Bridgewater permits and licenses

[gigoguy]

1 minute ago, tree monkey said:

If the tree hasn't been covered by the various constraints fill your boots

but it is covered by the various constraints so what now?

[tree monkey]

6 minutes ago, gigoguy said:

but it is covered by the various constraints so what now?

Justify the work to the TO or forestry commission.

I have other less interesting things to do right now, if your genuinely interested I will happily answer your questions and help with any tree issues you might have but as I suspect this is not the point of this I am going to leave you to it.

Good luck with your battle with peel

Edited October 11, 2017 by tree monkey

[gigoguy]

Just now, tree monkey said:

Justify the work to the TO or forestry commission.

I have other less interesting things to do right now, if your genuinely interested I will happily answer your questions and help with any tree issues you might have but as I suspect this is not the point of this I am going to leave you to this.

Good luck with your battle with peel

Cheers

And all I am saying is that you can only do what you can do if you have permission, including cutting down a bloomin tree! 

Can anyone translate sense into Welsh?

[Pie Eater]

There seems to be a lot of trees on the Bridgewater 

[Graham Davis]

16 hours ago, Graham Davis said:

There is a tree in my garden.
I am NOT in a Conservation Zone.
The tree does NOT have a TPO.
The trunk is less than 75cm.
The volume is less than 15 cu mt.
Therefore I can cut it down without asking permission of anyone!

 

16 hours ago, gigoguy said:

 

You can't do what you want unless you have permission. How much clearer does that need to be. You can charge for passage IF you have permission, you can charge to park IF you have permission, you can cut down a tree IF you have permission you can do anything IF you have permission. Without permission you CAN'T do it no matter where it is, what it is or who says they own it.

 

You asked me earlier if I had difficulty reading, so I will now ask you the same question?
Instead of throwing your toys out of the pram actually read what I said and then read what TreeMonkey says.

I can cut down the tree on my property.
It is not covered by any of the constraints.
I do NOT require permission.

Again you have to get in another petty and childish little insult. It does your argument no good what-so-ever. 

And from your comments on TB, no-one here has bullied you, no-one here has threatened you, so that comment is somewhat wasted. 

Edited October 12, 2017 by Dave_P

[gigoguy]

14 hours ago, Graham Davis said:

 

You asked me earlier if I had difficulty reading, so I will now ask you the same question?
Instead of throwing your toys out of the pram actually read what I said and then read what TreeMonkey says.

I can cut down the tree on my property.
It is not covered by any of the constraints.
I do NOT require permission.

Again you have to get in another petty and childish little insult. It does your argument no good what-so-ever. 

And from your comments on TB, no-one here has bullied you, no-one here has threatened you, so that comment is somewhat wasted. 

Edited to remove pointless insult.

Edited October 12, 2017 by Dave_P

[ditchcrawler]

This week, not my photo but on Facebook

[MtB]

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

This week, not my photo but on Facebook

 

Interesting swing bridge bridge there DC.

Where is it?

[gigoguy]

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

This week, not my photo but on Facebook

very nice........maybe someone can post a picture of a tree they've cut down as well?

[ditchcrawler]

40 minutes ago, gigoguy said:

very nice........maybe someone can post a picture of a tree they've cut down as well?

Sorry

[Graham Davis]

1 hour ago, gigoguy said:

you're a fool...............just go away you really are what they say on TB

Oh you are so predictable!

You can tell Kris that I definitely am a member!

[bizzard]

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Interesting swing bridge bridge there DC.

Where is it?

Barton. The BW canal swing bridge is extreme right and the curved top one is the road bridge. Many Manchurian pedestrians take rides on the road swing bridge when its swung.

[LadyG]

I suggest Admin close this thread, it serves no further purpose

Edited October 11, 2017 by LadyG

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

Oh you are so predictable!

You can tell Kris that I definitely am a member!

If correct, time to get posting, you obviously spend time on there.

[Cheshire cat]

Someone asked about the Tesco Traffic. It stops well short of the Barton Swing Bridge, in fact two whole locks short. Peel are in the middle of building a Port at Irlam and plan to bring many more  containers up the ship canal much to the dismay of all the people that use the swing bridges along the canal's route. How many ships and barges will make the journey remains to be seen but the good people of Warrington have expressed their concern.

Peel of course are deaf to their protests

[MtB]

On 11/10/2017 at 21:35, LadyG said:

I suggest Admin close this thread, it serves no further purpose

Did it serve any purpose in the first place, other than to massage the inflated ego of the op?

[Arthur Marshall]

6 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

Did it serve any purpose in the first place, other than to massage the inflated ego of the op?

Yes, I think so. If someone genuinely thinks something illegal is going on and challenges it, it's not a bad thing to share the reasons and results, nor to debate them. Information is always useful. Getting sidetracked is just an added feature of internet forums, or possibly fora. 

I'd certainly want to know if anything concrete ever came out of the correspondence with Peel and would be happy to acknowledge it if my own opinions are proved wrong. 

[Alan de Enfield]

15 hours ago, gigoguy said:

So let me get this clear.....just for the record like.

If a tree stands on your land and is......protected by a tpo, is over a certain size, your land is a protected area.....then you don't have permission to do with it as you will....correct?

Discounting the trees so affected (a very small minority) the owners / landowners of the remaining millions of trees can just 'do what they like', and they require no permissions.

[Captain Pegg]

13 hours ago, gigoguy said:

very nice........maybe someone can post a picture of a tree they've cut down as well?

Unfortunately I can't take a photo of a tree that isn't there.

However I have cut down two trees in my garden since I moved in 13 years ago. No permission needed because no legal constraints were in place. I have two other trees remaining and both branch out over the public highway. That obliges me to maintain them in a way that does not obstruct the highway because there is specific legislation that does not allow me to cause an obstruction on the highway. Other than that I can do what I like with them.

As others have said the law works the opposite way round from how you suppose.

JP

[mayalld]

18 hours ago, gigoguy said:

Arthur have you heard about the Euro car park charges being illegal? Now that you know they can't charge you. Would you, out of loyalty and feeling you have a moral duty to pay for what you use. Now pay and tell everyone else to pay?

If you got a parking ticket in town and you had a valid parking permit would you say. 'Oh well never mind I'll pay anyway'?

And this is just exactly the same. They don't have authority and if they can't prove they do they are breaking the law. And it's a criminal offence to demand money with no right to demand it.

You try it. Just stand outside your house with a couple of big chaps and try to charge every car that drives past 20 quid. See how long it takes for the busy's to turn up

 

They may indeed have to prove it to a court if anybody takes them to court.

However, that doesn't mean that they have to spend vast sums of money prove it to the satisfaction of every malcontent who doesn't want to pay.

[Dave_P]

Mod hat on:

I've done some minor editing.  This has largely been useful thread with valid points from a variety of positions.  However, personal attacks are not allowed and this thread has begun the predictable descent into tit-for-tat posting.  If it carries on, the thread will be closed, and I don't think anyone wants that.

Disagree with another's opinion all you want but name-calling is not on.  Stick to the point of the discussion.

 

[Midnight]

2 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Yes, I think so. If someone genuinely thinks something illegal is going on and challenges it, it's not a bad thing to share the reasons and results, nor to debate them. Information is always useful. Getting sidetracked is just an added feature of internet forums, or possibly fora. 

I'd certainly want to know if anything concrete ever came out of the correspondence with Peel and would be happy to acknowledge it if my own opinions are proved wrong. 

Agreed Arthur - and back on topic  - there should be a horticultural section on this forum me thinks. The main point here is, after reading the arguments and counter arguments, who would have enough confidence to throw the return passage invoice in the bin. Well me for one for which I thank the main contributors here.

BTW Arthur in another BW thread IIRC you asked if anyone had received such an invoice as you were planning a return trip yourself. Did you do so? Did you get charged? Did you pay? just asking out of interest not bothered if you cut down any trees or got stuck waiting for Barton swing bridge to open.

[gigoguy]

17 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

Unfortunately I can't take a photo of a tree that isn't there.

However I have cut down two trees in my garden since I moved in 13 years ago. No permission needed because no legal constraints were in place. I have two other trees remaining and both branch out over the public highway. That obliges me to maintain them in a way that does not obstruct the highway because there is specific legislation that does not allow me to cause an obstruction on the highway. Other than that I can do what I like with them.

As others have said the law works the opposite way round from how you suppose.

JP

You see that is EXACTLY! my point. You CAN cut them down if you have PERMISSION that means that if they are of a certain size in a certain area or are protected you CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you can only do what you have permission to do end of story. Anyone who cuts down a tree that they DON'T have permission to cut down will be in trouble.....or am I missing something here?

No permission needed fill your boots permission needed leave it alone till u=you get it. On YOUR land or anywhere else.

 

Parking fines are legal because a local authority went to court and got permission to charge them at some point. Or by Act of parliament......Peel have done neither.

This is a serious matter if they don't enforce it with me they can't enforce it with anyone. So fill your boots

[Midnight]

3 minutes ago, gigoguy said:

 

This is a serious matter if they don't enforce it with me they can't enforce it with anyone. So fill your boots

Yes so let's not encourage talk of trees and bridges.

[Richard10002]

3 minutes ago, gigoguy said:

This is a serious matter if they don't enforce it with me they can't enforce it with anyone. So fill your boots

"Not sure what you mean by "can't"?

I would suggest that Peel, BWC, whoever, can choose who they enforce it with, and who they don't enforce it with. I could suggest that they are free to merely take the money from those who choose to pay, and not pursue anyone who chooses not to pay.

What do you think will happen if they enforce it with someone else, but not you?