me that if you 
have a tractor you can drive any damn green lane, byway, 
bridleway, RUPP, or whatever, because with a tractor you are 
obviously a farmer, and so you "have a right to be there".  
You just fill up with red diesel, (thus avoiding paying a bit 
of tax towards the repairs for the damage you are about to 
inflict), and off you go !  When did you last see a group of 
ramblers march up to a tractor and snarl "Excuse me, but what
exactly do you think you are doing ?"?  Drive the same lane in
a Land Rover that doesn't have a sheepdog, three bales of hay, 
and a bobbin of baler twine in the back, and you are instantly
branded an environmental hooligan, a vehicular vandal.

Gentlemen, we are all driving / riding the wrong sort of motors.
What we all need are giant 4x4 Massey Ferguson behemoths, the 
ones that are the size of a small house, and have wheels taller 
than the roof on a Discovery.  At least then we'd be competing 
on equal terms when arriving at the three foot deep ruts in the 
lane.  And walkers and ramblers would give us a nod and a cheery
wave as we gouged deep into the ancient surface of the track.

I am even starting to think that a new type of RoW status is 
evolving, that of TOR (sic) - Tractor Only Road.  On National 
Green Lane Day I was up on Occupation Road (UCR), Barbondale, 
with Brian Lewis.  Our party of four Land Rovers had only
gone a quarter mile when we came upon a tractor.  Not bothering 
to dismount from the dizzy heights of his cab the farmer launched
into his opening gambit:  "You bloody lot again.  You're up 'ere 
every weekend, rain or shine, riving about ............ this 
track's for farmers not you lot ....... we all mended it again 
recently ....".  I was tempted to ask him if he had permission 
to do the repairs, from North Yorkshire County Council, but I
thought better of it since I once nearly got shot in Dentdale 
for making such a remark.

In time, as the new TOR status is adopted by YDNP, NYCC, DOE, 
etc., I suppose it will become commonplace to hear farmers' 
cries echoing around the hills as they challenge riders, 
mountain bikers, and maybe even walkers:  "What's your game 
then ? Don't y' know this lane's tractors only ?"

Anybody know where I can pick up a good second-hand Massey ?

Peter Bradley

------------------------------

From: Charlietrf@aol.com
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 15:32:22 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Dangerous walks

Richard,
            Maybe we should do what my sister-in-law has done in the past
when faced with people who ignore polite requests - she " sends a deputation
". The first time I was told this I was a bit puzzled by how this approach
would be any more effective, until my brother explained that it would consist
of him and majority of the West Coast Angels Chapter from Bristol on their
Harleys! I must say that it has always proved incredibly effective, and with
absolutely no fisticuffs.
                                               Regards
                                        Charlie Morriss.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 21:35:02 +0100
From: Brian Lewis <brian@limb.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Council Vans and Tractors

In message <33454709.5F0D@dial.pipex.com>, Peter Bradley
<hm50@dial.pipex.com> writes
Hi Peter again

Its the same reason I go in my old hat, wax coat and take my sheepdog
with me when I go laning on my own HI.
>In time, as the new TOR status is adopted by YDNP, NYCC, DOE, 
>etc., I suppose it will become commonplace to hear farmers' 
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 11 lines)]
>then ? Don't y' know this lane's tractors only ?"
>Anybody know where I can pick up a good second-hand Massey ?
The best thing for around the dales is an ATV!!!!!!
Bye for now 
Brian 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 21:27:55 +0100
From: Brian Lewis <brian@limb.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: NYCC

In message <33441C38.44CA@dial.pipex.com>, Peter Bradley
<hm50@dial.pipex.com> writes
>I wrote to Wadkins, RoW, NYCC, on the 11th of March asking
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 21 lines)]
>says "Yes, that is what I said ....."  ????
>Peter Bradley
Hi Peter 
I have spent the morning with Kieth Watkins (Wadkins to you)
he as been on holiday and only came back yesterday, he has been very
helpful and should not be upset!!!!! I will explain on the telephone
some time.

You are asking the wrong questions in order to get trhe repairs done. 
First ask if they are reponsible for repairs on that highway(is it on
the LIst of Highways Mantained at public expence, do not asks about its
classification) 
Then when you get a reply of yes which you must, then detail the repairs
needed.
there is a few more steps but once you have started thgis process they
should repair the road, if not there are still some more steps you
cantake, read the blue book. HA 80 s56.

There is another problem the YDNP have created by classifing UCRs as
BOATs, because they do not exist on the difinative map as a RUPP then
they are a new additional route (and there is no route in the act to add
them any way with reguards to maintainence), and as such the highway
authority do not have to maintain then, but becuase they are a dual
status road ( UCR with a difinative classification of BOAT) they have to
be maintained as a UCR and fit for vehicular use!!!!! so WC act 1981
section 54(7) can not be aplied. (ie authorities are not obliged to
metal BOATs or to suface them to make them suitable for the passage of
veihcles.) anything in section 54 only aplies to RUPPs not UCRs.

By the above I can aply for repairs under HA S56 to be done on these
BOATs, I don't think that is what was intended by the YDNP.

Bye for now
Brian 

------------------------------

From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 17:49:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Tractors & such

Should we have a sticker based on Fred Muckspreader in Private Eye, only
saying
'Get orf my Landie!'
Or does it only seem funny at midnight?
Tim

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 19:47:09 -0500
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Subject: obstructions-again

What lovelly postings, John for case law, and Peter for motive means.

(I used a GPO van years ago to go places that anyone else would have been
challenged on, amazing what welcoming waves and smiles you still get in
some audacious places.)

Roman road Hereford, I promised an update earlier today,  if update there
was, - and there was.

Approached from east, bollards still there so with an estimated 20,000 lbs
to the top of a steel bollard, filled with concrete set into a massive
amount of concrete, it bent and then snapped.  If it was not for the
concrete in the middle, I am sure it would have just bent and remained a
problem.  Drove to the far end. friendly waves from the locals. At the far
end, two steel animal crushes, set into slabs of concrete, one on top of
the other, covered in a liberal helping of dung was encountered. Imposibble
to pull out of the way from in the lane, so retraced steps and long way
round to far end.  Pulled both out of the way with some considerable degree
of effort, and the wooden gate next to them was by then opened, about to
drive through, when Mr Angry from Magna Castra Farm runs up and slams the
gate shut in front of us, standing there master Masters style in front of
us.   Swearing why dont we F&*% off back to Orleton, and other choice
expressions.

So how does he know where I am from? had the police told him or was it the
CC?  Asked for his name - no reply. Why couldnt we go down there? because
it was only a footpath on the definitive map.  (It wasnt, it is a UCR &
only a UCR).  

Well I of course after a respectful length of time (Dangerous walks style)
backed off, and drove straight to the police and reported threatening
behaviour.  But what is my next course of action.  Quoting case law to a
deaf CC or plod gets me nowhere.

I have sent a letter to CC legal dept this time, 
after explaining my intentions,  and the obstructions:-

<snip>

I am writing to ask you to confirm this highway is publicly maintainable 
and available for use by all classes of traffic.

If this is the case, could you suggest what steps I should take to bring
about the removal of these obstructions?  I have already made a formal
complaint to West Mercia Constabulary in Hereford, but they appear
reluctant to act in this matter.
 
Today when I attempted to use the road I was physically prevented from
doing so by the owner of Magna Castra Farm, who insisted it was only a
footpath on the definitive map.  I understand  your council have a duty to
protect and assert the rights of the public to use such roads and I am
concerned that a blind eye has been turned to the illegal blocking of this
road to date. 

Would you be good enough to confirm in writing that my intended use of this
way is lawful, and to inform the owner of Magna Castra Farm that the way
has public vehicular rights over it.

Chris.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 02:47:01 -0500
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Masterful

Steve, re

> Resign from GLEAM? Don't forget we'll need another agent, 
>our last one got thrown out!

I wanted to resign before being chucked out.   My name has appeared in
print, I have written the odd letter or two, oposed them in court & PI, 
and so I wanted to resign over something that brings great discredit such
as Masters behaviour, first.

It is easy enough for anyone to join, they are desparate to get anyone to
promote their evil propagander to,  so I think I will pass it over to
someone else.

Chris

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 02:46:59 -0500
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Subject: Council Vans and Tractors

> Anybody know where I can pick up a good second-hand Massey ?
> Peter Bradley

I got an old International 275,
but that wont do enough environmental damage to compete 
with the modern giant lane destroyers!

Chris

------------------------------

  END OF * LIST DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 11 lines 520 [forwarded 41 whitespace 99]
 Output: lines 462 [content 308  forwarded 17 (cut  24) whitespace 88]