Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Couple Ordered to Demolish House - any update?

13567…32

Comments

  • #62
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    Do tou feel better after blurting out that nonsense?

    What's nonsense about it? Is it a fact or not that that road conditions are not consistent in this country? That laws are not applied consistently? And fairly. It seems to me what you are saying is that the problems with this country are not the problems of this country, but the people who find fault with the problems of this country


  • #63
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    Do tou feel better after blurting out that nonsense?

    What's nonsense about it? Is it a fact or not that that road conditions are not consistent in this country? That laws are not applied consistently? And fairly. It seems to me what you are saying is that the problems with this country are not the problems of this country, but the people who find fault with the problems of this country


  • #64
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    Do tou feel better after blurting out that nonsense?

    What's nonsense about it? Is it a fact or not that that road conditions are not consistent in this country? That laws are not applied consistently? And fairly. It seems to me what you are saying is that the problems with this country are not the problems of this country, but the people who find fault with the problems of this country.


  • #65
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    El Tarangu wrote: »
    I live in Belgium; this is pure invention.

    You seem to be suggesting that, because planning isn't perfect in Ireland (and I'll concede that it isn't), there should be a free-for-all, and fair fecks to anyone who can get away with it. What if you decided to build some McMansion and got away with it, but then I bought the parcel of land next door and decided to open a sulpher mine or a meat rendering plant and got away with that, where would we be then?

    You live in Belguim? Tell me, do the authorities collect rubbish from households on the side of the road on a regular basis? Is that pure invention? Is the health service better or worse there? What about public transport? Or the roads? In your honest experience, are public services better there or not? All I want in this country is a "RONSEAL" public service....one that does exactly what it says it does. For instance, I recently went to a local waste centre with a sofa and single bed, paid €47 for the privilege and on my way home, what did I see only another sofa and mattress dumped on the side of the road. In response to people being allowed to build what they want, that is not what I am,saying. What I am saying is to have planning laws, but ones that are applied evenly, fairly and universally. Have plans that lay out intentions for 5,10, 15 years that have services included and that everyone can have confidence in. If you dont think what I am saying about the planning laws of this country are right, familiarise yourself with the case of the local musician in west Kerry who cant get permission for a small dwelling on what is an ancient settlement while others are granted planning for holiday homes in the same area. This is the fact of the laws of Ireland being applied unfairly and indescriminatably. But again, I make the point that the problem seems to be the people who have a problem with these laws, not the laws themselves


  • #66
    JustAThought
    Registered Users Posts: 5,323 ✭✭✭JustAThought


    whatever about the McMansion I agree totally about the laws being unfairly applied &
    the ‘laws’ of this country being a total farce. Look at what is happening regarding Zone Z planning in the ao called protected
    conservation area of St Annes Park in Dublin City Council Area, and the two fingers given to the protected stratus of tye protected trees in ‘Santry’ Park and the high court injunction protecting Malahide Castle in Fingal County Council - planning and legal protection and the ‘might’ of the law is a total joke in this country and only seems to depend on what pull
    you have and how deep the taxpayer pockets who you can dig into are - regardless of what the law says against you.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    El Tarangu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭El Tarangu


    Tiger20 wrote: »
    You live in Belguim? Tell me, do the authorities collect rubbish from households on the side of the road on a regular basis?

    They do, but it's not covered by your property tax, as you claimed; you have to pay for it (though i will concede it's not very expensive). There loads of crappy roads in Belgium also, with the roads of one region being in worse condition than those of the others, to the extent that there are loads of memes about it.

    it's true that the public transport is a lot better and the hospitals are good - but these things come with a cost, I doubt that you would want to pay Belgian taxes.


  • #68
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    El Tarangu wrote: »
    They do, but it's not covered by your property tax, as you claimed; you have to pay for it (though i will concede it's not very expensive). There loads of crappy roads in Belgium also, with the roads of one region being in worse condition than those of the others, to the extent that there are loads of memes about it.

    it's true that the public transport is a lot better and the hospitals are good - but these things come with a cost, I doubt that you would want to pay Belgian taxes.

    Pay Belgian taxes? Happily, if I got Belgian public services. As I pointed out, we get nothing for our property tax that we did not get before. I would have happily paid the water charge, because it is the one thing that you actually got to see what you paid for. Turn on your tap, theres your water. My point re planning laws, and all laws in this country, is that they are totally unfair and not applied evenly. There are many examples of this, for instance the Central Bank fmhad permission to build 16 storeys, but "someone" built 17, did they have to knock a floor? No. So, if you want a law applying to the people in this OP, then apply it to everyone


  • #69
    Widdensushi
    Registered Users Posts: 5,154 ✭✭✭Widdensushi


    Tiger20 wrote: »
    Pay Belgian taxes? Happily, if I got Belgian public services. As I pointed out, we get nothing for our property tax that we did not get before. I would have happily paid the water charge, because it is the one thing that you actually got to see what you paid for. Turn on your tap, theres your water. My point re planning laws, and all laws in this country, is that they are totally unfair and not applied evenly. There are many examples of this, for instance the Central Bank fmhad permission to build 16 storeys, but "someone" built 17, did they have to knock a floor? No. So, if you want a law applying to the people in this OP, then apply it to everyone

    Rubbish, we need rules or everyone can build what they want, I am not necessarily against that but if you have rules then the people who ignore them have to take down their properties or there will be a free for all. It's an injustice to everyone who applies for planning permission that this property is still standing.


  • #70
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    Widdensushi wrote: »
    Rubbish, we need rules or everyone can build what they want, I am not necessarily against that but if you have rules then the people who ignore them have to take down their properties or there will be a free for all. It's an injustice to everyone who applies for planning permission that this property is still standing.

    That's my point, which you seem to miss. We need rules, but ones that are applied to everyone. Why should these people have to take down their property if the Central Bank did not have to abide by the laws and remove a floor that they had no permission for? To me, that is the injustice


  • #71
    JG009
    Registered Users Posts: 2,482 ✭✭✭JG009


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    Do tou feel better after blurting out that nonsense?

    Welcome to the internet. People say things here. So what if he does?


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    s1ippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭s1ippy


    If everyone just did it then we could all just do it.

    Fucl< da Co €o
    Let's develop Mayo
    Never mind the 5-0
    Watch me build a gaf tho
    Next we'll start in Sligo
    Fill the country with ho
    .
    .
    .
    .

    mes. Homes.


  • #73
    MaryLouMacari
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭MaryLouMacari


    Does anyone know the reasons why the Murrays were refused planning in the first place?


  • #74
    2018na
    Registered Users Posts: 215 ✭✭2018na


    MaryLouMacari wrote: »
    Does anyone know the reasons why the Murrays were refused planning in the first place?

    Planning in Meath is a joke. Broke the Murrays hearts over a period when they legitimately applied a number of times albeit for a smaller dwelling. Around that time another builder had got retention for a massive mansion built in the wrong field and drastically bigger than any permits granted. Also this mansion is fully visible from the road whereas the Murray house is up a very quiet cul de sac. As regards knocking it what sort of a man he gonna bring machinery on site to actually knock it. Everyone is really busy and no one needs that sort of job along with the inevitable hassle it will bring the contractor. It’s also amazing it got to the stage of being totally finished without the planning authorities realizing something’s amiss no


  • #75
    ronivek
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    Tiger20 wrote: »
    There are many examples of this, for instance the Central Bank fmhad permission to build 16 storeys, but "someone" built 17, did they have to knock a floor? No. So, if you want a law applying to the people in this OP, then apply it to everyone

    They spent over a million pounds reducing the height of the building because they were in breach of planning laws. At least pick a valid example if you're going to claim planning laws aren't 'applied evenly'.


  • #76
    lawrencesummers
    Registered Users Posts: 8,470 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    Bought farm land.
    Turned down for small house.
    Built bigger house
    Turned down for retention.



    Fcuk em.


  • #77
    MaryLouMacari
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭MaryLouMacari


    lawrencesummers wrote: »
    Bought farm land.
    Turned down for small house.
    Built bigger house
    Turned down for retention.



    Fcuk em.


    Really depends on why they were turned down and what else was being granted around them?


  • #78
    ronivek
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    MaryLouMacari wrote: »
    Really depends on why they were turned down and what else was being granted around them?

    It really doesn’t. They built without planning permission and they’ve been ordered to tear it down by the Supreme Court.


  • #79
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,972 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    MaryLouMacari wrote: »
    Really depends on why they were turned down and what else was being granted around them?

    It absolutely doesn't.

    They showed compete disregard for law


  • #80
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,659 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Tiger20 wrote: »
    Pay Belgian taxes? Happily, if I got Belgian public services. As I pointed out, we get nothing for our property tax that we did not get before. I would have happily paid the water charge, because it is the one thing that you actually got to see what you paid for. Turn on your tap, theres your water. My point re planning laws, and all laws in this country, is that they are totally unfair and not applied evenly. There are many examples of this, for instance the Central Bank fmhad permission to build 16 storeys, but "someone" built 17, did they have to knock a floor? No. So, if you want a law applying to the people in this OP, then apply it to everyone

    You do realise that the reason we don’t have water charges is because of people with your attitude to law and order .

    No system is perfect but it’s a lot better than the alternative.


  • #81
    MaryLouMacari
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭MaryLouMacari


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    It absolutely doesn't.

    They showed compete disregard for law

    Maybe for a law that wasn't being applied equally?

    If you and your neighbour were both parked on double yellow lines and you were the only one clamped, would you simply pay the fee with a smile and not want to know why the other car wasn't clamped?

    As I already asked, do we know why they were refused planning?

    I think someone has already stated that an even bigger, more prominent house was granted planning nearby.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Yellow_Fern
    Registered Users Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    2018na wrote: »
    Planning in Meath is a joke. Broke the Murrays hearts over a period when they legitimately applied a number of times albeit for a smaller dwelling. Around that time another builder had got retention for a massive mansion built in the wrong field and drastically bigger than any permits granted. Also this mansion is fully visible from the road whereas the Murray house is up a very quiet cul de sac. As regards knocking it what sort of a man he gonna bring machinery on site to actually knock it. Everyone is really busy and no one needs that sort of job along with the inevitable hassle it will bring the contractor. It’s also amazing it got to the stage of being totally finished without the planning authorities realizing something’s amiss no

    A true Meath patriot


  • #83
    um7y1h83ge06nx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,029 ✭✭✭um7y1h83ge06nx


    I'm not saying they may not have a grievance but no two planning applications are the same so it's impossible to do a like for like comparison.


  • #84
    Irish_peppa
    Registered Users Posts: 653 ✭✭✭Irish_peppa


    Is there a streetview of the house?. If its far back from the road and or surrounded by large trees out of site out of mind i guess:pac:


  • #85
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,972 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    MaryLouMacari wrote: »
    Maybe for a law that wasn't being applied equally?

    If you and your neighbour were both parked on double yellow lines and you were the only one clamped, would you simply pay the fee with a smile and not want to know why the other car wasn't clamped?

    As I already asked, do we know why they were refused planning?

    I think someone has already stated that an even bigger, more prominent house was granted planning nearby.

    Check the councils website to find out what the reasons for refusal were.

    Also check an bord pleanala as they also refused it.

    Check the high courts ruling as to why its illegal.

    And while your at that check the supreme courts ruling as to why it upheld the high courts ruling.


    Or maybe you think they are all in this together as some kind of major conspiracy??


  • #86
    MaryLouMacari
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭MaryLouMacari


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Check the councils website to find out what the reasons for refusal were.

    Also check an bord pleanala as they also refused it.

    Check the high courts ruling as to why its illegal.

    And while your at that check the supreme courts ruling as to why it upheld the high courts ruling.


    Or maybe you think they are all in this together as some kind of major conspiracy??

    {SNIP}

    Send me on the planning reference number.


  • #87
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,972 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    No


  • #88
    dubrov
    Registered Users Posts: 3,545 ✭✭✭dubrov


    [QUOTE=MaryLouMacari;114200524

    Send me on the planning reference number.[/QUOTE]

    Someone got out of bed on the wrong side this morning!


  • #89
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    ronivek wrote: »
    They spent over a million pounds reducing the height of the building because they were in breach of planning laws. At least pick a valid example if you're going to claim planning laws aren't 'applied evenly'.

    "They" spent over a million. Who's the they......its the taxpayer, not any individual, I dont think the taxpayer will pay to demolish this house, it will fall on the individual.


  • #90
    ronivek
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    Tiger20 wrote: »
    "They" spent over a million. Who's the they......its the taxpayer, not any individual, I dont think the taxpayer will pay to demolish this house, it will fall on the individual.

    It fell to the owner to remedy; the owner in that case being the Central Bank. Precisely the same way in this case it has fallen on the owner to remedy.

    The fact the Central Bank is state owned is immaterial to your point about planning laws not being applied evenly. Unless you’re trying to claim the Murray’s are receiving preferential treatment in some way?


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Tiger20
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Tiger20


    Cyrus wrote: »
    You do realise that the reason we don’t have water charges is because of people with your attitude to law and order .

    No system is perfect but it’s a lot better than the alternative.

    What do you know about my attitude? If you read my post I said I would happily pay, if I got the service. I supported and paid water charges, so how can it be people like me being responsible for not having them. It was actually spineless populist politicians, IMO. The point you miss which I repeat, is that I want and support laws but want them applied fairly, not on a who you know basis, and that the problems in this country seems to be people who rail against injustice. Were the speeding laws applied to everyone? A certain guard who highlighted that certain well connected people were continually flouting were getting their points wiped, happily speeding away while the rest of us drove legally. But that wasnt the problem , he was the problem. That's just one of the the sort of thing I am talking about


Advertisement