Jump to content


Photo

Court rejects Croft noise case appeal


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 Jedi_F1

Jedi_F1
  • Member

  • 747 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:24

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/73001

:down: :rolleyes: ):

Oké who was first:
-the Croft Circuit?
-the three local residents?
Or is that here not the case???

If you don't like to live near a noisy area like a circuit, an airport, an crowdy club,... then don't buy a house there or don't live there and ask them to go away or change activities.

I live just across a school, I don't ask the children to stop making noise in the morning ... :rolleyes:

Advertisement

#2 Rob

Rob
  • Member

  • 9,223 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:30

What a bleeding joke. :rolleyes:

#3 le chat noir

le chat noir
  • Member

  • 4,712 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:34

The residents, who live within 300 metres of the track, are Derek and Julia Watson and their daughter, Jill Wilson - the ex-wife of Jimmy Wilson, whose Croft Classic and Historic Motor Sports company brought motorsport back to the North Yorkshire venue in 1994.

Scandalous!
Just get some double glazing or move!

- however, most locals around schools do complain!

#4 Slyder

Slyder
  • Member

  • 5,453 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:40

Great idea to get money: Move and build your house 300 meters from the airport and then sue for damages and to have them reduce the noise in the airport. That'll earn you money in a heartbeat. :rolleyes:

Bunch of dumbasses, everyone involved.

Of course, the family sour grapes helped the caase.

#5 mmmcurry

mmmcurry
  • Member

  • 2,739 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:58

Thats the way it works, There were some flats built near a club in Sheffield and the club had to change the noise levels due to the new flats.

Unfortunately thats the way things work, common sence counts for very little, isn't in the same for one of the Italian circuits?

Steve.

#6 Suzy

Suzy
  • Member

  • 1,099 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:06

Great! So some stupid (%_)*$(_$(_ÂŁ$ÂŁ) who is locked in a bitter divorce battle with somebody at Croft has managed to screw a load of money out of the circuit and left every race circuit in danger of litigation now. This is nothing more than a vindictive woman using Croft as a pawn in her divorce battle and the Judge should have told her where to shove it. Anybody willing to help me shove a nosecone or two up her backside?;)

I notice she didn't have a problem with the noise at Croft when she and her equally-ghastly parents were putting in planning permission to turn their house into a hotel in order to maximise income from the circuit and its various track days and testing events! :mad:

#7 le chat noir

le chat noir
  • Member

  • 4,712 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:13

Originally posted by mmmcurry
Thats the way it works, There were some flats built near a club in Sheffield and the club had to change the noise levels due to the new flats.

Unfortunately thats the way things work, common sence counts for very little, isn't in the same for one of the Italian circuits?

Steve.


Monza of all places IIRC

#8 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 62,470 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:14

It's the trackdays to which they object. The 40 days or whatever of racing need not be affected. The circuit's argument (I've not seen it yet) was presumably that the 40 days of racing mean that it's a noisy environment so you can cause all sorts of other noise - not an attractive one...

There are legal provisions about moving TO a nuisance, and everyone's pretty much agreed that the law is in a hell of a state thanks to a mentalist decision in the 1870s, but Parliament has never been bothered to legislate on it. If Croft take it to the Lords it may get reviewed.

#9 Suzy

Suzy
  • Member

  • 1,099 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:19

Originally posted by ensign14
It's the trackdays to which they object. The 40 days or whatever of racing need not be affected. ...

If Croft take it to the Lords it may get reviewed.


As I said, she didn't object to the trackdays when she thought she could make money out of drivers staying in her hotel.

And it won't go to the Lords - any further appeal has been refused. Can this be over-riden in some way?

#10 Rob

Rob
  • Member

  • 9,223 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:21

Originally posted by ensign14
There are legal provisions about moving TO a nuisance, and everyone's pretty much agreed that the law is in a hell of a state thanks to a mentalist decision in the 1870s, but Parliament has never been bothered to legislate on it. If Croft take it to the Lords it may get reviewed.


Despite over 13,000 people signing a petition to the effect that long-standing activities are being ruined by these idiots, the response was rather pathetic - here

#11 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 62,470 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:23

Originally posted by Suzy
And it won't go to the Lords - any further appeal has been refused. Can this be over-riden in some way?

You go straight to the Lords for leave. It's normal for the judge(s) that have just ruled on your case to refuse permission to appeal, so you go to the next Court up. Indeed you can't petition their Lordships until the Court of Appeal have denied you permission. They need to show a public interest, which is likely here as "moving to a nuisance" is in a right state at present, you can't make boiled sweets but you can play cricket. :drunk:

#12 JacnGille

JacnGille
  • Member

  • 2,837 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:48

Originally posted by Jedi_F1
If you don't like to live near a noisy area like a circuit, an airport, an crowdy club,... then don't buy a house there or don't live there and ask them to go away or change activities.


The exact same thing is happenin on this side of the pond so don't feel like Croft is bein singled out. :

#13 reason42

reason42
  • Member

  • 295 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 26 January 2009 - 17:55

As well as the ÂŁ150,000 in damages, circuit leaseholder Croft Promo-Sport was ordered to pay ÂŁ120,000 in legal fees up front and will have to pay the claimants' full legal costs, which are reported to be around ÂŁ700,000


ÂŁ700,000 in legal costs - WTF????????????????????//!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#14 ExRhodesian

ExRhodesian
  • New Member

  • 13 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 26 January 2009 - 21:19

:mad:

This is very bad news.

#15 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,360 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 26 January 2009 - 21:29

*speechless with anger* :mad:

#16 Dudley

Dudley
  • Member

  • 9,248 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 27 January 2009 - 10:09

This will effectively kill Croft.

Sadly these stupid, pathetic, ******** leeches have ruined it for everyone else.

Maybe I should sue on the grounds that their stupidity is probably contagious.

#17 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 27 January 2009 - 12:08

Originally posted by Dudley
This will effectively kill Croft.

Sadly these stupid, pathetic, ******** leeches have ruined it for everyone else.

Maybe I should sue on the grounds that their stupidity is probably contagious.


my local track too , hell hath no fury like a woman scorned eh grrrrrrrrr :mad:

#18 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,360 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 27 January 2009 - 12:17

Will this judgement affect this seasons racing calender there or just track days? i.e. will there still be a BTCC round there this year?

#19 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 27 January 2009 - 12:24

reinforcing the 40 day ruling (which i think has always been in place) should still see plenty of time for the BTCC, GT and BSB rounds, but the revenue available to the track from testing and track days will be severely compromised. Having said that, the legal bill looks like it amounts to over ÂŁ1,000,000 so i fear the only way forward now for the promoters is toward the bankrupcy court.......i hope they revive themselves 'phoenix-style' (wasn't the original promotion called something like Phoenix promotions? I've got the programme somewhere, i went to the first meeting when they reopened before the track was modified) and secure a deal to run '60s American V8s daily from 8am to 8pm with a special detour along the farm boundary fence.
The track has 'provenance' and great support, but i fear the legal bills might see the place mothballed in the current climate and it'll be 'just' farmland again in 6 months time, although i hope i'm wrong

yours, banging head off nearest wall......wrighty

Advertisement

#20 Dudley

Dudley
  • Member

  • 9,248 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 27 January 2009 - 15:54

Originally posted by wewantourdarbyback
Will this judgement affect this seasons racing calender there or just track days? i.e. will there still be a BTCC round there this year?


As Wrighty says, the 40 days leaves enough running time for those rounds, the problem is without track day income will the circuit be profitable overall.

At best it may have to drop the most expensive and/or least attended series to run more track days, at worst they'll go track day only or close altogether.

And all this assumes they have a cool million or so sitting around to pay off these selfish freaks without going under. Don't forget, Zavvi and Fopp were both profitable but were both killed off by sudden bills from in trouble suppliers calling in debts, cash flow issues have killed off many a successful business and who's going to lend to Croft if they need it?

EDIT : God I hope I'm wrong.

#21 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 27 January 2009 - 19:47

been having a butchers about for more info and found a Northern Echo article on the story that does give a little more depth to the story (the Echo's the local paper, the main office is about 10 miles from the track and it's always given lots of decent coverage to events at the track). The news is good and bad i'm afraid......it would appear that the damages figure quoted isn't final, but of course that probably doesn't include the exorbitant legal costs, and the real biggies are two-fold.....firstly, this does open the door for other local residents to present a case against the circuit, and it also allows residents close to other circuits to use this case as a platform to pursue action against 'their' local circuit too .... apparently the move of F1 from Silverstone to Donington has already been mentioned :cry:

there is a Croft Facebook group for those who wish to add their support.

yours, Gutted, near Croft (which has 32 days of racing scheduled for this year btw according to the circuit site schedule page )

#22 Dudley

Dudley
  • Member

  • 9,248 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 28 January 2009 - 10:14

Brands would have the biggest problem, there are houses you can see standing at the side of the track at the top end.

#23 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 28 January 2009 - 12:51

Originally posted by Dudley
Brands would have the biggest problem, there are houses you can see standing at the side of the track at the top end.


off the top of my head, Brands, Mallory, Donington and Rockingham are all in that boat m8 :(. The point is, anyone who feels the value of their property is being affected by racetrack noise can now cite this case in their 'defence' (i use the word advisedly)......if we move away from 'proper' circuits and start including the short ovals around the country there's a couple of dozen tracks that could be dragged into this grrrr.........

#24 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 45,085 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 28 January 2009 - 13:15

I think Silverstone could have a problem if they go ahead with the plans to develop areas around the track. I think this included housing, so the buyers could complain after purchase.

#25 Rosemayer

Rosemayer
  • Member

  • 1,253 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 28 January 2009 - 13:20

All the Road courses and Drag strips in southern california including Riverside went away for the same reasons.

#26 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,360 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 January 2009 - 17:13

Originally posted by Clatter
I think Silverstone could have a problem if they go ahead with the plans to develop areas around the track. I think this included housing, so the buyers could complain after purchase.

What is the world coming to? :(

#27 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 29 January 2009 - 10:25

Originally posted by wewantourdarbyback
What is the world coming to? :(


lets face facts, in the current climate the housebuyers are more important to the government than 'minority sport supporters'......the banks even more-so than the housebuyers, although the government say they're trying to encourage the banks to lend, it just seems the banks arent listening (yes, i know the government put conditions on the bail-out that the banks have to demonstrate solvency and capital reserves, so its not unlikely that the banks would be loath to lend the money out on the risk of not getting it back early enough to keep the bean-counters happy).
If the government did care about motor racing, they'd be using all of the spare labour swilling around atm from the construction industry on projects like the revamp at Donington (landmark event, world stage, flag-carrying project, 'best of British' civil engineering etc), but from what i've seen they're not even prepared to put extra resources into the Olympic project, and that's got 'their' name on it :

#28 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,440 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 January 2009 - 16:06

Originally posted by wrighty


lets face facts, in the current climate the housebuyers are more important to the government than 'minority sport supporters'......the banks even more-so than the housebuyers, although the government say they're trying to encourage the banks to lend, it just seems the banks arent listening (yes, i know the government put conditions on the bail-out that the banks have to demonstrate solvency and capital reserves, so its not unlikely that the banks would be loath to lend the money out on the risk of not getting it back early enough to keep the bean-counters happy).
If the government did care about motor racing, they'd be using all of the spare labour swilling around atm from the construction industry on projects like the revamp at Donington (landmark event, world stage, flag-carrying project, 'best of British' civil engineering etc), but from what i've seen they're not even prepared to put extra resources into the Olympic project, and that's got 'their' name on it :


Britain at its best! :down:

#29 Slartibartfast

Slartibartfast
  • Paddock Club Host

  • 9,750 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 31 January 2009 - 20:51

Not all is doom and gloom though - Nigel Mansell has managed to get a noise abatement order overturned;


http://www.devon24.c...w...3A34:26:050

It's only a karting track, Mansell's company has made great effort to minimise the noise, and still people object.

#30 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 01 February 2009 - 17:34

Originally posted by Slartibartfast
Not all is doom and gloom though - Nigel Mansell has managed to get a noise abatement order overturned;


http://www.devon24.c...w...3A34:26:050

It's only a karting track, Mansell's company has made great effort to minimise the noise, and still people object.


you have to wonder what would make more of a whine though.....15 karts or the Nige.... :lol:

#31 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,360 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 01 February 2009 - 18:14

Nige probably pointed out that he would not have shut up had they rejected it ;)

#32 alfista

alfista
  • Member

  • 1,015 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 05 February 2009 - 14:25

Little OT, but only little. My Finnish friends have told me that Ahvenisto circuit at the outskirts of Hämeenlinna is under threat. It has been a target for environmentalists for quite a long and they are mounting a new attack again . If you think your vote will help the circuit then just go here: http://www.adressit.com/ahvenisto
Looking to the list you can find some familiar names...
Ahvenisto is only 3 km long and very compact but absolutely fascinating. It's going up and down over the hills like a mini-Spa and needs very big balls from the driver. As one local put it: "Your line is right if your right mirror grates against the pitwall".
More about the circuit: http://ahvenistonfan.../index_eng.html
Stunning incar video: http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

Posted Image

#33 F1Fanatic.co.uk

F1Fanatic.co.uk
  • Member

  • 1,725 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 06 February 2009 - 17:13

Originally posted by wrighty
you have to wonder what would make more of a whine though.....15 karts or the Nige.... :lol:

:rotfl:

#34 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 07 February 2009 - 11:44

Originally posted by F1Fanatic.co.uk

:rotfl:


;)

in other news, the following statement has appeared:

Croft Promosport would like to express their gratitude to all those people who have contributed to the overwhelming and unprecedented support, which has been shown for the Circuit in this difficult period. However, we would ask that all people show respect for the Court of Appeal's decision and the rights and privacy of the Claimants in those proceedings.


: looks like the negative press regarding the case might've had the opposite effect......now that's 'Britain at its best' for ya :(

#35 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 07 February 2009 - 12:26

Originally posted by mmmcurry
Thats the way it works, There were some flats built near a club in Sheffield and the club had to change the noise levels due to the new flats.

Unfortunately thats the way things work, common sence counts for very little, isn't in the same for one of the Italian circuits?

Steve.


Just about every country in the world has the same story. Australia is very bad for this and have lost a lot of tracks.

Similar theme, Australia's only big truck manufacturer Western Star had a factory near nowhere for many years and houses were later built near it - yup, they had to move and they employed hundreds there. And by law here, real estate agents have to inform prospective buyers of local business and possible nuisances and this **** still happens.