Clandestine Castle in England: Destroy It!!!!

[Threedee]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_britain_secret_castle

UK man's castle won't be his home, court says

By GREGORY KATZ, Associated Press Writer Gregory Katz, Associated Press Writer – Wed Feb 3, 1:30 pm ET
LONDON – A man's home is his castle — but not if British authorities say it has to be destroyed.

That's the situation faced by Robert Fidler, a farmer who lost a High Court bid Wednesday to protect the once-secret castle he built 40 miles (65 kilometers) south of London and kept hidden from planning authorities.

[G R I N D]

he used to have hay covering the whole thing up

[Thorn]

I wonder why he felt the planning board wouldn't approve its construction? It looks like a beautiful house.

[MakeMeASandwichBitch]

Do they really have to destroy it? Jesus. Just fine him if its such a big deal. What a waste.

[tom prendergast]

Originally Posted by Atheistmark

Do they really have to destroy it? Jesus. Just fine him if its such a big deal. What a waste.

If he broke the planning laws then unless they grant retrospective permission or argues that he doesn't need it then he is screwed. His defence that the house had been complete for four years and is thus exempt from needing permission may work. Although the council will probably say that it wasn't complete as it was covered in hay bales and tarpaulins.

The only group of people who seem to be exempt from any planning laws are Irish travellers who are a law unto themselves. All those Americans who bleat about the dastardly English and their treatment of the Irish should read this article. Bear in mind that many left Ireland because tinkers, as they are known there, are despised and reviled and they know the English authorities are too soft and PC by comparison.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ty-centre.html

[USFREEDOM911]

Originally Posted by tom prendergast

If he broke the planning laws then unless they grant retrospective permission or argues that he doesn't need it then he is screwed. His defence that the house had been complete for four years and is thus exempt from needing permission may work. Although the council will probably say that it wasn't complete as it was covered in hay bales and tarpaulins.

The only group of people who seem to be exempt from any planning laws are Irish travellers who are a law unto themselves. All those Americans who bleat about the dastardly English and their treatment of the Irish should read this article. Bear in mind that many left Ireland because tinkers, as they are known there, are despised and reviled and they know the English authorities are too soft and PC by comparison.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ty-centre.html

We have known about the "Irish Travellers" for years.

They usually hit Arizona about this time of the year, for "roof repairs", seeing as how it's the rainy season.
Most of those in the US, congregate in the South. Mostly in Tennessee; but they also have footholds in Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.

In the US, they're usually just referred to as the "Travelers".

[Damn Yankee]

The article doesn't say what provisions of law were broken.

Back about 12 years ago there was a case in Skaneateles, NY where a guy built a house about twice the size allowed on the lot. He was a lawyer and thought he could out-smart the Town officials. They eventually had it torn down.

[USFREEDOM911]

Originally Posted by Southern Man

The article doesn't say what provisions of law were broken.

Back about 12 years ago there was a case in Skaneateles, NY where a guy built a house about twice the size allowed on the lot. He was a lawyer and thought he could out-smart the Town officials. They eventually had it torn down.

The problem with all of this, is that while the interior and exterior can be inspected; it's all the stuff inside the walls that can't be seen, that's the problem.
Were the walls, the wires, the plumbing secured properly? Are the walls and roof tied together correctly?
If an inspector buys off on this and something happens, he just left himself wide open for a liabiltiy suit.

[Damn Yankee]

Originally Posted by USFREEDOM911

The problem with all of this, is that while the interior and exterior can be inspected; it's all the stuff inside the walls that can't be seen, that's the problem.
Were the walls, the wires, the plumbing secured properly? Are the walls and roof tied together correctly?
If an inspector buys off on this and something happens, he just left himself wide open for a liabiltiy suit.

I can't see how that's the issue. Even if he built the place without any permits here in NC all the authorities could do is refuse to grant a Certificate of Occupancy. Without that he can't get a mortgage or insurance, and you don't need either to live in a house.

In fact when I lived in upstate NY I knew a guy who built a house without borrowing money or getting any permits. He told the authorities to pound sand when they came for inspections, and told them to take their C of O and shove it. They couldn't even assess it, which meant that they couldn't tax it.

This to me sounds like a zoning issue, and for that the outside appearance, dimensions and setbacks are all that matter.

[USFREEDOM911]

Originally Posted by Southern Man

I can't see how that's the issue. Even if he built the place without any permits here in NC all the authorities could do is refuse to grant a Certificate of Occupancy. Without that he can't get a mortgage or insurance, and you don't need either to live in a house.

In fact when I lived in upstate NY I knew a guy who built a house without borrowing money or getting any permits. He told the authorities to pound sand when they came for inspections, and told them to take their C of O and shove it. They couldn't even assess it, which meant that they couldn't tax it.

This to me sounds like a zoning issue, and for that the outside appearance, dimensions and setbacks are all that matter.

I know you're in construction and I was also, for a number of years.
I can't speak for other States; but in AZ, if you don't have the permits they're not going to allow the building to stay standing for very long.

[Damn Yankee]

Originally Posted by USFREEDOM911

I know you're in construction and I was also, for a number of years.
I can't speak for other States; but in AZ, if you don't have the permits they're not going to allow the building to stay standing for very long.

That might be true here as well I'm not really sure. Back before 2002 we were under the Southern Building Code and one of its provisions was that a licensed engineer or architect could inspect a home and approve it for a C of O to be issued by the authorities, and in fact could overrule a county inspector who wasn't licensed and very few are (I've never known one who was). When they adopted the International Building Code that language went away here. Since then I have overruled inspectors many times, which irks the shit out of some of them, and in fact have been challenged on it several times. Each time they have pushed and of course I've pushed back, citing engineering practice and other applicable provisions of the IBC. So far all challengers have backed off. My thinking on this is that if they push hard enough to get in front of a judge, he's likely to force the old SBC language back in.

In fact when I built my mountain cabin I had a problem with the plumber, who was a buddy with the inspector, who then tried to fuck me over by verbally approving construction without logging the approvals back at his office. My other subcontractors were all witnesses to his verbals and were all willing to testify this. When I went for the C of O the department head told me that I hadn't past a single inspection. So I wrote him a letter with a CD full of photos of every stage in the construction, copies of my sealed drawings with my findings that everything was according to Code and that report sealed as well. This pissed him off royally so on a Friday afternoon he threatened to take the matter up with the State engineering board. I immediately I called a local attorney, put him on retainer then called every one of the County Commissioners over the weekend telling them that a lawsuit was pending that they would surely lose. First thing Monday morning the department head calls me asking when he could meet me to give me my C of O.

[USFREEDOM911]

Originally Posted by Southern Man

That might be true here as well I'm not really sure. Back before 2002 we were under the Southern Building Code and one of its provisions was that a licensed engineer or architect could inspect a home and approve it for a C of O to be issued by the authorities, and in fact could overrule a county inspector who wasn't licensed and very few are (I've never known one who was). When they adopted the International Building Code that language went away here. Since then I have overruled inspectors many times, which irks the shit out of some of them, and in fact have been challenged on it several times. Each time they have pushed and of course I've pushed back, citing engineering practice and other applicable provisions of the IBC. So far all challengers have backed off. My thinking on this is that if they push hard enough to get in front of a judge, he's likely to force the old SBC language back in.

In fact when I built my mountain cabin I had a problem with the plumber, who was a buddy with the inspector, who then tried to fuck me over by verbally approving construction without logging the approvals back at his office. My other subcontractors were all witnesses to his verbals and were all willing to testify this. When I went for the C of O the department head told me that I hadn't past a single inspection. So I wrote him a letter with a CD full of photos of every stage in the construction, copies of my sealed drawings with my findings that everything was according to Code and that report sealed as well. This pissed him off royally so on a Friday afternoon he threatened to take the matter up with the State engineering board. I immediately I called a local attorney, put him on retainer then called every one of the County Commissioners over the weekend telling them that a lawsuit was pending that they would surely lose. First thing Monday morning the department head calls me asking when he could meet me to give me my C of O.

Two entirely differnt situations.
While yours is about you passing your inspections and someone trying to cheat you, the first one is abouit someone who apparently never even tried to pass any inspections.

[Threedee]

Originally Posted by USFREEDOM911

We have known about the "Irish Travellers" for years.

They usually hit Arizona about this time of the year, for "roof repairs", seeing as how it's the rainy season.
Most of those in the US, congregate in the South. Mostly in Tennessee; but they also have footholds in Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.

In the US, they're usually just referred to as the "Travelers".

I still don't understand why so many Irish, an ethnic and frequently religious minority, went South...

[USFREEDOM911]

Originally Posted by Threedee

I still don't understand why so many Irish, an ethnic and frequently religious minority, went South...

Good question.
Maybe the people living in the South were more tolerant of the Irish immigrants, then those living in the North.

[Damn Yankee]

Originally Posted by USFREEDOM911

Two entirely differnt situations.
While yours is about you passing your inspections and someone trying to cheat you, the first one is abouit someone who apparently never even tried to pass any inspections.

True but he never admitted to trying to cheat me and I don't think it matters either way. My point is that an inspection issue could be solved by this guy hiring a private, licensed professional.

And again, I assumed that he built the home without financing and insurance, since to obtain same he would have to had had a permit to construct at the outset.