 Tel: 01443 400960 mob: 07817 196435 |
enduro
news |
|||||||||||||||||
 The newest & largest Honda showroom in the UK. |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| Home | Events | Results | Links | Letters | Contact | Mailing List | ||||||||||||
|
Rights of Way |
MOTOR CYCLE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION CALLS ON LORDS TO PREVENT
OFF-ROAD MOTORCYCLING DISASTER
In advance of the Second reading of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Bill the Motor Cycle Industry (MCI) has today written to very member of the House of Lords to try and prevent a catastrophe to off-road motorcycle activity. The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Bill that received its third reading in the House of Commons last week proposes the removal of vehicular access from any existing public Right of Way (RoW), if access to that RoW is not already recorded on a county’s definitive map and statement as a ‘Byway Open to all Traffic’ (BOAT). Parliament has already made the decision to drastically reduce motorised use of Britain’s unsurfaced road network. If this unwelcome legislation is approved by the Lords it will result in all motor vehicles including trail bikes and cars being banned from large numbers of 'green lanes', on the meagre five percent of England and Wales public rights of way that can currently be used. The Government has caved in to pressure led by extremist ramblers who already have exclusive use of 95% of rights of way. They have gained seven percent of the country under the newly granted Right to Roam law and they continue to seek to extend their rights of access to all our coastline. The proposed legislation will have a limited effect on the perceived problem of illegal and noisy motorcycling and if it is passed it will only have a negative effect on the law-abiding people who responsibly enjoy our countryside. MCI’s Craig Carey-Clinch said; “ The new law demonstrates a lack of respect for the law-abiding motorcyclist and will mainly serve to penalise and criminalise many because of the inappropriate and irresponsible behaviour of a few. “Illegal use will continue, and use of the remaining legitimate routes will increase until they are saturated. Other routes will become fragmented and the character of them will change. The very character of our ancient RoW network is reliant on vehicular use which helps to keep them open and of a suitable width. Ramblers can only create footpaths, vehicle use preserves the historic appearance of RoWs and stops them from becoming overgrown and inaccessible. “This is another example of intolerance towards minority interests. Problems have been exaggerated, attempts to enter meaningful dialogue have been rebuffed and alternative strategies rejected. The rambler and environmental lobby has weaved blatant dislike and an intolerance of alternative lifestyles into the language of reason, in a successful attempt to present a case which is out of proportion to the real problem. The voice of reasonable and co-operative users is drowned out.” s56 Meeting & Court Case Powys FAO: Charlie Morriss TRF, Mick Dyer AWDC, Alan Kind BBT, Stuart Dodwell TRF, cc Tim Stevens LARA, Duncan Green GLASS. Dear Charlie, Mick, Alan, Stuart, I have, in my name taken action against Powys Council under HA80 s56 after they TRO'd the most popular BOAT in Mid Wales through their neglect. (They then TROd 4 more major routes - all of these others have been admitted OOR by s56.) I asked for a meeting to avoid court action, but they repeatedly ignored me until I issued the summons. We have been to court once, where they refused to plead, they (incorrectly) demanded our evidence first. They have had this, still not pleading, and asked the court for an adjournment for a meeting with us, I think to agree an out of court settlement that is affordable, and should result in them being re-opened, either full time of part time. We will fight for all access, (ie even if it means 2w user is open, or TROd less than 4w), we will achieve the best possible deal. 'We' presently being Tim Stevens, Duncan Green CEO GLASS Ltd., and myself. We can not get an agenda out of Powys for their part, nor even an admission of it being Out of Repair, we have our agenda drafted. We think they will wish to do a deal to minimise the risk of subsequent s56 action by others, and I would like to invite any other representatives from the TRF, WTRA, AWDC, BBT or any other like minded organisation to attend, if they wish to, providing they want to see maximum sustainable access for all. We shall also be pressing hard for our legal fees they have unnecessarily incurred on us so far. I will forward any names willing to attend to Powys. So, a) do you have anyone that could attend this Thursday 22/9/05? (especially if they have had any s56 experience!) b) would you like Tim/us to speak for your group's best interests specifically? c) *IF* there were, most unlikely as it now seems, any appeal against a victory in the Magistrate's Court, which then forced us to a higher court against our wishes, incurring considerable further expenditure, would your organisation *consider* a pledge to ensure we can see off any bluff by Powys that we could not follow this through? GLASS intends to continue to fully back the costs of legal representation for all probable outcomes, which has been substantial due to the Councils intransigence. Powys have not had a s56 Summons before apparently, and they seem to be on a face saving exercise to avoid all expenditure. (b) might mean that we say that further s56 action would not be likely to be backed or condoned by any major user group IF they complied with a reasonable program to ensure Byways are maintained and managed in accordance with MBoB and best practice. (c) If they think our funds are strictly limited, they may feel they can make threats that would prevent us completing any action. If we had to, state 'the then current position will be reviewed, but further pledges to pursue are available', our position would be most tenable. If you could pass this on to any officers or other groups that you trust to be open and honest in wanting RoW access for all, I would be grateful. I append further details below for info only. Yours sincerely Chris Marsden The story so far: Chris Marsden issued a s56 on the BOAT known as Water Break Its Neck (WBN) 8km, worn, neglected, but mainly sound with odd holes where tiny streams cross on the high level section, and one 300 metre incline which has worn through water and ordinary use, so that it is high centred. Photographs available at http://www.noots.org.uk/lanes/wbin/ This was in Nov 04, by Dec 04 a TRO was made as the route "was in very poor condition" as stated in the report to Committee (http://www.powys.gov.uk/typo3conf/ext/powys_minutes/documents/rep_2004-12-1 5rs1_172a_en.pdf), and the offer to talk was ignored. Since then they have issued TROs on four other similar routes. The TRO stopped vehicles only, even though they admitted verbally the hazard was to walkers, horses and sheep. In June they put up steel pins and bunting around the worst of the holes. A number of requests to admit the way was Out of Repair, were ignored, a Summons was finally issued in June 05. In court, when we expected to hear a plea of yes, or no it isn't OOR, their in house solicitor said "I am not germane to what happened before the summons, and requires the complainant to provide the evidence on which he relies". Guidance on the procedure says we should only have to produce our evidence *if* they plead it is not out of repair. http://www.prowgpg.org.uk/gpg/gpg/default.asp?PageID=148 So we were forced to obtain expert witness statement (Jeremy Hurlstone) saying (from past personal knowledge of it) that he would say the route is OOR, and forced to incur a lot of solicitor's legal fees for ourselves. On the eve of the second hearing the respondent agreed to an adjournment to allow discussions to take place, finally arranged for 22/9/05, and with another hearing (a Pre Trial review) set for 27/9/05. The respondent (Mr Vaughan obo Powys CC) has said to our legal team he would deny the road was OOR, that the s56 was not correctly served, and the response was by a person not authorised to respond to such notices!........ So we have two parallel arguments, whether the emailed (since sent recorded delivery) was good, but as PCC responded, openly, and been to court without raising this issue, and whether the admission it was a highway by an unauthorised officer, (their incompetence) is grounds to say at this stage the court can not hear / make an Order / award costs against PCC is one argument and the other is the fundamental Is it OOR or not? We still have no admission it is OOR, but a meeting Thursday to discuss the repair of this road, and (so far as we can guess) 4 other byways (in several sections), that have had similar TROs made, most of which have been admitted are OOR, without any need for the legal process. The court may go along with his claim it was not properly served / replied, and we would have to repeat the process, allowing them to admit OOR without further liability to costs! There is an additional complication. When we re surveyed the route to prepare expert witness statements, whilst measuring the depth of ruts we discovered what we thought was an unexploded bomb, exposed by the water erosion occurring since being closed to vehicles and of course immediately we had to report to the police. It is harmless according to the Royal Engineers, they removed it on the 18/8/05 and did not say there was any need to close the road, but Powys have used this to issue an 'Emergency' TRO to stop all users. They have done this on 9/9/05 to 30/9/05, under RTA84 s14(2). Possibly the max for an emergency TRO after we reported it! So much for safety of the public. We do not know what steps they have taken to prevent access, as walkers tend to follow the track. 19/9/05.
|
DIRTBIKE-TRAXS.co.uk  18th Sept Woodhouse inc Kids event
Sports Massage & Complementary Therapist Massage can aid recovery from injury. You can also treat your partner/pit crew to a relaxing aromatherapy treatment. Spokes Wheel Building Gerard Pettit. Bedwas Caerphilly Tel: 029-20861452 Mob: 07974384427
Frank Morgan's 2004 Compilation
Video.
NB No reliance should be placed on the accuracy of the information published on this site.
|
||||||||||||||||
