East Wall, Dublin 3

whatnext

esmerelda80 wrote: »

In reply to what you said a dont appreaciate our block being classed as spongers welfare and scumbags that party at other peoples expense read the other threads and my mindset is i treat others the way they treat me i have respect for everybody that treats me with it..... Further more i dont wish negative equity on anybody and if you read the thread correctly i said that is prob why they as in a few residents feel like there hard done by and think we have it so easy.....and i work in the nursing sector and i have 3 young children so yeah i would work very hard 7 days a week split shift......and i would like to know how people come to the conclusion they did about our block without any back up as you say .... and further more what kind of person sits in there window taken photos of kids playing chasing to report to a mangement company and incase you dont know under the child protection law no child can be photographed without written consent its illegal ..... and to be honest that is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the snobbery we have encountered in this complex....:mad:

Is this a lie? If not I'm sure you have had the guilty party carted off and sent down for some hard time

I'm sensing a lot of anger here. My point was (rather badly put, I admit) that you are making just as many generalisations and assumptions about other people in the development as some have made about you, so I ask you, are you really any better than them?

esmerelda80

No i dont think im better or worse than the next person...... but sometimes you have to vent at the people writhing them comments for them to actually see how childish there being reverse physch works wonders sometimes......and no that isnt a lie about the wom:mad:an taking photos ..........

candyman

As far as I know, the house rules do not permit children to play on or obstruct the Common areas of the development.

humberklog

esmerelda80 wrote: »

and further more what kind of person sits in there window taken photos of kids playing chasing to report to a mangement company and incase you dont know under the child protection law no child can be photographed without written consent its illegal ..... quote]


Esmerelda80 I'm pretty sure this statement is very incorrect. Can you back it up?
Someone may read it and believe it as actual law which would be very wrong. You may be right and this part of a law went under my radar but I would be very surprised, so as asked; can you quote which law?

Now I appreciate that you're talking about a man taking photos of kids in a complex (am I correct?). This is run by a management company? Then it's probably safe to say it's regarded as private property therefore the photographing of anyone is a little hazy. It can be done up until you're told not to is the general rule of thumb. But this goes for photos of kids or adults, the law of this country doesn't distinguish. If however the photographer is taking photos of people that are on public ground then he is free to do so. A photographer (and by "photographer" I mean anybody with a camera) can take a photo of anyone in any public space at any time. This once again means anybody, adult or child.

An example you might understand is a photograph of Saoirse Ronan, the young Irish actress. She's been snapped lots of times by lots of people and even printed in the press. These photos were taken on the street and no permission was required.

esmerelda80

Well candy man the rules also state no bbq,no pets and no satillite dishes.....None of these rules are being followed or implemented.....Wonder why that is ??...........Obstruction can you define that word for me .....Its called child protection law look it up....

candyman

esmerelda80 wrote: »

Well candy man the rules also state no bbq,no pets and no satillite dishes.....None of these rules are being followed or implemented.....Wonder why that is ??...........Obstruction can you define that word for me .....Its called child protection law look it up....

I don't see many pets around to be fair, nor satellite dishes or bbqs.

Can you explain the "Wonder why that is ??" comment? I'd be interested to hear your opinion on why people apparently don't follow the house rules. Personally I think most people do abide by the rules and it's mostly a pretty quiet complex.

esmerelda80

I do agree with you it is a very quiet complex at the best of times....A friend told me of the comments left about the welfare and social block and how we party all the time .....:mad: I wish i work hard and ive 3 young children as do most of the familys in this block....Our block is one of the quietest of the complex ask security.....It baffles and really irritates me how a few people in this complex have nothing better to do than to sit around taking photos and listing complaints of children at play i.e chasing and other harmless games...Have these people forgotten what its like to be young or did they not have a childhood ?? The block furthest from the gate is the picture taker on the second floor.....All of the police activity in here has been in other blocks never here....So why do people make assumptions .....In regards to the rules take a walk around the complex and see how many rules are broken and there are plenty of dog owners living here to ....We had paddling pools out for the children in july fully supervised as house rules state and some grinch went up and complained about noise at 5 in the evening......In my eyes that is a really sad thing to do

candyman

i hear ya, it would be hard not get annoyed at some of the throw away ill thought out comments you see on these boards sometimes but being honest we are probably all guilty of saying something with no real foundation at some stage so a pinch of salt I'd say! ;-)

It's the kids I feel sorry for to be honest, is there no community areas or parks around where they can play some football openly rather than being boxed in to the area outside the gate?

it makes we wonder though, if the house rules state no kids playing etc etc and social housing put mums with three kids (like yourself esmerelda80) into such a complex I don't see their (housing authority) logic in deciding that an apartment is a good housing solution? its hardly fair on the kids with no where to play etc?!

humberklog

esmerelda80 wrote: »

Its called child protection law look it up....

Not sure if this part is addressed to me as it's not quoted but I'll assume it was. I'm aware of the child protection law and there is no reference to photographing. I thought maybe I'd missed something so made further inquiries with a legal outfit as I do a lot of street photography..there is no law preventing the photographing of children.

esmerelda80

I know its disgracful they gave us nothing for the children at all and the majority of people seem fine its just the few bad apples that just wont let them be kids ...... If they where little ******* i would understand but they dont bother anyone and if they did they would be checked for it ....My son hates his home and always around in my mams cause of the way there is nothing for him here its a sad state of affairs ....

candyman

esmerelda - can I ask what a few things if you don't mind...
1. what government body is responsible for social housing?
2. is social housing the correct term?
3. do they (i.e. the governement body) consider your individual circumstances (married/single/kids/no kids etc) when they are finding you a home to make sure they place you in a home that is fit and appropriate for your circumstances?

Max Power1

esmerelda80 wrote: »

Well candy man the rules also state no bbq,no pets and no satillite dishes.....None of these rules are being followed or implemented.....Wonder why that is ??...........Obstruction can you define that word for me .....Its called child protection law look it up....

is this what you are referring to?

http://193.178.1.79/2000/en/act/pub/0037/sec0001.html

Because there is no mention of not being able to take photos of children in public places.

esmerelda80

hi candy
Dublin City Council is responsable for all housing and housing bodies .i.e respond ,,,,,,cluaid,,,,,helm they all inter link...And nominate people to lists DCC being the top dog and having most of the imput .....Yes each individual has unique circumstances so each profile is considered.... Social housing is a term i dont like and think it in its self put a stigma on people not sure whether its the official name...And no like everybody the council doesnt always get i right in putting familys into certain complexes.....Our rent can vary from 75 to 700 a month people think where so lucky but what they dont realise is we will never own these propertys but still pay high money....:( Yeah max think thats the one i was thinking about ive done child protection law and we where clearly told you need explict permission or written to take a childs photo...And ive had that clarified by the garda...

humberklog

esmerelda80 wrote: »

hi candy
Yeah max think thats the one i was thinking about ive done child protection law and we where clearly told you need explict permission or written to take a childs photo...And ive had that clarified by the garda...

That's the one that I have read too and is also the one that anybody in our legal jurisdiction would too and that includes garda. You were misinformed in your studies and mislead by the garda you talked to. I would advise you to re-approach these people and have them corrected as that mis-information that they told you and you spread here is ill informed, plain wrong and dangerous.
Any person (young or old) can take a photo of any person young or old in the public arena without permission. Before you give advice to people (me included) about reading up on family law you should do so yourself otherwise you could find yourself in a whole lot of unneccessary bother.
If possible could you PM me the garda's details and the course in which you took?

donaghs

candyman wrote: »

It's the kids I feel sorry for to be honest, is there no community areas or parks around where they can play some football openly rather than being boxed in to the area outside the gate?

it makes we wonder though, if the house rules state no kids playing etc etc and social housing put mums with three kids (like yourself esmerelda80) into such a complex I don't see their (housing authority) logic in deciding that an apartment is a good housing solution? its hardly fair on the kids with no where to play etc?!

Ah, isn't Fairview Park across the road? It seems fairly busy with kids doing everything from football, cycling (even the odd dirt bike), and "knacker drinking". Most parts of Dublin don't have that much green space next door to them.

Also, looking through this document East Wall seems fairly well catered for compared to other parts of Dublin in terms of public facilties like Community Centres (2 of them?) and an all-weather football pitch.
http://www.ddda.ie/files/business/docs/eastwallaap2004.pdf

Esmerela80, who are "they" and what do you think they should be doing?
I think there's a lot of taxpayer funded facilities in East Wall, and if the taxpayer is also subsidizing your accomodation, isn't this enough?
"I know its disgracful they gave us nothing for the children at all and the majority of people seem fine its just the few bad apples that just wont let them be kids"

humberklog

Playground in Crescent Gardens too. East Wall has loads of stuff for kids and adults.

ParkRunner

Anyone know what happened on Sherriff St this morning down by the Docklands train station? The road was closed all morning with the gardai keeping people out

esmerelda80

Well humpy i would take any high ranking officers word over yours and every playschool, creche,summer project, council facilities i.e swimming pools,gyms etc...... All abide by this law so maybe its a case you should delve deeper and its taught by all fetac levels in childcare .... Further more if i caught anyone taking pictures of my young children without my permission i would take it very seriously i.e invasion of mine and my childrens right to annomity and privacy and full take action againest anyone who did so ..... What person in there right mind would go around taking pictures of young children that werent there own or werent in a photo studio....Why do you think the news papers cant publish pictures of any young offenders or even name them under the age of 18 go figure.... And the person i was talking about in our complex who was taking photos of the kids and emailing them around ....

esmerelda80

Hey DONAGHS i am a TAXPAYER and no body subsidises my accomadtion i pay my own way.... Do you i wonder ......And there is no playground in crescent gardens Humpy.....Theres one on russel avenue that is run down and in need of repair ...Fairview park is full of junkies and weridos at the best of times ...I wouldnt inflict that on my children and further more i pay enough money each month for my children to play in ther own complex and they will regardless of anyone in here that thinks other wise.....We have put up with enough crap and discrimantion since we moved into here and we as a block and all families concerned will not be tolerating this sort of crap any longer .....

whatnext

I have no problem with the kids on the complex, they are fairly well behaved as a group, the most anyone could really say is they get bit noisy some times, but kids don’t come with a volume control so no problems there, and any way they seem to be back in at a more that reasonable hour.

Residents returning from a night on the beer get my back up. And I know this is going to rub some people up the wrong way but it’s mostly seems to be noisey women, but again that’s life, got to grin and bear it.

But back to an earlier point, I'm still pretty sure that its not illegal to take photos of children or anyone else for that matter without consent, and the fact that a Garda says otherwise is a more than a bit worrying, but not surprising.

I could understand it being illegal to publish photos of juniors without consent, but if I'm not mistaken it is not, but I believe there is a casual agreement amongst the press not to.

There are guide lines established by various organisations, but these are not law. big difference. As an eg I know a friend was was asked by there kids school not to take photos at the school sports day, as they felt "it would be inappropriate"

humberklog

esmerelda80 wrote: »

Well humpy i would take any high ranking officers word over yours and every playschool, creche,summer project, council facilities i.e swimming pools,gyms etc...... All abide by this law so maybe its a case you should delve deeper and its taught by all fetac levels in childcare .... Further more if i caught anyone taking pictures of my young children without my permission i would take it very seriously i.e invasion of mine and my childrens right to annomity and privacy and full take action againest anyone who did so ..... What person in there right mind would go around taking pictures of young children that werent there own or werent in a photo studio....Why do you think the news papers cant publish pictures of any young offenders or even name them under the age of 18 go figure.... And the person i was talking about in our complex who was taking photos of the kids and emailing them around ....

That is all your personal opinion. This does NOT make it law. And it is not law. Read up on your law. Anyone can take a photo of anybody in any public place, this is a fact. The reason minors are not printed in the paper is for a completely different reason and one (if you think you know so much) should look up. Because you don't.
There is a huge difference between opinion and law. What you were told was wrong and being told one thing is law when it is not (and spreading that mis-information around on-line or on the street or on courses or in Garda stations) is dangerous to people and society in general.




Russell ave indeed. It was grand when it was put in and that wasn't too long ago, around the same time as St. Anne's was put in, IIRC. St Anne's is still tip top and that playground's away from residents' view and in a park frequented by drinking gangs and it's still clean and working properly. Russell Ave. did get wrecked and looked ugly pretty quickly (perhaps some local residents thought it was the LAW to wreck everything that's given to them, but it's not the law, just a badly informed opinion). Hardly the coucil's fault, more society. General society and moreso local society. I'm from East Wall by the way, born there.
As for the park...junkies aren't that much of an issue there these days. I find it far more pleasant now and with better amenities than it ever had. It was a spooky and tough place in the 70's and 80's but on the whole it has scrubbed up well.

esmerelda80

Ring your local garda station and ask ....See what answer you get....And and in ref to the playground you are right its a disgrace it was wrecked maybe if know so much you such approach them and teach them the law instead of spending time leavin message that are pompus in the way that they are wrote and dripping in scarcasm.... If you cant have a decent conversation with out being condescending..... Let me know how you get on with that call

humberklog

esmerelda80 wrote: »

Ring your local garda station and ask ....See what answer you get....And and in ref to the playground you are right its a disgrace it was wrecked maybe if know so much you such approach them and teach them the law instead of spending time leavin message that are pompus in the way that they are wrote and dripping in scarcasm.... If you cant have a decent conversation with out being condescending..... Let me know how you get on with that call

I've no need to ring as I'd already inquired with two I know; one detective and one ex asst commisioner. Their answer was the same as my regular solicitors and their answer; anyone can take a photo of anybody at anytime in the public domain. I rang my solicitors after reading your post thinking (erroneously) that you might know what you're talking about as I do a lot of street photography and I am at present shooting in East Wall for photos to accompany a book so I felt it neccessary to check. There is nothing to the contrary in the act that has been previously posted. Your statement regarding the unlawulness of taking photos of children is wrong and unfounded. The act was posted on this thread and is there for the both of us to read.

It's not for me to approach the kids that have wrecked the playground. They're not my kids and I don't ever have to look at the playground or live in the area. My responsability is to bring up my daughter not to do what they do. There is a long history (I've taken stories of one family that go back to 1936 and this family is still troublesome) of dysfunctional families being alowed to run down the area's reputation. I've no interest in doing anything about it, that doesn't mean I can't comment on this behaviour.

Spektator

hi everyone. im about to move into the lighthouse apts, but ive read alot of negative comments here about car robberies and people breaking in and getting their doors kicked in?? i'm kinda shocked, it seemed very secure to me when i went to see it. what's the story? is it safe to park your car in the underground car park or does it make any difference if its in the car park or not? could i ask what floor the people were getting broken into on? i saw that there was beepers for the main gate/doors/lift etc, are people still breaking in?? any info would be greatly appreicated. thanks

Spektator

hahaha. we're in the throws of a global economic recession with nearly 440,000 people unemployed in ireland from all backgrounds, professions, etc and still there are people throwing around the stereotype of the lazy unemployed sponger who sits on the welfare and does nothing.
it's time to broaden your supposedly educated mind and think what happens if you lose your job? i'm sure lots of people thought, it'll never happen to me...

"Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man"

candyman

Hi all,

In the last few days I've had to replace the water pump in the hot press in the apt to the cost of nearly 1000e.

Has anyone else had to do this and if so is it possible to claim this on an insurance policy?

Cheers.

lightening

Hi Candyman, I got one installed in my house, the water pressure was pretty weak and it cost 800 Euro for a retrofit, so almost 1000 euro sounds very very expensive for a replacement of an already plumbed in one. I would deffo claim, it came with the apartment.

candyman

lightening wrote: »

Hi Candyman, I got one installed in my house, the water pressure was pretty weak and it cost 800 Euro for a retrofit, so almost 1000 euro sounds very very expensive for a replacement of an already plumbed in one. I would deffo claim, it came with the apartment.

Did you claim the expense under an insurance policy?

lightening

No, we just got the appliance installed to boost the shower.

candyman

Thanks Lightening but I'm looking to see if anyone has managed to claim such an issue on insurance. I'm not debating the cost, I know it's expensive!