Anthony Westoby wrote:I think you are reporting heresay and rumour and have picked up a few errors along the way.Treeman wrote:Anthony Westoby wrote: In the end, this landowner was given the choice of paying a fine or cutting his trees down to a lower height, which IMHO was a stupid decision, knowing as I do, that these particular trees were, indeed, planted deliberately with definite, stated and witnessed, malicious intent. They were cut down a bit under threat of an 'ASBO'
Yes, I probably did give that impression, I was trying to condense a very very long running saga involving the LA who should probably have contacted your good self for advice, as I'm sure they didn't know which way was up at the time.
Enforcement officers were becoming a way of life at this time, trying to get the guy to give these people alongside him some light in their houses. His reply to their verbal complaints was "If you can't see to read in your kitchen, go in your front room!"
That's not hearsay, or rumour, that's witnessed, I won't make a statement on here that I can't back up with written facts.
As 'Despair' said at the time, on here, "The High Hedges Law isn't working!" and she was absolutely correct.
Thats not true either, the HH legislation is working but it isn't working how someone as polarised as despair would like it to.