NIMBYs win at Croft

Resident wins £150,000 compensation for noise problems at Croft:
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4055046.Fears_for_future_of_racing_circuit/

Open the floodgates?

 

In communiqué

As in other similar cases (Silverstone springs to mind), it is the track
days that the complainants are objecting to not the 40/50 races a year.

Note that this is a common law case, not a local authority statutory
nuisance or planning action.

I'll give a full treatise on the concept of 'Best Practicable Means' and
how it doesn't apply in common law nuisance actions if you like.

You generally need deep pockets to even consider starting such an
action.

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Gilera Nordwest * 2 Yamaha WR250Z |
| Gilera GFR * 2 Moto Morini 2C/375 Morini 350 "Forgotten Error" |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

 

Legal fees of £700K?!

We can only hope that other neighbours are slightly more sensible about
it, or I can't see Croft surviving.

At the very least, I think the price of trackdays at Croft will be going
up again.

 

Well I wouldn't mind the concise edition.

 

Well it did say that costs were awarded at £700,000 so it seems that
the lawyers were winners in this one too ;-)

My point was that if one resident has successfully claimed, it will
open the floodgates for other residents in the same vicinity to push
for claims, and encourage those living near other tracks to also make
similar claims; especially given the large sums involved.

Given the tight budgets that tracks run to, and the smaller track's
reliance on trackdays to increase income, it may well mean the death
of a lot of smaller tracks if such claims are successful.

Castle Combe has always been a target and I read somewhere that even
Cadwell was recently named in a new case!

 

It doesn't appear to be quite that simple...
(apart from the fact that there aren't many other neighbours...)

http://www.richardbuxton.co.uk/v3.0/?q=node/334

The couple bought the house in 1990, when the circuit was more-or-less
closed. It re-opened a few years later, and they've been in fairly
constant dispute since then - the 1998 limits on the number of days for
various noise levels came from a legal agreement with them. Somehow,
though, that didn't stop them buying the other house for their daughter
(the other claimant) in 2000 - coincidentally, the year that the circuit
saw most use...

Now, d'you think it's pure coincidence that that daughter was married to
the developer of both the circuit and those houses in the early '90s,
then underwent a messy divorce from him, BEFORE buying that house and
moving in...?

 

In a nutshell.

The Local Authority can[1] serve a Section 80 Environmental Protection
Act 1990 Statutory Nuisance Notice when satisfied that there is "noise
amounting to a nuisance" from premises.

A defence is to show that the "best practicable means" have been taken
to prevent said nuisance. In terms of a race circuit that may mean
controlling individual vehicle noise levels, noise barriers such as
earth mounds etc, and limits on hours of operation.

On direct application for a common law high court injunction by the
complainants, no such defence is available to the respondents.

The floodgates in this particular case could be the awarding of
compensation, rather than an injunction restraining the operation, say
by limiting the number of days racing, or testing, or other noisy
activity can take place. That is unusual.

The report doesn't make it clear, but as they got compensation I wnder
if they also got an order for Croft to pay their costs (seeing as how
they 'won'). So effectively not 150,000 but 850,000 to find.


Want some case law precedents for the concept of "coming to a nuisance"
(NO !), as well ?

[1] In fact the legislation says "shall" serve a notice. No idea what
the LA have done in this case.
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Gilera Nordwest * 2 Yamaha WR250Z |
| Gilera GFR * 2 Moto Morini 2C/375 Morini 350 "Forgotten Error" |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

 

In communiqué

Quite. The unusual aspect is the awarding of compensation rather than
an injunction applying restraints.

If they live just as close and are subject to the same noise
level/incidence/duration, possibly.

Indeed. It is an increasing tend given the almost daily track days at
some circuits now. The state of affairs is not the same as it was when
some residents moved in - though that may not be so in his specific
case.


--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Gilera Nordwest * 2 Yamaha WR250Z |
| Gilera GFR * 2 Moto Morini 2C/375 Morini 350 "Forgotten Error" |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

 

That's logical.

The solicitors enquiries on that house sale would make interesting
reading.

No. Malice, is a factor that can be taken into account in deciding if
somebody is causing nuisance. A bit trickier to prove the other way.


--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Gilera Nordwest * 2 Yamaha WR250Z |
| Gilera GFR * 2 Moto Morini 2C/375 Morini 350 "Forgotten Error" |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

 

Odd mention in the comments about one of the complainants, Mrs Wilson?,
being an ex of the former manager of Croft. Strikes me there's more to
this than meets the eye, but it's a pity everybody else's enjoyment
might be hit.

More broadly, what kind of **** moves next to a facility then complains
about the noise of that very place? Not unknown, but honestly, these
arseholes are just so 1.stupid, 2.calculating.

Depends on how many grasping cunts are in the country.

Oh... that's fucked it then.

 

Super - thank you.

 

Resident wins £150,000 compensation for noise problems at Croft:
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4055046.Fears_for_future_of_racing_circuit/

Open the floodgates?

It's just another fucking twat trying to stop others having some fun.

We constantly read in the bike rags "Don't speed on the roads, take your
toys to a track", so now that track days at Croft appear to be at risk, can
we expect the A1 to become a starting grid?


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

 

Beav wrote:
< snip everything >

Oi, Beav: apparently it isn't just ogden's posts that you can't quote
correctly.

I think I see a common factor...

 

Croft's biggest problem is its controlled by Richmondshire District
Council, who basically think "All Creatures Great and Small" is a
modern cutting edge documentry. If it was a couple of miles West and
in Darlington Borough Council's area it would get far more sympathy
and have money thrown at it.