Michael Saunby wrote:
You don't have to - you choose to, and in doing so you probably break
the law. I used to live on a fairly narrow road in Wargrave, the
folks there simply restricted their parking to one side of the road.

IIRC doesnt Germany have a law that says If you are the first one in an
empty street you may park which ever side of the road you like but all
others must follow suit and only park on one side of the road.



Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

Jim W wrote:
Aaaah but theres a difference betwen a hedge and overhanging shrubbery
from a domestic garden.. I cannot imagine them getting a flail
trimmer down our residential north London street LOL.. That'd bring
everyone out quick;-) that said there are quite a few overhanging
things esp in the summer.

Hedge cutting is usually (to my knowledge) only done in the 'country'
sic where it is necessary to road safety. (visibility). Or just
routine maintainance of larger areas.

Jim there is a difference betwen a hedge and a hedgerow.

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

In article , Michael Saunby
writes

"Kay Easton" wrote in message
...
In article , Michael Saunby
writes

And what would the difference be? Why as a smallholder don't I have to
worry about keeping my roadside hedge from overhanging the road, but a
suburban gardener must?

Must he? I thought all a suburban gardener had to do was keep the hedge
from overhanging the pavement?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I presume you do not have a pavement to
overhang.


True, but why is a pavement different from a road in this respect?

Because roads are used by lorries and cars, whereas pavements are
intended for pedestrians, who may be injured by overhanging bushes.


--
Kay Easton

Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm

"Essjay001" wrote in message
...
Michael Saunby wrote:

But does the owner have to cut them?

Yes he does, a house holder can do more or less what he likes within the
bounds of his own property, however once his hedge /shrub stsrts to
imping
on the pavement he is then blocking a public right of way. If a
pedestrian
has to walk in the road because of the overgrowth from a domestic
property
and gets knocked down by a passing car who is he going to blame and more
importantly who is he going to sue.


Out here in rural West Devon the council cut the hedges,

Do we need to make a distinction here between domestic hedges and
hedgerows.
Certainly here in Wilts it took me about 18 months to get the authorities
to
cut a domestic hedge that overhung a 6' foot path by 5'.


I really can't imagine the sense in doing things any other way.

Why should the council cut domestic hedges? Why should a guy who doesn't
have a hedge have to pay in his coulcil tax for someone who is too lazy
to
do it himself?

All the likely legal fees, letters sent and ignored, knocking on
doors,
etc.

A court case ususlly sorts out the 'negligent hedge owner


Still a pointless expense.

Surely the council cut roadside verges, so why not the hedges?

Hedgerows yes but not hedges and shrubs in private gardens

Clearly (sub)urban Britain has some very strange customs.

No not really just some very lazy people


But where did this custom of keeping (someone else's) pavement clear? It
seems at odd with all other similar practices. Even removing dog shit,
litter, etc. from pavements isn't the responsibility of the person the
other side of the hedge.


Granted some folks might not want their hedges cut with a tractor
mounted flail, but surely that's just a technical matter for
homeowners to agree with the council.

You have obviously never had your windscreen broken by the debris from a
flail.
Jusy imagine a 'normal' domestic street, and the put a flail in the
picture.
Apart from the debris all over the road, broken windows injured people,
dead
cats etc etc. Absolute bloody nightmare.


So use the appropriate equipment for the job. It would create some
employment.

I don't for one minute believe that the council comes round to cut
peoples
privet, leylandii, beech or any other private hedge, but if this is true,
someone should take the council to court for mis-appropriation of taxes


They don't come around. They pay one of the local farmers to do them. And
yes, they'll cut whatever you have - granted most are fairly ancient mixes
of oak, ash, beech, thorn, whatever, though ours is beech and thorn because
that's what was planted when the road was widened. It's their (council's)
road for Christ's sake so why shouldn't they keep it clear? I keep my own
lane clear, I cut back any of my neighbour's hedges that grow into my
property.

Why is this any more a misuse of taxes than to collect private rubbish?
Why do I have to pay to dispose of the excessive waste generated by other
households? What about council tenants - who cuts their hedges?

The nearest rural parallel to this that I can think of is public footpaths
on private land. The owner of the land is obliged to keep the path clear.
If this is the reason for the suburban situation it suggests that the
council is considering the householder, not the council, to be responsible
for maintaining the right of way. This seems rather cheeky, since I expect
that in most cases the householder doesn't own the pavement, and has no
legal obligation to maintain a right of way.

Michael Saunby

"Kay Easton" wrote in message
...
In article , Michael Saunby
writes

"Kay Easton" wrote in message
...
In article , Michael Saunby
writes

And what would the difference be? Why as a smallholder don't I have
to
worry about keeping my roadside hedge from overhanging the road, but
a
suburban gardener must?

Must he? I thought all a suburban gardener had to do was keep the
hedge
from overhanging the pavement?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I presume you do not have a pavement to
overhang.


True, but why is a pavement different from a road in this respect?

Because roads are used by lorries and cars, whereas pavements are
intended for pedestrians, who may be injured by overhanging bushes.


Wouldn't it be great if sensible logic like that could be shown to be the
basis of our laws? Then you might even be able to argue successfully that
you don't actually need to cut back a hedge unless it presents a hazard.

Though it would be nice to think that the law really does have such little
regard for horse riders, cyclists and motor cyclists. They think they are
regarded as 2nd class citizens, and you may have found the proof :-)

Michael Saunby

John Towill wrote:

It is an offence to park on the pavement. Here is an amusing story.

A friend lives beside a busy dual carriageway with a very wide
pavement. It is usual for people to park on that pavement to aviod
causing an obstruction to the road, the pavement is so wide that it
will easily accommadate a pram as well.

His daughter aquired a new boy friend who lived on a nearby "problem"
estate. One evening when he took the girl home by car he was
followed by a police car, when he parked on the pavement he was
imediately booked. My friend phoned the police to complain, and
insisted that they sent someone arround to deal with the matter.

When an inspector arrived he said that as the paperwork was done the
prosecution would have to go through. My friend had sent his son out
to photograph the inspectors car. The case was dropped, work out
why! :-) He also gave a copy of the photograph to all the local
residents. Cheers
John T

An even more amusing Fact: At present it is unlawful to drive on the
pavement, but most magistrates do not accept a pavement-parked vehicle as
proof that it has been driven there!
http://www.eta.co.uk/tr/pj/peds/pave.htm

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

"Essjay001" wrote in message
...

An even more amusing Fact: At present it is unlawful to drive on the
pavement, but most magistrates do not accept a pavement-parked vehicle as
proof that it has been driven there!
http://www.eta.co.uk/tr/pj/peds/pave.htm

Bah! Why am I not surprised. This bloody country is upside down.

O

Michael Saunby wrote: reams of twaddle
"Essjay001" wrote in message
...
big snip

Micheal
I suspect you are just being bloody minded. Your diatribe shows you have
little grasp on reality. I am so glad I don't live next door to you.

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Essjay001 wrote:

But does the owner have to cut them?

Yes he does, a house holder can do more or less what he likes within the
bounds of his own property, however once his hedge /shrub stsrts to imping
on the pavement he is then blocking a public right of way. If a pedestrian
has to walk in the road because of the overgrowth from a domestic property
and gets knocked down by a passing car who is he going to blame and more
importantly who is he going to sue.

Hmm! A sorts of interesting points have come out of this thread which I
started some thirty messages ago, not least that many of us are a bit
hazy about who is responsible for what!

However my original complaint, which has been lost sight of, was that a
man down the road from me was being made by the council to spoil his
lovely, neat hedge which overhangs the pavement only slightly and
doesn't incommode pedestrians (I know, because I use that pavement
regularly) while cars in the same road which are parked on the pavement,
and which *do* incommode pedestrians, are ignored. I find it difficult
to negotiate these cars so I'm sure a blind man who also uses that
pavement does, too, not to mention mothers and children walking to and
from the local primary school.

Either double standards or a jobsworth - or both!

--
+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet: | writing from |
| Fidonet: David Rance 2:252/110 | Caversham, |
| BBS: telnet://mesnil.demon.co.uk | Reading, UK |
+-------------------------------------------------------+

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Michael Saunby wrote:

I don't for one minute believe that the council comes round to cut
peoples
privet, leylandii, beech or any other private hedge, but if this is true,
someone should take the council to court for mis-appropriation of taxes


They don't come around. They pay one of the local farmers to do them.

Actually they do - in France. There are "cantonniers" whose job it is to
go round in the countryside cutting grass and trimming hedges. And when
one of my hedges over there was deemed to be interfering with the
automatic working of a street light a councillor came and trimmed it
back himself!

--
+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet: | writing from |
| Fidonet: David Rance 2:252/110 | Caversham, |
| BBS: telnet://mesnil.demon.co.uk | Reading, UK |
+-------------------------------------------------------+

"Essjay001" wrote in message
...
Michael Saunby wrote: reams of twaddle
"Essjay001" wrote in message
...
big snip

Micheal
(ae - always)

I suspect you are just being bloody minded. Your diatribe shows you have
little grasp on reality. I am so glad I don't live next door to you.


Different realities that's all. I live a mile outside a very small village
and only have one residential neighbour with whom I share a fairly ill
defined boundary and who has use of my lane to access the highway. The
rest of my boundaries are with fields so the purpose of those hedges and
fences is to either keep stock in, or out, including the one that runs
alongside the highway.

As for the role of local authorities, well I'm involved with various
community initiatives and wherever I get the chance I like to stress that
the role of local authorities is to provide useful services, not to waste
money telling everyone else what their responsibilities are - at least not
until they can show they are discharging theirs in a sensible and efficient
manner.

Though the situation I live in is perhaps very different from most in the
UK, very many of our laws and customs are drawn from ancient rural
practice, so it seems odd that local authorities in urban areas feel that
land owners are responsible for keeping pavements free of obstruction.
It's not my intention to be bloody minded, only show how odd this seems
when viewed from a different perspective.

Your view might be that councils should avoid wasting money. Ok, take that
view, in which case why do they act as an enforcement agency when, most
likely, no complaint has been made by a member of the public? If it were
really the responsibility of the householder to keep the pavement clear
then anyone with a complaint about obstructions should surely be directed
to take up the matter with the responsible householder, not the local
council. Ah, but the council are responsible for pavements - I rest my
case!

Michael Saunby

In article , bnd777
writes
and you should just hear the abuse those car drivers will give anyone like
me when politely asked not to park on the pavement because I cant get by
with a twin buggy
Quite why they think a pushchair should be forced onto the road while they
sit on the pavement is beyond me

What you want is a well-strapped in child who thoroughly enjoys daddy
taking his buggy up the back of the car, across the roof, and down the
bonnet. You need a good pair of trainers though.

John
--
John Rouse

David Rance wrote:
They don't come around. They pay one of the local farmers to do
them.

Actually they do - in France. There are "cantonniers" whose job it is
to go round in the countryside cutting grass and trimming hedges. And
when one of my hedges over there was deemed to be interfering with the
automatic working of a street light a councillor came and trimmed it
back himself!

David I am sure that your comment is very relevant to the french way of
life, but in all honesty can you see that happening in the UK?
Steve R

PS "uk.rec.gardening" gives one the idea that french custom and practice are
not really relevant here
---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

David Rance wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Essjay001 wrote:

But does the owner have to cut them?

Yes he does, a house holder can do more or less what he likes within
the bounds of his own property, however once his hedge /shrub stsrts
to imping on the pavement he is then blocking a public right of way.
If a pedestrian has to walk in the road because of the overgrowth
from a domestic property and gets knocked down by a passing car who
is he going to blame and more importantly who is he going to sue.

Hmm! A sorts of interesting points have come out of this thread which
I started some thirty messages ago, not least that many of us are a
bit hazy about who is responsible for what!

However my original complaint, which has been lost sight of, was that
a man down the road from me was being made by the council to spoil his
lovely, neat hedge which overhangs the pavement only slightly and
doesn't incommode pedestrians (I know, because I use that pavement
regularly) while cars in the same road which are parked on the
pavement, and which *do* incommode pedestrians, are ignored. I find
it difficult to negotiate these cars so I'm sure a blind man who also
uses that pavement does, too, not to mention mothers and children
walking to and from the local primary school.

Either double standards or a jobsworth - or both!
I'll go with usless council **** if it's all the same to you

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Essjay001 wrote:

David I am sure that your comment is very relevant to the french way of
life, but in all honesty can you see that happening in the UK?
Steve R

PS "uk.rec.gardening" gives one the idea that french custom and practice are
not really relevant here

Do be careful that you don't get into a habit of criticising others'
postings, Steve. I'm the second person you've criticised in less than
three hours!

Maybe it's frustration at not being able to get out on to the garden
because of the rain! ;-)

--
+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet: | writing from |
| Fidonet: David Rance 2:252/110 | Caversham, |
| BBS: telnet://mesnil.demon.co.uk | Reading, UK |
+-------------------------------------------------------+