Lissadel House Shut down

blackiebest · 09-01-2009 10:10am #1

Just to get this topic rolling. Stunning move by the Cassidy clan. I do see why they have done what they have but its so sad and I think typical that one of Sligo's most beautiful and historic estates can end up in such a stale mate with the nett result of being closed to the public!!

Opinions please...

Jabby · 09-01-2009 11:01am

blackiebest wrote: »

Just to get this topic rolling. Stunning move by the Cassidy clan. I do see why they have done what they have but its so sad and I think typical that one of Sligo's most beautiful and historic estates can end up in such a stale mate with the nett result of being closed to the public!!

Opinions please...

First I've heard of this...what is their story I wonder? I have my own suspicions but will have to read more about it.

partyguinness · 09-01-2009 11:07am

Read todays Irish Times, I belives the County Council are trying to impose public rights of way through the lands without consulting the owners who are funding the renovations from thier own pocket.

Jabby · 09-01-2009 11:11am

partyguinness wrote: »

Read todays Irish Times, I belives the County Council are trying to impose public rights of way through the lands without consulting the owners who are funding the renovations from thier own pocket.

Thanks pg, I've just read about it now. Mainly about the right of way it seems. There is either a right of way through the estate or not. It should be easy enough to resolve.

kmick · 09-01-2009 11:17am

I heard an interview with one of the local council heads talking about this some time back and his attitude stank. They seem to have fallen out with the family over access across the estate. He consistently refused to agree that this family buying the house and trying to keep it open to the public was a good thing. I guess the family just got sick of battling them and decided to shut up shop. Another example of the incompetency of local and national government.

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 11:53am

partyguinness wrote: »

I belives the County Council are trying to impose public rights of way through the lands without consulting the owners

There were rights of way through the estate used for generations, long before the present owners bought the estate ( for a song I seem to remember...about 1.5 million including all that land ). The right of way issue has nothing to do with the viability of the estate as a business concern.....in fact if the owners did not insist on trying to block the right of way then the public would have been more inclined to visit the estate.

partyguinness · 09-01-2009 12:02pm

jimmmy wrote: »

There were rights of way through the estate used for generations, long before the present owners bought the estate ( for a song I seem to remember...about 1.5 million including all that land ). The right of way issue has nothing to do with the viability of the estate as a business concern.....in fact if the owners did not insist on trying to block the right of way then the public would have been more inclined to visit the estate.

From the article it states that foot numbers have gone from 4000 per year to 40000 which is a serious jump and without public funding under the new ownership..

I think its a bit rich now for Sligo County Council to start throwing their weight around and getting all preachy about Rights of Way when they didnt want to know anything about the place in 2003 when it was up for sale.

slavigo · 09-01-2009 12:22pm

if the owners did not insist on trying to block the right of way then the public would have been more inclined to visit the estate.

I very much doubt whether keeping or removing the right of way has anything to do with the visitor numbers to the estate. It is an attraction to tourists in it's own right and would continue to be so, if it's kept open.

I'm falling on the let them do what they want, as it's their land and the powers that be, didn't want it when it was for sale, even if it would be sad to loose the routes. But at the end of the day, it's private land.

Is it down to votes? There are more votes locally that want it open, so it'll be forced on the fewer votes that don't?

Having said all that, I don't know the full in's and out's of the whole situation.

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 12:27pm

slavigo wrote: »

at the end of the day, it's private land.

Yes, but with a right of way through it, used for generations. Thats the law. I would have thought the owners of the land were aware of the law when they bought it. Maybe thats one of the reasons they bought it so cheap.

slavigo · 09-01-2009 3:14pm

Conspiracy theory: Do you reckon when it came up for sale, it wasn't bought by government cause of the rights of way and the fact that people would be granted access to the grounds anyway. No matter who shelled out for it?

magnumlady · 09-01-2009 3:16pm

I heard a bit about it on Ocean fm apparently a councillor has taken on complaints from people that don't live in the area about the rights of way.

The locals were saying they are delighted with the family that bought Lissadel and that they are devastated that this is going on.

kmick · 09-01-2009 3:20pm

The previous owner gave a sworn affidavit that there were no public rights of way through the land when she sold the house. The county council admit they do not upkeep the roads on the estate as they are private. The county council are a shower.

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 3:22pm

magnumlady wrote: »

I heard a bit about it on Ocean fm apparently a councillor has taken on complaints from people that don't live in the area about the rights of way.

The councillor is more concerned ( and rightly so ) with the locals in the area, as well as those from outside the area, the majority of whom do not want their ancient right of way blocked. The previous owners of Lissadell house never blocked it, and got on with the locals.

There is no conspiracy theory - its just that the law is the law, a right of way is a right of way and nobody has the right to block it.

partyguinness · 09-01-2009 3:29pm

jimmmy wrote: »

Yes, but with a right of way through it, used for generations. Thats the law. I would have thought the owners of the land were aware of the law when they bought it. Maybe thats one of the reasons they bought it so cheap.

You seem very certain about the law in this matter. Are you aware of all the facts I wonder?

I am sure there is alot more to it than what we read about in the paper or hear via local gossip.

In other words unless we know all the facts we should be very slow to jump to conclusions.

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 3:46pm

partyguinness wrote: »

In other words unless we know all the facts we should be very slow to jump to conclusions.

What exactly are you unaware of ?

partyguinness · 09-01-2009 4:04pm

jimmmy wrote: »

What exactly are you unaware of ?

Unless you are have owned the house/own the house/inspected the title deeds as a solicitor during the sale of the house...I fail to see how you or anyone else (including me) could possibly know all the facts. Therefore any info we have is only third/fourth hand, opinion or local pub gossip.

Drummerboy2 · 09-01-2009 4:14pm

Why are the family so intent on blocking access to the road if it has been used for generations. Is it an insurance issue?

booooonzo · 09-01-2009 4:35pm

http://www.lissadellhouse.com/home.php

read it there, explains their reasons.
Council are a serious shower imo. As if anyone here would want a right of way imposed or upheld outside our front door five years after buy the house.

fair play to them.

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 4:57pm

Drummerboy2 wrote: »

Why are the family so intent on blocking access to the road if it has been used for generations.

For the same reason anyone would want to extinguish a right of way going through their property. No great mystery about that. It seems while the previous owners allowed free access through the estate, the present owner erected barriers to restrict access over the past few years, which has not gone down too well with local people ( ask the councillors ) or the county council.

magnumlady · 09-01-2009 5:38pm

I think its a disgrace.
The family have done great work to the house and had some really lovely things for families to do.
I wouldn't want people traipsing all over my land.
The council won't maintain the roads but expect them to be open to the public.

partyguinness · 09-01-2009 5:47pm

magnumlady wrote: »

I think its a disgrace.
The family have done great work to the house and had some really lovely things for families to do.
I wouldn't want people traipsing all over my land.
The council won't maintain the roads but expect them to be open to the public.

I am not from Sligo..but I imagine there might be some resentment among fianna fail gombeen councillor types against the owners...well to do Dublin based barristers..

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 6:08pm

jimmmy wrote: »

There were rights of way through the estate used for generations, long before the present owners bought the estate ( for a song I seem to remember...about 1.5 million including all that land ). The right of way issue has nothing to do with the viability of the estate as a business concern.....in fact if the owners did not insist on trying to block the right of way then the public would have been more inclined to visit the estate.

thats wrong - there were no "rights of way" over the land when the bought the property. The Cassidy's have the legal document to prove this.Cllr. Leonard is now trying to impose a new right of way - and as a result he has caused over 20 people to lose their jobs - good Cllr!

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 6:17pm

jimmmy wrote: »

The councillor is more concerned ( and rightly so ) with the locals in the area, as well as those from outside the area, the majority of whom do not want their ancient right of way blocked. The previous owners of Lissadell house never blocked it, and got on with the locals.

There is no conspiracy theory - its just that the law is the law, a right of way is a right of way and nobody has the right to block it.

wrong again - there is no right of way and there was no right of wayCllr Leonard promised before the last election that he would obtain a ROW and as there is another election coming he was trying to make good on that promise.Now he has lost a lot of people, local people, their job - talk about making a grand geasture and having it backfire.Look at the bigger picture - Sligo as a tourist destination has f@ck all to shout about - ask anyone in England, Europe or the US if they have heard of Sligo and they think you are talking about a diease! Ask the same question about Donegal or Galway and its a different reaction.For the older (over 40) tourist what is there in County Sligo - the opportunity to soak in some seaweed - wow!Lissadel is one of a few attractions that bring tourists to Sligo. Think of a couple in Dublin who are looking for a weekend break I would have thought that they run through a few attractions they can see and book a hotel in town - Lissadel would probably be top of at least near the top of most lists - without it we are struggling. This is so short sighted and typically Sligo!

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 6:18pm

slapbangwhallop wrote: »

thats wrong - there were no "rights of way" over the land when the bought the property.

The county council says there is, and they are the people who matter in planning matters etc.

Plus people were able to drive + walk past the house for generations until the property changed hands 4 or 5 years ago.

slapbangwhallop wrote: »

Cllr. Leonard is now trying to impose a new right of way - and as a result he has caused over 20 people to lose their jobs - good Cllr!

The right of way has nothing to do with the viability or otherwise of the estate - if anything the estate would be more viable if access was unhindered. The business could not support 11 people, how could it.
The tea rooms + shop there was nearly always empty, at least on the occassions I know of.

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 6:20pm

Drummerboy2 wrote: »

Why are the family so intent on blocking access to the road if it has been used for generations. Is it an insurance issue?

its a matter of control - how can you run a business and investment money in an attraction and the property and its gardens if you have no control over access!

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 6:22pm

jimmmy wrote: »

if anything the estate would be more viable if access was unhindered. The business could not support 11 people, how could it..

how do you make that out?The Cassidy's put their nut on the line for Lissadel and this is how the Council repay them! They should really be embrassed!

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 6:36pm

slapbangwhallop wrote: »

its a matter of control - how can you run a business and investment money in an attraction and the property and its gardens if you have no control over access!

You lock the house when you want to, you lock the buildings like the shop and tea rooms. You can even lock the walled gardens. This is as it should be. You can not lock a road over which the public has had access for generations. The barrier erected looked like a roadblock from a WW2 film.

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 6:39pm

slapbangwhallop wrote: »

The Cassidy's put their nut on the line for Lissadel

How do you make that out ? They did not even live there most of the time as far as know. It is absurd to claim because there is a right of way then 11 jobs should go. People should be treated with more respect than that.

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 6:40pm

jimmmy wrote: »

You lock the house when you want to, you lock the buildings like the shop and tea rooms. You can even lock the walled gardens. This is as it should be. You can not lock a road over which the public has had access for generations. The barrier erected looked like a roadblock from a WW2 film.

Yes you can if there was no Right of Way!Its THEIR property THEY paid for it - local people - Sligo people - the council all had f@ck all interest in the place for years. If you have a problem with the barrier THEY erected with THEIR money then why dont YOU help pay for a prettier one!

luckat · 09-01-2009 6:40pm

Surely this should be sorted out in an adult manner - the owners of the house, if they want to live with their neighbours, should be gracious about continuing the traditional right of way, and the neighbours should be equally gracious about using it properly.

partyguinness · 09-01-2009 6:42pm

jimmmy wrote: »

How do you make that out ? They did not even live there most of the time as far as know. It is absurd to claim because there is a right of way then 11 jobs should go. People should be treated with more respect than that.

jimmy...you are very preachy and high and mightly about "the law" which I suspect you know absolutely nothing about.

Why dont you answer my previous post about whether or not you have all the facts??

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 7:01pm

luckat wrote: »

Surely this should be sorted out in an adult manner - the owners of the house, if they want to live with their neighbours, should be gracious about continuing the traditional right of way, and the neighbours should be equally gracious about using it properly.

Hear hear.

jimmmy · 09-01-2009 7:03pm

partyguinness wrote: »

jimmy...you are very preachy and high and mightly about "the law" which I suspect you know absolutely nothing about.

Why dont you answer my previous post about whether or not you have all the facts??

Both sides have put forward their arguments, and it is clear that in planning matters it is what the County Council decides that is important.

Essexboy · 09-01-2009 7:25pm

Jabby wrote: »

Thanks pg, I've just read about it now. Mainly about the right of way it seems. There is either a right of way through the estate or not. It should be easy enough to resolve.

Exactly! and as the owners are sucessful lawyers one would have expected them to take legal action if they had a strong case.
Is closing down the House a bargaining ploy?

magnumlady · 09-01-2009 7:51pm

I don't blame them for shutting the place down.
The council took the decision about the right of way at a meeting that the family weren't even told about.

Xiney · 09-01-2009 7:55pm

This, from the Lissadell House website (the link to which was posted above) makes the issue quite clear to me:

As part of the purchasing process Sir Josslyn Gore Booth, the vendor, gave a sworn declaration confirming that no public rights of way existed over the property. Additionally, Sligo County Council stated that the only roads in the charge of the Council were roads outside Lissadell. There was no suggestion by Sligo County Council that the internal roads or paths were subject to any public rights of way.

For a public right of way to exist, it must be expressly dedicated by the owner of the land. That is the law. There is no evidence that any such dedication was ever made over any part of the Lissadell Estate, either when it was a 4,000 acre estate, or when it was reduced to the current 400 acres in the 1970s.

It seems the Council are up their own holes. Surprise, surprise.

xxgrannygruntxx · 09-01-2009 7:57pm

As a local to the area i can say without any doubt there is a right of way .Some of the local farms have no choice but to cross that land to get to their fields as they have done for generations without any problems Now with these barriers they cannot use their own land so its lying bare Also it was good enough for hill farmers to be forced to make right of ways on their land where there never was a right of way This family are blocking a right that was always in existance which they have to have known of as they are trained barristers

Xiney · 09-01-2009 8:05pm

The council have produced no evidence of a right of way through the land, which is something that is required by law. As a matter of fact, they actually have evidence to the contrary.

Just saying it's so, and right of ways by word of mouth aren't protected by the law.

Essexboy · 09-01-2009 8:19pm

Xiney wrote: »

The council have produced no evidence of a right of way through the land, which is something that is required by law. As a matter of fact, they actually have evidence to the contrary.

Just saying it's so, and right of ways by word of mouth aren't protected by the law.

A right of way does not have to be recorded; it can be made by a period of use for at least 20 years without interuption. If people have walked through Lissadell grounds without hindrance - and lots of locals say they have - a right of way exists.
The County Council have not said definitely that there is a right of way: Councillor Patsy Barry told OceanFM the resolution was only the first step in a procedure to determine whether a right of way exists.

Xiney · 09-01-2009 8:37pm

But there is a sworn statement on record by the previous owner that says there is no right of way.

The fact that people have been contradicting this shouldn't matter, I wouldn't think. However, Right of Way legislation in Ireland is very vague, as far as I can tell.

xxgrannygruntxx · 09-01-2009 8:54pm

Sir Josslyn cannot know what right of way existed he lived in Australia and never visited i was a carer in the house at one time all Sir wanted was the money for the property as a few people in the area could tell Now one last remark as i think the family who purchased the property good luck Its a sad day the family of the Goor Booths died they were a dacent family

dardevle · 09-01-2009 8:57pm

landlord denying people access to land,
locking the gates,dismissing the workers....

and the year is??? anyone?

what would the countess say?:rolleyes:

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 9:00pm

xxgrannygruntxx wrote: »

As a local to the area i can say without any doubt there is a right of way .Some of the local farms have no choice but to cross that land to get to their fields as they have done for generations without any problems Now with these barriers they cannot use their own land so its lying bare Also it was good enough for hill farmers to be forced to make right of ways on their land where there never was a right of way This family are blocking a right that was always in existance which they have to have known of as they are trained barristers

you might be local but there isnt a right of way - do you know what a right of way is??

The council only tried to bring the right of way in in December - there was no official ROW before that - that is a fact!

locals may have used it and have been given the right of passage across the land but there wasnt a Right of Way

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 9:06pm

Essexboy wrote: »

A right of way does not have to be recorded; it can be made by a period of use for at least 20 years without interuption. If people have walked through Lissadell grounds without hindrance - and lots of locals say they have - a right of way exists.
The County Council have not said definitely that there is a right of way: Councillor Patsy Barry told OceanFM the resolution was only the first step in a procedure to determine whether a right of way exists.

well there definately was a restriction on access over the past 5 years - that is way the new owners purposefully erected the gated because the did not want a Right of Way to be created - which is perfectly OK by me - if I bought a house for over a million quid then I would want the right to choose who I let come on to my private property as well

slapbangwhallop · 09-01-2009 9:08pm

dardevle wrote: »

landlord denying people access to land,
locking the gates,dismissing the workers....

and the year is??? anyone?

what would the countess say?:rolleyes:

1. Private land

2.Locking their own gates, just like most would shut their own gates, lock their garage and bolt their front door

3. if effect Cllr Leonard had these people sacked because he made a struggling business which was employing local people untenable!

Scoobydoobydoo · 09-01-2009 9:22pm

slapbangwhallop wrote: »

1. Private land

2.Locking their own gates, just like most would shut their own gates, lock their garage and bolt their front door

3. if effect Cllr Leonard had these people sacked because he made a struggling business which was employing local people untenable!

From what I've read so far, I agree with the above in general. It's extremely disappointing that this house ended up in the hands of a private family in the first place, but since that is the case, and they seem to have done such positive things with it, and most importantly, opening it in to the public - I would think that they should be allowed have control over it. I should think they would be concerned particularly about the security aspect, that anyone should be able to be around outside the house at any time, I wouldn't like that.
I don't understand why this is only an issue now, five years on. I don't have a proper understanding of the situation of how it came to be that people have land which is only accessable by passing though someone else's. Surely these people could have ensured that this was pointed out at the time of the sale anyway?

blackiebest · 09-01-2009 10:24pm

I expected this would be heavily debated. I have good friends who live very close to Lisadell house and use the contested route almost daily, they have been fighting against the route closure for the last five years along with most of the other local residents. Recently I walked from their home to the beach along this route and really felt very uncomfortable. Many reasons for this but mainly because of the anomisity which exists betwen the Cassidy's and the people who want to access the beach using the route.

I think it is fantastic what the Cassidy family have done to the estate and for sure it has benefited Sligo greatly.

I think they handled the situation really badly by allowing the locals to become so incensed when they closed the route.

The route passes within feet of the front door of the house and could not possibly allow any feeling of privacy or security for the owners

The day I walked to the beach I felt terrible passing so close to these peoples home and could clearly see into their home.

I really believe that an alternative non-vechile route should have been created away from the family home and open to the local families who do wish to be able access the shore line or go for a walk.

The Cassidy family are entitled, IMO, to privacy adn security but not to the manner and percieved arrogance displayed when they closed the route and bullied the local people shocked at their actions.

It is terrible the house is now closed and it seems there are only losers as a result.

Lets hope common sense prevails...

T runner · 09-01-2009 11:42pm

slapbangwhallop wrote: »

Yes you can if there was no Right of Way!Its THEIR property THEY paid for it - local people - Sligo people - the council all had f@ck all interest in the place for years. If you have a problem with the barrier THEY erected with THEIR money then why dont YOU help pay for a prettier one!

I think right of access laws apply to everyone and have to be applied without exception.

If the owners believe that there are legally no rights of way, as they implied on their website, then they should be able to challenge for this in a court of Law.

A FG councillor on the radio said the council had requested several meetings with the owners, all turned down.

I dont buy the owners claim that they are shutting the place because of this.
They are barristers and business people and if a place is making a profit, they would keep it open.

They arent making money and are closing for that reason. The other reason they stated is to put pressure on the council to reverse the decision.

They havent said the family is moving out due to safety considerations and they havent said they would reopen if the rights of way werent there.

A compromise in the form of a 5 kph speed limit and/or a motor vehicle ban on the right of way might be a compromise.

jimmmy · 10-01-2009 12:09pm

T runner wrote: »

.

I dont buy the owners claim that they are shutting the place because of this.
They are barristers and business people and if a place is making a profit, they would keep it open.

They arent making money and are closing for that reason. The other reason they stated is to put pressure on the council to reverse the decision.

I agree. In fact I think its an insult to the locals and to the workers for these new absentee landlords to close the route and try to link the closure of the business with the new closure of the route. The previous owners never blocked access, they were "dacent people" as a previous poster pointer out. Pity the new owners have closed / attempted to close a long established right of way, increase rents substantially etc etc. Most of the contents of Lisadell house were sold at a well publicised auction about five years ago, and I think the place has never been the same since. Ye can bring in a few new bits and pieces but the place has not the same spirit. I have great sympathy for the locals there, some of whom I know well.

Jabby · 10-01-2009 1:28pm

xxgrannygruntxx wrote: »

Sir Josslyn cannot know what right of way existed he lived in Australia and never visited i was a carer in the house at one time all Sir wanted was the money for the property as a few people in the area could tell Now one last remark as i think the family who purchased the property good luck Its a sad day the family of the Goor Booths died they were a dacent family

"a dacant family"???
Have you read Joe McGowan's book The shadow of Ben Bulben?

He has an interesting chapter on that 'dacant' family and their history.

jimmmy · 10-01-2009 2:16pm

Thats one persons opinions only.

I agree with xxgrannygruntxx that the previous owners of Lisadell house were "a dacent family.".
As I wrote, its a pity the new owners have closed / attempted to close a long established right of way, increase rents substantially etc

Lissadel House Shut down

Comments