Burning of 'Waste' !!

PhoenixGal · 30-07-2010 11:42PM #1

How would you deal with a 'gentleman' who has been ordered by the planning dept to remove a mobile home from his backyard and then proceeds to demolish said mobile home with a digger, digs a large hole where it had been standing with the digger and then burns the debris from the demolition and buries the leftovers in the hole........??

:mad::mad::mad:

djpbarry · 31-07-2010 12:33AM

I suggest you file a complaint with your local authority.

coletti · 31-07-2010 07:37AM

PhoenixGal wrote: »

How would you deal with a 'gentleman' who has been ordered by the planning dept to remove a mobile home from his backyard and then proceeds to demolish said mobile home with a digger, digs a large hole where it had been standing with the digger and then burns the debris from the demolition and buries the leftovers in the hole........?? :mad::mad::mad:

Why do you want to deal with him? If it were me, I wouldn't wand to deal with him. What is it you want from him that you feel he needs to be dealt with?

Wheelnut · 31-07-2010 07:25PM

@PhoenixGal, are you at any loss because of the way the gentleman has complied with the removal order? How are relations between you and him? Who made the original complaint about the mobile home? I ask these questions in the hope of getting a clearer picture of what's going on here.

Cookie_Monster · 01-08-2010 11:04AM

report him to the council for illegal rubbish burning...

Mahatma coat · 02-08-2010 03:35AM

YEP, good lads, grass him up, Disobeying silly greenie Laws, everyone KNOWS that the man is Just Pure evil, imagine it, Burning something he owns in his own Yard, the cheek of him, tis just one step away from molesting small children.

amacachi · 02-08-2010 03:44AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

tis just one step away from molesting small children.

That is exactly the impression I got from the other posters.

PhoenixGal · 02-08-2010 12:10PM

Just to add a few details about the 'gentleman' I referred to in my initial post:

He applied for and got planning permission for a house and large garage with the condition that he reduce the height of the house. He did not comply with this, and made other changes to the house without concern for planning.

He then built a garage larger than he had planning for - two storey with 5 additional windows which were not in his plans, at least 2 feet higher than it should have been.

As these overlooked our garden and kitchen we lodged an objection with the council stating this. When the council asked him to stop work on the - at that stage still in progress - garage he ignored them and continued to build, roof, plaster and paint the garage, and install the windows and doors.

He then applied for retention. This was refused, on the basis that his house was also outside his planning and they would not grant permission for a second unauthorised construction on the site.

He was then instructed to remove the mobile home, or get planning permission for it, and also he was instructed to remove the unauthorised garage.

His response to this was what I had in the original post.

He is not a very approachable person, and in the past 3 years there has been little or no communication.

coletti · 02-08-2010 04:22PM

PhoenixGal wrote: »

Just to add a few details about the 'gentleman' I referred to in my initial post:

He applied for and got planning permission for a house and large garage with the condition that he reduce the height of the house. He did not comply with this, and made other changes to the house without concern for planning.

He then built a garage larger than he had planning for - two storey with 5 additional windows which were not in his plans, at least 2 feet higher than it should have been.

As these overlooked our garden and kitchen we lodged an objection with the council stating this. When the council asked him to stop work on the - at that stage still in progress - garage he ignored them and continued to build, roof, plaster and paint the garage, and install the windows and doors.

He then applied for retention. This was refused, on the basis that his house was also outside his planning and they would not grant permission for a second unauthorised construction on the site.

He was then instructed to remove the mobile home, or get planning permission for it, and also he was instructed to remove the unauthorised garage.

His response to this was what I had in the original post.

He is not a very approachable person, and in the past 3 years there has been little or no communication.

I am aware of a similar case in Galway with a difficult neighbour and where he was instructed to demolish a structure.

If he does not do so, the council can get a court order compelling him to comply with the law. If he still refuses, then they can take him to court for the more serious charge of contempt of court, and the court can give him two options; either comply with the court order, or be committed to prison. Or it can levy a fine and still insist he complies with the court order, with the threat of prison if he still refuses.

A sting in the tail will be that the local authority will be likely to also ask the court to award them their costs against him, and these costs are likely to increase all the time he refuses to carry out the court order. If he refuses to pay the costs, they can then apply to the court for a judgment mortgage, which in effect prevents him, or his successors, from selling the property until such times as the debt has been paid.

Additionally, if he tries to sell his house, he will find that it is very difficult to sell while this situation persists, as any search will reveal that there is a planning issue which has not been resolved and a judgment mortgage against the property.

PhoenixGal · 02-08-2010 04:48PM

Hi Coletti,

Thank you for that info... most interesting!!

Can I just ask you if that case is still ongoing, or has it been resolved??

djpbarry · 02-08-2010 10:45PM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

YEP, good lads, grass him up, Disobeying silly greenie Laws, everyone KNOWS that the man is Just Pure evil, imagine it, Burning something he owns in his own Yard, the cheek of him, tis just one step away from molesting small children.

So it's cool for me to keep a tyre fire burning indefinitely on my property regardless of the adverse health effects? Or how about a nice big pile of festering animal corpses?

Mahatma coat · 02-08-2010 11:14PM

Well I'd recomend using the tyres to Burn the Festering animal Corpses

A Man should be free to do what he wants in his own Yard, if Phoenix Gal dosent like it, well She is Free to MOVE, but why should her neighbour have to jump through hoops and destroy his own Property because someone else is a little sensitive about things blocking their view over her morning Frapachino.

This strikes me as the same sort of people who complin that the scenic beauty of the area is disturbed by farmers ploughing up the nice green fields.

djpbarry · 03-08-2010 08:27AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

A Man should be free to do what he wants in his own Yard...

Anything at all? No restrictions?

Cookie_Monster · 03-08-2010 08:51AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

but why should her neighbour have to jump through hoops and destroy his own Property because someone else is a little sensitive about things blocking their view over her morning Frapachino.

because its the law and you can't just decide to only follow the ones you agree with

PhoenixGal · 03-08-2010 08:53AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

A Man should be free to do what he wants in his own Yard, if Phoenix Gal dosent like it, well She is Free to MOVE, but why should her neighbour have to jump through hoops and destroy his own Property because someone else is a little sensitive about things blocking their view over her morning Frapachino.

This strikes me as the same sort of people who complin that the scenic beauty of the area is disturbed by farmers ploughing up the nice green fields.

Mahatma coat - you have no idea why this is bothering me and you should not make assumptions about people you do not know!! Some of your comments are quite offensive.

I come from a farming background and was raised to have respect for the land - everybody's land!!!

I chose to live in a quiet country area because that was my choice!! At no point in any of my posts have I made any reference to my view or anything blocking it.

I initially posted on this forum for a bit of advice and unbiased opinions - not bigoted remarks which have no bearing on my queries!!

Just to clarify - for your benefit - my major outrage is over the damage that this person is causing to the surrounding land, which belongs to local farmers and also to the damage he is causing to the health of local people, both adults and children (including his own!!). I saw the smoke from his fire obscuring houses which are over half a mile away!

In my opinion we all have a responsibility to the area we live in and should not knowlegably do anything which would harm other people by our actions.

PhoenixGal · 03-08-2010 08:58AM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

because its the law and you can't just decide to only follow the ones you agree with

Exactly!!! Thank you!!

Macha · 03-08-2010 09:50AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

A Man should be free to do what he wants in his own Yard,

If what he or she does impacts on other people then no, a person should be allowed to do anything.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

if Phoenix Gal dosent like it, well She is Free to MOVE, but why should her neighbour have to jump through hoops and destroy his own Property because someone else is a little sensitive about things blocking their view over her morning Frapachino.

The idea that PhoenixGal is being "sensitive" ignores the fact that the neighbour's actions are having an impact on her property. I'm not sure where she has suggested that he "destroy his own Property" as it seems that's exactly what she's trying to get him to stop doing.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

This strikes me as the same sort of people who complin that the scenic beauty of the area is disturbed by farmers ploughing up the nice green fields.

Nonsense.

kilmuckridge · 03-08-2010 11:30AM

Hi PhoenixGal,
I had a problem with illegal burning in my area, but when the authorities arrived the ash and residue had been moved, so no evidence remained. In such cases the local authority will only follow up the case if waste charges are not being paid by the offender. In your case however, the burnt material is buried in a known location, so it should be easy for the authorities to prove that illegal burning took place.

coletti · 03-08-2010 02:00PM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Well I'd recomend using the tyres to Burn the Festering animal Corpses

A Man should be free to do what he wants in his own Yard, if Phoenix Gal dosent like it, well She is Free to MOVE, but why should her neighbour have to jump through hoops and destroy his own Property because someone else is a little sensitive about things blocking their view over her morning Frapachino.

This strikes me as the same sort of people who complin that the scenic beauty of the area is disturbed by farmers ploughing up the nice green fields.

Your post made me laugh out loud! If you think we bear no responsibility at all to our neighbours, and can ignore the law, then thats what you think.

Additionally, if you equate a farmer ploughing a field to burning tyres to incinerate a pile of stinking corpses next door to someone's house, then you'll forgive me for observing that you seem a little unbalanced in your logic. But then I think you know that already!

:D

Wheelnut · 03-08-2010 05:10PM

...er, I thought this thread was about PhoenixGal wanting to "deal with a gentleman" who was ordered to remove a mobile home but instead he broke it up, burned it and buried the ash! So where did we get burning tyres, festering corpses and ploughed fields?

Looking at this positively it seems to me that progress is being made even though another wrong has been done. I'm sure the "gentleman" would have preferred to sell the mobile home for cash but could not do so in the present climate, so he is at a financial loss by burning the home and he would not have burned it if he was not feeling some pressure.

recedite · 07-08-2010 10:19AM

PhoenixGal wrote: »

proceeds to demolish said mobile home with a digger, digs a large hole where it had been standing with the digger and then burns the debris from the demolition and buries the leftovers in the hole

Well its gone now, so you can relax. It would be hard enough to get the Council to react to something that is still there.

Antrim_Man · 21-08-2010 08:58AM

Is this really a burning issue to get heated up about

demonspawn · 22-08-2010 05:22PM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

YEP, good lads, grass him up, Disobeying silly greenie Laws, everyone KNOWS that the man is Just Pure evil, imagine it, Burning something he owns in his own Yard, the cheek of him, tis just one step away from molesting small children.

The law is the law, regardless of your own personal opinion. If everyone decided it was ok to break laws they didn't agree with, where would we be? That's right, in absolute chaos and disorder.

People who break the law, even "silly greenie laws", should be held accountable for their actions.

Mahatma coat · 25-08-2010 05:03AM

Exactly What LAW did this man Break??????

there is a huge distinction between Statutes , Acts and LAWS

chughes · 25-08-2010 06:13AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Exactly What LAW did this man Break??????

there is a huge distinction between Statutes , Acts and LAWS

On the basis that planning laws are indeed laws then it would appear that this man has broken the planning laws by not sticking to the permission he was granted.

Mahatma coat · 25-08-2010 07:46AM

I think you'll find they are Statutory Instruments, or ACTS, Entirely different beast to LAWS

kilmuckridge · 26-08-2010 04:28PM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I think you'll find they are Statutory Instruments, or ACTS, Entirely different beast to LAWS

Please, enlighten us? Name a law

demonspawn · 27-08-2010 02:39AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I think you'll find they are Statutory Instruments, or ACTS, Entirely different beast to LAWS

I think you'll find you are simply being argumentative and rude in almost every thread in this section. Did you intentionally come here to bash people or was it just a coincidence that you disagree with everything people say on this forum? You obviously have no interest whatsoever in sustainability and the environment so....what are you doing here?

djpbarry · 01-09-2010 06:43PM

demonspawn wrote: »

I think you'll find you are simply being argumentative and rude in almost every thread in this section. Did you intentionally come here to bash people or was it just a coincidence that you disagree with everything people say on this forum? You obviously have no interest whatsoever in sustainability and the environment so....what are you doing here?

How's about you leave the moderating to the moderators?

Pete M. · 01-09-2010 10:37PM

The waste enforcement section of the local authority is obliged to at least investigate the incident.

Disposal of waste by burning is prohibited under section 32 of the Waste Management Act 1996-2010, because it would probably cause environmental pollution and also the Air Pollution Act 1987, as a nuisance.

The burying of waste on the property without a permit would be an offence under section 39 of the Act.

Each offence could lead to fines of up to €3000 in the district court.

There is also a fairly new set of regulations, the Waste Management (prohibition of waste disposal by burning) Regulations 2009 which also has something to say about the whole thing.

The regulations and acts make up 'The Law' afaik.

Unless it's some cops who are onto you, then you may also refer to them as 'The Law'. :pac:

Oh and if one were burning festering corpses on a property, then the waste management regs. wouldn't apply, as it would be animal by-products and they are exempt under the regulations, but the air pollution act still would (can imagine twud be a nasty enough smell).

Burning of 'Waste' !!

Comments