Jump to content

George Ward evicted.


Featured Posts

4 minutes ago, Heartland said:

What would George's living conditions be described as now ?

 

He seems to have shade, better headroom and much more width than a narrowboat interior. I'd say its an improvement. It would also be an improvement over an unheated narrowboat in winter - but that's not directly answering your question. Now, 27th March at about 10:34am, its lovely weather for camping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

He seems to have shade, better headroom and much more width than a narrowboat interior. I'd say its an improvement. It would also be an improvement over an unheated narrowboat in winter - but that's not directly answering your question. Now, 27th March at about 10:34am, its lovely weather for camping.

It looks quite comforable at the moment (27th May) and with his solar panels he appears to be here for the long haul, don't like to think about his toilet facilities, but I wonder now what CRT are going to do about him.

He does appear to be an awkward old sod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Mack said:

What legal powers do CRT have to stop people camping on their land? The nearest I can see in the Byelaws is that you must not obstruct the towpath, but is his tent actually an obstruction?

 

The Vagrancy Act 1824, I'd have thought.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagrancy_Act_1824

 

"The Vagrancy Act 1824 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom that makes it an offence to sleep rough or beg in England and Wales."

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mad Harold said:

 don't like to think about his toilet facilities

 

 

From the article (my italics) -- "George Ward, 62, is camping on the canal towpath close to Smelly Bridge near Bradford on Avon."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MtB said:

 

The Vagrancy Act 1824, I'd have thought.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagrancy_Act_1824

 

"The Vagrancy Act 1824 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom that makes it an offence to sleep rough or beg in England and Wales."

 

 

 

That seems to be a law that is honoured more in the breach than the observance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

What legal powers do CRT have to stop people camping on their land? The nearest I can see in the Byelaws is that you must not obstruct the towpath, but is his tent actually an obstruction?

 

Whatever the actual detail of the law is, the police are very well aware of the situation and took no action. I'm not sure CRT can take legal action except on the relevant byelaws and waterways acts (which would mention the duty of the "board").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The towpath is private land (unless it is a section designated as public right of way, in which case you have a right to pass along it, but not to erect a tent, store possessions or stay indefinitely). So I think by camping Ward is trespassing and maybe also squatting. In either case I think that means CRT would have to get a Court Order if he refuses to go. But past history would suggest that is not a quick way of dealing with the matter!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

Whatever the actual detail of the law is, the police are very well aware of the situation and took no action. I'm not sure CRT can take legal action except on the relevant byelaws and waterways acts (which would mention the duty of the "board").

They could use Section 9 of the British Waterways Act 1983.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, magnetman said:

It does not seem to mention the land. 

 

IMG_20230527_164120.jpg.e6c89c6e68c90c5511be85f6c04294cc.jpg

 

 

Mind you, right at the beginning we have this, which basically says "inland waterway" includes the towpath and other land associated with the waterway:

 

image.thumb.png.683d0c978f686a0cd54da0c6879399d0.png

 

 

 

 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The problem here is that there is a.) b.) and c.).

 

a.) and b.) don't apply and c.) seems to be interesting as it mentions lawful authority to be "in the waterway or reservoir". 

How would lawful authority work if you are on land owned by the board?  Does the tent need a BSC and a licence given that the land owned by the Board / Trust is included in the part 2 definition of 'waterway'? 

 

 

I flagged this on this thread a while ago as a potentially interesting situation. 

 

The CRT need to get their shit together and deal with inappropriate use of land asap or Bad Things will happen. 

 

 

This Ward geyser is a squatter and as with all good squatters he is asking questions by his actions.

 

Interesting questions.

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, magnetman said:

 

 

The problem here is that there is 1, 2 and 3. 

 

1 and 2 don't apply and 3 seems to be interesting as it mentions lawful authority to be "in a waterway or reservoir". 

How would lawful authority work if tou are on land owned by the board? 

 

 

I flagged this on this thread a while ago as a potentially interesting situation. 

 

The CRT need to get their shit together and deal with inappropriate use of land asap or Bad Things will happen. 

 

 

 

 

I think George is going to turn out to be a trailblazer. Given CRT's dismally slow response to George's 'two fingers' up at them regarding his boats, I can imagine them taking another ten years with his tent. To start with, they will no doubt feel obliged to obtain an unnecessary court order to clear it off their waterway just as they did with his boat. Which will probably require at least three or four years of navel-gazing while they try to wake up their solicitor.

 

By which time I suspect 'tent' will be too small a word to describe the small shanty town George will probably build for himself. Lots of people will be watching and I suspect more tent-dwellers will join him as neighbours.

 

I think what might happen actually is the local planning authority will issue an enforcement order of some sort to force CRT's hand. But whatever happens, I can see it taking years to implement. During which time, living in a complicated and high-tech tent on the canal bank will become a thing. After all there are plenty of facilities provided for boaters they can use. Already most CRT car parks have a campervan or two. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by MtB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there are laws around littering.

 

It seems to me that the temporary nature of a tent and associated equipment and activities would be dealt with by something other than waterways legislation. There is no boat. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I wonder if there are laws around littering.

 

It seems to me that the temporary nature of a tent and associated equipment and activities would be dealt with by something other than waterways legislation. There is no boat. 

 

 

But by CRT's own argument, it is someone's home and therefore a court order must be obtained first. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been quite a few little tent encampments on the K&A in the past, I don't know if and how they have been removed by the authorities. Also discrete overnight camping accross the system is not uncommon, a few people do some very big towpath walks. The canal is a mostly relaxed place full of slightly unconventional characters and it will be very sad if George causes things to get more controlled.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GUMPY said:

His tent would make a good starter for a bonfire. Would be a real shame if the local scrotes decided to have one🤔😱

 

If CRT ever get around to cutting the towpath vegetation the mower would make a right mess of his tent...

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/05/2023 at 17:18, MtB said:

 

I think what might happen actually is the local planning authority will issue an enforcement order of some sort to force CRT's hand. But whatever happens,

 If (and it's a big if) the local authority use their powers - which might be planning or one of their other statutory functions, the CRT will be given a relatively short period to act or the authority will do it for them. Planning authorities have had houses demolished before now so the fact it's a tent that someone is living in won't stop them - lack of resources and lack of political will might. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.