Walker killed by cattle....

[john87]

3 hours ago, Billhook said:

No, in my case it was never a public footpath, just a private path that I allowed a few people in the village to use in return for them reporting any interesting wildlife or people acting with bad intent.

Newcomers to the village who saw others using the path then tried to claim it was now public because it had been used  for over ten years, but they had no evidence of this.

You must stop this path up then or you will have no end of trouble in future.. 20 years use and it WILL be a path..

 

john

[dumper]

42 minutes ago, john87 said:

You must stop this path up then or you will have no end of trouble in future.. 20 years use and it WILL be a path..

 

john

I believe not if it is closed 1 day per year 

[Billhook]

3 minutes ago, dumper said:

I believe not if it is closed 1 day per year 

Hence my gate and fence

But I really do not want to be seen as a “Git orf moi Land” farmer and 95% of the locals appreciate the access .  In fact it was one of the regular locals, a strong character, who gave the knob in the village a dressing down for exactly the reason that if he carried in insisting it was a public footpath that I would probably completely close it down to the detriment of the whole community 

[john87]

26 minutes ago, dumper said:

I believe not if it is closed 1 day per year 

I think that is right, but might it not be hard to prove....

 

john..

[Bob_z_l]

9 minutes ago, john87 said:

I think that is right, but might it not be hard to prove....

 

john..

Not really. Always used to be Christmas day on the farm next door. 

[Stere]

Any actually real life cases of the "20yrs permissive path" being upgraded to PROW against a landowners wishes?

 

Rights of Way: Applications for paths based on twenty years' use

WWW.OSS.ORG.UK

---

Are you looking for information on how to record plublic paths after twenty years' use? Visit the Open Spaces Society...

 

Not sure how you prove if a path  was closed for one day or if it has being open for 20yrs either?

 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Stere

[dumper]

50 minutes ago, john87 said:

I think that is right, but might it not be hard to prove....

 

john..

Both ways picture of locked gate should do it they would have to prove it wasnt

[openspaceman]

8 minutes ago, dumper said:

Both ways picture of locked gate should do it they would have to prove it wasnt

This saves the bother

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267383/pb14043-ca16-form-guidance.pdf

[Billhook]

There was a big row some years back when the Churchwarden locked the gate into the Church field for the one day.  There were a couple of houses in the Church field and an ambulance was called to one of them and could not enter and I think after that it has not been locked again

[Sutton]

4 hours ago, openspaceman said:

There are some changes to the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 and something in a new policing and sentencing act. The effect is to make protests a criminal act on private land (consider the Kinder Scout trespass that led to the public being able to access the hills would now become criminal. The thing is some of these areas which people are buying up can support public access without causing the owners who are often absent any problems. Not that I think England can support a right to roam as in Scotland and indeed I did not support the CRoW act where IMO it impinged on different rare habitats.

 

Now ostensibly one part of the act is to criminalise setting up encampments with vehicles, the side effect will be to criminalise  kipping in your car.

 

The driver is businesses that have bought into big office developments and shopping malls with their own security, because these were often built alongside public squares and roads but the land was transferred and rights extinguished, so when you walk by them you are now walking permissively.

 

The upshot is it will control protests and the police will not have any more resource to deal with travelers but private companies will be able to evict protesters. In other threads comments have been made on how Covid has increased the control the government has on the population and I think this is mostly to do with the demands of the kingmakers, the holders of assets, to restrict the general public and has become worse as assets have come under control of the super wealthy.

I was just asking in case my unlawful efforts at protecting stock would be undone by some new illegality. Don't have much to concern after all. Thanks again.