1. My email of 10/11/07 brought a response from the HCC Countryside Department. I was told that any landowner can enclose a right of way providing the path was not obstructed. However, this one now had been because the gate that had replaced the Terminator had been moved to the other side of the unlawfully enclosed field where it was unusable. Not only was the handle invisible from the Lindford side but it was positioned too low to reach from horseback. Also, it was hung on the wrong side.
   2007 Rob Thompson

2. As for being advised to claim the extra width by a 20- year user claim which normally took six to ten years to first assessment, was not only unhelpful but quite unacceptable.

3. It also brought to my attention that Hampshire’s Countryside Department had a priority list for its Statutory Duties of maintenance and care of rights of way. It showed how behind they are in performing their Statutory Duties of maintenance to Rights of Way probably because the funding for this from Central Government was not ring fenced and therefore being used for other more favoured projects.

4. Notwithstanding, a Statutory Duty is just that and if Parliament wished it to have been only a power it was up to Parliament so to provide. There should not be one rule for the Council and another for the taxpayer. Imagine the furore that would arise if we prioritised the payment of our taxes which are also a Statutory Duty.

5. I emailed by return the same morning serving notice on them to remove the fencing with the same alacrity as it had been erected, because not only was the wire on the wrong side of the fence but the re-erected gate had been hung on the wrong side constraining the opening while the handle was set so low it could not be reached from the back of a horse.
   2007 Rob Thompson to MC
   
   

Next time: A site visit by Countryside

All 'TCHCC' Parts so far

Click here for the list of all 'TCHCC' Parts so far