krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
But I hate himDon't forget piers!
But I hate himDon't forget piers!
True. I suspect in this case they are both involved though whatever name is on the deeds.Some women do actually run businesses too! Shocking, I know.
They'd need to find a wonky spirit level from somewhere.If the pub ends up being rebuilt, of course it won't be the same , but easier to do from scratch than renovating it
They'd need to find a wonky spirit level from somewhere.
Don’t know where you’ve got that impression from. They seem to have form - and a list of court decisions - for similar. They aren’t ‘neighbours’ as they live in Leicestershire. And given that other pubs they’ve bought have been converted into housing I'm betting they aren’t just planning to use the land as a drive way
‘Arson attack’ pub’s owner lives the high life
The demolition is destroying evidence at a crime scene (arson) so could be a police matter (although i'm not a lawyer so could be wrong).
Ah, but it was new money demolishing a business that had cultural heritage. I doubt they’d be as arsed if it was a social housing estate.Weird to see a Murdoch organ like the Times complaining about rich people stampeding all over the law and basic decency to do whatever they like. You'd think they'd be cheering these people on for sticking it to the pencil-necked wokes at the council planning department and the wishy-washy health and safety nerds at the fire service.
Hardly. The nimby impulse in the propertied strata of society runs very deep, as Gove has found with his proposed then reworked and/or abandoned reforms to planning rules. It also crosses any party or 'left' 'right' divides. The idea that culture war stuff would outweigh the existential horror of the propertied that someone like these fuckers could get away with this sort of thing adjacent to their property is ridiculous.Weird to see a Murdoch organ like the Times complaining about rich people stampeding all over the law and basic decency to do whatever they like. You'd think they'd be cheering these people on for sticking it to the pencil-necked wokes at the council planning department and the wishy-washy health and safety nerds at the fire service.
The demolition is destroying evidence at a crime scene (arson) so could be a police matter (although i'm not a lawyer so could be wrong).
“There is lots of misinformation circulating within communities and online and this is unhelpful. We’re trying to provide accurate and timely updates, but as I am sure you can appreciate there is a lot of work and liaison with a number of partners which needs to be completed, and this takes time.
“There are also certain things that police and fire do not have the powers to deal with, the decision around partial demolition of the building, for example, when the scene was handed back to the owner".
Ok. Sounds like they had already checked it before it was demolished. Fair enough.That doesn't seem to be the view of Detective Chief Superintendant Chisholm:
Weird to see a Murdoch organ like the Times complaining about rich people stampeding all over the law and basic decency to do whatever they like. You'd think they'd be cheering these people on for sticking it to the pencil-necked wokes at the council planning department and the wishy-washy health and safety nerds at the fire service.
Also weird to see Sir Gavin Williamson and the Tories in Staffordshire attacking the developers. The pub lay on the border of the WMCA/Staffordshire border and there has been extensive greenbelt developer activity around there. It's clearly part of a plan to a a) make Dudley pick up the resulting infrastrucure burden and b) ensure the greener, posher bits of Staffordshire are left alone.
What would be really funny is if they couldn't get planning permission to do anything other than build a pub with their new found plot of land.
If the pub ends up being rebuilt, of course it won't be the same , but easier to do from scratch than renovating it
Whilst they get the council tax receiptsSame here in Devon. The rural districts are tacking all their developments onto Exeter so it's Exeter's roads, schools, doctors etc that have to deal with them.
Massively speculating here but I’m thinking that the access dispute might have been about using the quarry for landfill and the pub objecting to the traffic. Buy the pub - problem solved. Although that doesn’t explain their need to demolish it unless they wanted that land to somehow facilitate the coming and going vehicles.
The pub was sinking though. Which made it an attraction. I’m no structural engineer so maybe they know more than me how they’re going to prevent any future building works not do similar.Nah. They had shared access so there's nothing the pub could've done to stop the landfill owners using the road. Six hundred grand is a lot of money to spend on solving a dispute that doesn't need solving. Just tell the pub to get fucked, and continue using the road.
These are greedy fuckers, as evidenced by their form sheet. They were going to redevelop it somehow.
The pub was sinking though. Which made it an attraction. I’m no structural engineer so maybe they know more than me how they’re going to prevent any future building works not do similar.
They have redeveloped it somehowNah. They had shared access so there's nothing the pub could've done to stop the landfill owners using the road. Six hundred grand is a lot of money to spend on solving a dispute that doesn't need solving. Just tell the pub to get fucked, and continue using the road.
These are greedy fuckers, as evidenced by their form sheet. They were going to redevelop it somehow.
Just beating the Sunaks as The Most Hated Couple in Britain?
Just beating the Sunaks as The Most Hated Couple in Britain?