[BBC News] Inquiry over Clarkson's footpath

[The Voice of Reason]

It always makes me smile when the personal insults start appearing.

 

This is obviously going to come as a surprise to you I know but I think you'll find that not only are the PROWL folks taxpayers but they also knew that if this storm in a teacup led to it's logical conclusion, an inquiry, then it would be they, the taxpayers, who would be footing the bill.

 

Guess what? They're very happy about the money they have paid in tax being spent on it. Like I posted earlier, it undoubtedly makes it all the sweeter for them. Now they could have baulked at the cost and stood down and let their taxes be extravagantly frittered away on such things as jollies for ministers to do their xmas shopping in the states. But no, they very sensibly decided to spend their taxes on their own worthy cause i.e. it is up to them. Good on 'em! I just wish there were more ways where Joe Public could spend his taxes on things he actually wants. Unfortunately the opportunities don't come that often.

 

By the way, vendetta is a very ugly word....

If your persona is anything like your posts suggest I imagine you go round all day grinning like a Chesire Cat

 

Your initial assertion that one can hypothecate ones own tax payments - "if they want to spend their contributions in this way, surely it's up to them" - is just wrong.

[%age]

It's not running out of points at all.

 

Clarkson is exercising his rights. Joe Public in the shape of PROWL are exercising theirs. It's going to cost the taxpayer which it always does when folk's rights are concerned. Now, that's not too difficult to grasp is it?

It shouldn't be costing the taxpayers anything. If access is in dispute between PROWL and JC they should take the matter to the civil courts. If PROWL win then JC may wish to look at the advice given to him when buying; if they lose then there was nothing for them to fight over.

 

At the Civil Courts this will costs the 'losing' side many£10ks. Their own legal fees plus the other side. On the Isle of Man such a matter can easily run into 6 figures.

 

If JC 'loses' he may have a claim against those advising him but then I would imagine that just now they would be advising him not to go to court.

 

Do PRoWL have the cash to employ advocates at £100s per hour every hour?.

 

It all becomes a nasty expensive gamble and the advocates will be rubbing their hands with glee just now - they never lose of course.

 

Mediation as suggested by Graham Cregeen MHK for Santon and Malew, would hardly help as there is an indeterminate number of people on the side of the public whereas if it were JC on one side and the IoM Government on the other that might be different. The IoM Gov of course do not wish to enter the foray.

 

 

I would be interested to know what the expected cost of an enquiry would be, as there would be no need for expensive lawyers. It seems a good starting point in this matter.

[Cronky]

I think Graham Cregeen's suggestion of mediation is the answer. A days mediation with the cost split between the parties would benefit the taxpayer. At the heart of this dispute lie disagreeing parties. Getting them together with a neutral and confidential mediator for a day would do no harm at all. If the parties can be brought to a resolution then the walkers might get their right of way and the landowner might get his privacy - if indeed these are the real issues.

 

If mediation does not work then it is only the parties money and time that will have been wasted.

 

There is nothing to be lost by trying mediation and everything to be gained.

[WTF]

the title says it all, clarkson's footpath. not local residents right of way to nowhere and back again. why anyone should think they ever had a right, even before clarkson had the place, to just start wandering round someone else's property years ago mystifies me. if it was an official footpath clarkson would have been told, but it isn't and he wasn't. the fact that trespassers think it should be cos they've trespassed for years is laughable. shame that trespass laws are bunk over here.

[Gladys]

It all becomes a nasty expensive gamble and the advocates will be rubbing their hands with glee just now - they never lose of course.

 

Well, PROWL should put their money where their mouth is, instead of expecting the taxpayer to pick up the bill for their malevolent crusade, or just shut up.

[%age]

As any person who buys a house will know, especially one that is not newly built, there are "Enquiries before Contract". This takes a more or less bog standard form and many of the questions are answered simply as tick boxes, such as:

 

Is there an electricity supply, is there access to the property, is there drainage, does anyone else have an easement over your property for drainage, electricity etc. etc.

 

There is always a catch all general "is there anything else that might effect the property" question also.

 

If you own your property please take a look at your Abstract of Title. Or Google it

 

It would be obvious that there might be a potential problem with ramblers and the like in this case.

 

This leaves an either/or situation.

 

Either there is clearly no public right of way over the land. In which case I wish Jeremy Clarkson all the very best with this matter. I really do.

 

Or

 

He was aware there could be a problem and he has, in typically Clarkson fashion, stuck two fingers up at anyone wearing a big wooly jumper and a dog called Major daring to cross his land.

 

 

All this really is a Legal Matter. Public Opinion or Enquiry should not come into it.

[WTF]

i think it's more a case of there was no official legal access to the property, so why would clarkson or his lawyers assume otherwise. also the ramblers have never had a problem till now so in typical island tradition it's chase around after the fact to correct their own previous assumptions and oversight.

[John Barber]

I wish the island would tell Clarkson to find a home elsewhere. Miserable rich householders like him shouldn't be welcome on a island like this.

 

 

I really think you would do well to read and perhaps even understand the quote at the foot of you post! DeValera may have said, but its meaning seem to have escaped you.

 

The Clarksons are as entitled as anyone else to live their lives in peace and comfort, and, if they so wish, some privacy and respect for their home.

 

 

The Manx Crab really pisses me off!

[P.K.]

He was aware there could be a problem and he has, in typically Clarkson fashion, stuck two fingers up at anyone wearing a big wooly jumper and a dog called Major daring to cross his land.

Errrr... I think you'll find the dog is an Akita and it's name is Tyson.

 

Happy days.....

[P.K.]

Well, PROWL should put their money where their mouth is, instead of expecting the taxpayer to pick up the bill for their malevolent crusade, or just shut up.

In a way it's like folks objecting to the likes of that very nasty piece of work Abu Hamza getting legal aid. Basically it's actually protecting everyone's legal rights that is the key point here.

[Fossils]

He was aware there could be a problem and he has, in typically Clarkson fashion, stuck two fingers up at anyone wearing a big wooly jumper and a dog called Major daring to cross his land.

 

I think that anyone wearing a dog called Major should expect to be on the receiving end of a wide range of gestures.

[Gladys]

Well, PROWL should put their money where their mouth is, instead of expecting the taxpayer to pick up the bill for their malevolent crusade, or just shut up.

In a way it's like folks objecting to the likes of that very nasty piece of work Abu Hamza getting legal aid. Basically it's actually protecting everyone's legal rights that is the key point here.

Not the same at all. An enquiry is not the same as defending or prosecuting a private legal action for which legal aid is available. If PROWL are so sure of their position, they should have the courage of their convictions and take the matter to court themselves. Methinks that PROWL know they do not have any legal rights in this matter which is why they won't swallow the cost of a court case.

[Cronky]

Do not underestimate the power of Mediation in resolving a dispute like this.

[Gladys]

But PROWL don't want mediation, do they? It seems they do not want a resolution, but to cause as much discomfiture to JC as possible.

[P.K.]

Well, PROWL should put their money where their mouth is, instead of expecting the taxpayer to pick up the bill for their malevolent crusade, or just shut up.

In a way it's like folks objecting to the likes of that very nasty piece of work Abu Hamza getting legal aid. Basically it's actually protecting everyone's legal rights that is the key point here.

Not the same at all. An enquiry is not the same as defending or prosecuting a private legal action for which legal aid is available. If PROWL are so sure of their position, they should have the courage of their convictions and take the matter to court themselves. Methinks that PROWL know they do not have any legal rights in this matter which is why they won't swallow the cost of a court case.

Just so that I understand this PROWL can take on board the cost themselves or get the taxpayer to foot the bill? That's a tricky one not. At the end of the day even the Manx Legal System should be available to all and not just those who can afford it. However I can understand those who think their tax dollars are better spent elsewhere. Especially as some are complaining that it's all about putting JC down as opposed to anything else.

 

I just wish I could have seen JC's face when he discovered that a rottweiler from a previous life was once again snapping at his heels. I'll bet it was a picture. I've no doubt his bessie mate AA Gill will have some choice and no doubt disparaging things to say about it as well. Happy days!