Another anti camper council?

karakachan

Guest
My other half saw this on facebook...they don't like missing out on their council tax...do they

Rother District Council passed the PSPO public space protection order to ban sleeping OR habitating ANY motor vehicle on the highway or public space between 11pm and 7am starting 1st July 2018. Rother covers Rye in the East to close to Pevensey in the West up to wadhurst/Ticehurst in the north. 200 sq miles. We are trying to appeal for everyone, full timers, holiday makers, lorry drivers. It includes all ! Via the Local Government ombudsmen.
 
That’s sad because we are losing some cracking spots around Rye and Pevensey a regular haunt for Me and Bill on our annual south coast trek.
 
just quote the highway code do not drive if tired so what are you meant to do if normal let alone disabled the is is discramnation against disbled let alone normal peeps it does scare them when it rears its ugly head
quote section 6
Camping or sleeping at night [during the hours of darkness] on the beach
(excluding persons fishing), public open space, the highway or shop doorways
and curtilages think we going tohave to get some fishing tackle and some sticker for bus like prefer fishing to this councils policys



ps how do you fish when asleep is it called dream fishing
 
Last edited:
Just exchanged messages with a resident of the area.
She didn't have a problem with the guy living on the front or people sleeping on the beach, obviously some residents do have a problem with this.
 
Chainsaw Charlie said:
Take a look at the rubbish disposal as many would fall foul on that one !
http://www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=28999&p=0
Click to expand...


This list of anti social behaviours covers just about anything anyone could EVER do at any time no matter what age or time etc etc.... its monstrous and is clearly an abuse of process . These orders were meant to deal with a particular problem as notified to the council in sufficient numbers to be deemed a nuisance.... not to be used as a blanket ban for all human behaviour.

Is Rother saying its Order WILL cover all these ? Or are they just listing what they COULD cover?

But i cant somehow see the police getting involved in any of these things in terms of prosecution - they have enough to do with not chasing serious criminals
 
delicagirl said:
This list of anti social behaviours covers just about anything anyone could EVER do at any time no matter what age or time etc etc.... its monstrous and is clearly an abuse of process . These orders were meant to deal with a particular problem as notified to the council in sufficient numbers to be deemed a nuisance.... not to be used as a blanket ban for all human behaviour.

Is Rother saying its Order WILL cover all these ? Or are they just listing what they COULD cover?

But i cant somehow see the police getting involved in any of these things in terms of prosecution - they have enough to do with not chasing serious criminals
Click to expand...

I agree, I think we will see more and more PSPO.s used. It certainly seems local authorities are abusing democratic process and consultation 1984 springs to mind

Channa
 
maingate said:
It looks like they have everything covered there Charlie. I particularly liked the last one 'causing harassment, distress or alarm by siting a skip on the highway'. :lol-061:
Click to expand...


Unless of course the skip-placer has paid a license fee to the council in advance, in which case all the harrassment distress and alarm is perfectly OKAY !!!!
 
Les Haro said:
Just exchanged messages with a resident of the area.
She didn't have a problem with the guy living on the front or people sleeping on the beach, obviously some residents do have a problem with this.
Click to expand...

The Council Officials responsible have both got hyphenated names ..... very sinister. :scared:

It's the Cholmondley-Smyths of this World who are taking our freedoms away. :(
 
The thing that worries me more about this abuse of powers more than forbidding us to overnight in a council's domain is that it also forbids those who cannot legally continue driving from taking their required breaks (i.e. commercial drivers). You hit the 10 hour driving / 11 hour duty deadline and you're not permitted to drive for at least 9 hours. So what takes precedence? (I suspect drivers hours rules for those with a tacho and the PSPO for those without). Extrapolating: if it's dangerous for a van driver in charge of 3.5 tonnes of vehicle to continue driving, what about someone in charge of a 4.2 tonne motorhome?

Of course, this could all be avoided if councils adopted the French approach and established proper stopover points (i.e. aires!)
 
This is an outrageous abuse of the public's trust in the council's mandate, to treat their residents & visitors to the area fairly.
It seems very apparent that certain councillors are trying to stop the general public from enjoying the freedoms that have been their right for hundreds of years, especially when you consider the closing of public rights of way.

These rights of way or footpaths, have been a bone of contention between the land owners & users for as long as I can remember, these PSPO's are just another nail in the rights of the public to enjoy an area to the full!

The wording in this PSPO is a good example of legislation being written by people with zero foresight.
Rubbish bins are provided by the council to enable people to deposit their litter in, rather than scattering it on the streets. If this is stopped then people will dump it in the countryside instead.

All drivers of whatever vehicle need to rest/sleep at some time on a long journey, so if they won't allow the driver of a 40 ton lorry to have a kip in a layby, then will they take responsibility when that driver falls asleep & kills a few people because of their policies!!!

people are going to die because fire engines can't get to the fire, because there are vehicles blocking the roads, a contentious one this, as it's not nice for those who are in wheel chairs or blind to have to deal with them.

So you can't place a skip in the road, but if you get a licence, you can dump it right in the middle, according to their wording anyway!

It's all about eroding our rights in the name of public safety.

Phill
 
Quite right , us travelers ( and those in the different traveling communities) should be allowed to park up where we want . And I know it seems strange but I’m always tired when I get to a seaside town or a beauty spot . I wonder why I never seem to get tired in a old mining village in Wales or Winson green ?
 
They will be wondering where all the tourists have gone next. Pubs and Restaurants closing through lack of trade. Obsurd rules made by Councilors who have no idea how they will enforce them. They will have to publish all these rules otherwise how is anyone going to know they even exist or will they use the ignorance of the law is no defence.

How come fishermen are exempt :lol-053: Must be some fishermen / women on the Council.

Not surprising many head for foreign parts ..
 
Tezza said:
Quite right , us travelers ( and those in the different traveling communities) should be allowed to park up where we want . And I know it seems strange but I’m always tired when I get to a seaside town or a beauty spot . I wonder why I never seem to get tired in a old mining village in Wales or Winson green ?
Click to expand...

So you support the introduction of PSPOs then?
 
GeoffL said:
The thing that worries me more about this abuse of powers more than forbidding us to overnight in a council's domain is that it also forbids those who cannot legally continue driving from taking their required breaks (i.e. commercial drivers). You hit the 10 hour driving / 11 hour duty deadline and you're not permitted to drive for at least 9 hours. So what takes precedence? (I suspect drivers hours rules for those with a tacho and the PSPO for those without). Extrapolating: if it's dangerous for a van driver in charge of 3.5 tonnes of vehicle to continue driving, what about someone in charge of a 4.2 tonne motorhome?

Of course, this could all be avoided if councils adopted the French approach and established proper stopover points (i.e. aires!)
Click to expand...

Because a 3.5t van does not need a tacho and tacho rules, you could have better worded that as:-

'van driver in charge of a 4.2t van...........'.

Then the point is valid.

Geoff
 
maingate said:
So you support the introduction of PSPOs then?
Click to expand...

I don’t have a problem with them. If somebody doesn’t want me to park then I won’t. I will go elsewhere to sleep. For example you can’t sleep in your van in Weymouth ‘s free overnight car parks . But you go to the outskirts and park up at the side of the road then nothing the council can do . Most towns have a industrial estate , or out of town shopping sites. And people rant about lorries , you never see them in town car parks do you?
 
Tezza said:
I don’t have a problem with them. If somebody doesn’t want me to park then I won’t. I will go elsewhere to sleep. For example you can’t sleep in your van in Weymouth ‘s free overnight car parks . But you go to the outskirts and park up at the side of the road then nothing the council can do . Most towns have a industrial estate , or out of town shopping sites. And people rant about lorries , you never see them in town car parks do you?
Click to expand...

Rother covers an area of 200 sq.miles!
 
That’s a big area to have that sort of restriction in place, how the hell are people meant to know?
 
No BBQ on the beach either (13) or even yoga in the park (16)! They are going to have fun with people being "upset" by so many things! We love Rye, but will avoid in future. Has anyone found an address to email?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top