Court rejects Croft noise case appeal
#1
Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:24
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 ...
#3
Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:34
Scandalous!
Just get some double glazing or move!
- however, most locals around schools do complain!
#4
Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:40
Bunch of dumbasses, everyone involved.
Of course, the family sour grapes helped the caase.
#5
Posted 26 January 2009 - 15:58
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
Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:06
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!
#7
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
Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:14
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
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
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
Posted 26 January 2009 - 16:23
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.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?
#12
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
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
Posted 26 January 2009 - 21:19
This is very bad news.
#15
Posted 26 January 2009 - 21:29
#16
Posted 27 January 2009 - 10:09
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
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
#18
Posted 27 January 2009 - 12:17
#19
Posted 27 January 2009 - 12:24
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
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
Posted 27 January 2009 - 19:47
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
Posted 28 January 2009 - 10:14
#23
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
Posted 28 January 2009 - 13:15
#25
Posted 28 January 2009 - 13:20
#26
Posted 28 January 2009 - 17:13
What is the world coming to?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.
#27
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
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!
#29
Posted 31 January 2009 - 20:51
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
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....
#31
Posted 01 February 2009 - 18:14
#32
Posted 05 February 2009 - 14:25
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
#33
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....
#34
Posted 07 February 2009 - 11:44
Originally posted by F1Fanatic.co.uk
;)
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
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.