OV9

Rich B wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:03 am

Jobbo wrote: Tue Aug 08, 2023 7:59 pmSo I don’t see that the new owner has committed any sort of offence.

there we go. Presumably they got advice from a local lawyer like Jobbo before doing it?

Read the whole thread. They failed to obtain prior approval (which specifically relates to demolition of pubs - see link above), but it's not a criminal offence to fail to get planning consent until many more stages have passed (failure to comply with enforcement etc).

Here's a link to the General Permitted Development Order: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/201 ... dings/made
Right at the top, the very first lines read:
"Permitted development
B. Any building operation consisting of the demolition of a building."

As I said above, generally demolishing a building is permitted; it is only if you fall into an exception to that general rule that consent is required.

Rich B wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:03 am

Jobbo wrote: Tue Aug 08, 2023 7:59 pmSo I don’t see that the new owner has committed any sort of offence.

there we go. Presumably they got advice from a local lawyer like Jobbo before doing it?

Jobbo wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 8:33 am

Rich B wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:03 am

Jobbo wrote: Tue Aug 08, 2023 7:59 pmSo I don’t see that the new owner has committed any sort of offence.

there we go. Presumably they got advice from a local lawyer like Jobbo before doing it?

Read the whole thread. They failed to obtain prior approval (which specifically relates to demolition of pubs - see link above), but it's not a criminal offence to fail to get planning consent until many more stages have passed (failure to comply with enforcement etc).

Here's a link to the General Permitted Development Order: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/201 ... dings/made
Right at the top, the very first lines read:
"Permitted development
B. Any building operation consisting of the demolition of a building."

As I said above, generally demolishing a building is permitted; it is only if you fall into an exception to that general rule that consent is required.

yep, so presumably they got advice from a lawyer and no one else corrected that lawyer.

Was it popular before it closed??

Or is this a case of:

I’m outraged that it had been demolished!!!

Did you ever go there???

Well, no, I never went there. But I still wanted it to be there…

I thought people were over exaggerating that it’s in the middle of a dump but it really is!
https://maps.app.goo.gl/3XWSh6SM1LLsRj8t5?g_st=ic

In Kent they end up turning these dumps into industrial areas or shopping centres once they’re filled then move the dump to a field across. Perhaps that is what was planned here and the pub was right in the middle of the plot?

Rich B wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 8:53 am

Jobbo wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 8:33 am

Rich B wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:03 am there we go. Presumably they got advice from a local lawyer like Jobbo before doing it?

Read the whole thread. They failed to obtain prior approval (which specifically relates to demolition of pubs - see link above), but it's not a criminal offence to fail to get planning consent until many more stages have passed (failure to comply with enforcement etc).

Here's a link to the General Permitted Development Order: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/201 ... dings/made
Right at the top, the very first lines read:
"Permitted development
B. Any building operation consisting of the demolition of a building."

As I said above, generally demolishing a building is permitted; it is only if you fall into an exception to that general rule that consent is required.

yep, so presumably they got advice from a lawyer and no one else corrected that lawyer.

Having come across a few of these types in my time, I fully expect that no they didn't.

In five years time this is going to be a twee ITV TV film starring Jim Broadbent

Mito Man wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 9:57 am I thought people were over exaggerating that it’s in the middle of a dump but it really is!
https://maps.app.goo.gl/3XWSh6SM1LLsRj8t5?g_st=ic

In Kent they end up turning these dumps into industrial areas or shopping centres once they’re filled then move the dump to a field across. Perhaps that is what was planned here and the pub was right in the middle of the plot?

They'll most liekly be wanting an extension for quarrying and restoration via landfilling. Getting consent for a landfill is fairly difficult these days, and most are very historic sites with low levels of input these days. The land immedaitely around the pub looks to have been quarried and filled already, so my guess would be that they haven't quite met the planning conditions for cessation of use and restoration, and would then submit a new application for an extension to a still live permission.

Which they'll now find immensely difficult to get.

dinny_g wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 9:52 am Was it popular before it closed??

Or is this a case of:

I’m outraged that it had been demolished!!!

Did you ever go there???

Well, no, I never went there. But I still wanted it to be there…

Quite. There were lots of people at the site on the bbc news this morning, all very sad at the loss, some even laying flowers.

Maybe if they’d gone while it was still open it wouldn’t have closed and been sold?

I too wondered about the location, again the bbc had a reporter stood by a sign for the place on what looked like a fairly busy road which didn’t seem to match what jobbo said earlier. Google it and nope, stuck down the end of a shitty little lane about 1/2 a mile from the nearest house.

Something similar happened to a disused pub near us.

It went up for sale and was bought by a developer who left it vacant for a number of months. This didn’t mysteriously burn down but instead had toxic waste dumped in the cellar making the building apparently uninhabitable! The bulldozers moved in over a weekend when the environmental people at the council were unable to be contacted. There was a lot of moaning and threats of legal action from said council who later gave permission for a Co op to be built in place of the pub.

Very popular as you can see

So it seems the digger _was_ delivered before the fire took place. Which makes the fire look deliberate.Link

And now the fire is being treated as arson https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-65141057

ETA
and the Daily Mail has published pictures of the tits of the woman who bought it https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... sband.html

dinny_g wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 9:52 am Was it popular before it closed??

Or is this a case of:

I’m outraged that it had been demolished!!!

Did you ever go there???

Well, no, I never went there. But I still wanted it to be there…

I am no longer local and even when I was it wasn't a regular stop. It was off the beaten track and anyone near has a closer local. That said, I've still taken visitors there. The marble rolling up the table and the general feeling of being pissed when you walk round the place are not something you get in any old pub. It wasn’t popular, mainly due to a local brewery trying to turn it into a pretty naff food pub which didn’t work hence the sale.

Someone with a little more imagination may well have made a go of it, but more likely that it was to have been transported brick by brick to a heritage museum only 4 miles away. The wilful destruction only hours after the fire has prevented this.

As already said, sadly predictable and an all too common story, but this still very sad.


PS good to see fellow yam yams on here

Explosive Newt wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:00 pm ETA
and the Daily Mail has published pictures of the tits of the woman who bought it https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... sband.html

But uncharacteristically has declined to tell us how much they cost.

Explosive Newt wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:00 pm ETA
and the Daily Mail has published pictures of the tits of the woman who bought it https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... sband.html

This is an important editorial update.

Simon wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:24 pm

Explosive Newt wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:00 pm ETA
and the Daily Mail has published pictures of the tits of the woman who bought it https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... sband.html

This is an important editorial update.

Coming at it from a different angle

Update: a very good dog has identified that an accelerant was used in the fire.

I was once told by a dodgy person who lived in no permanent abode that if you want to start a fire which cannot be identified at all use a butane lighter, something about leaving no residue behind so it can't be pinpointed as arson unless there's eyewitness/video evidence. I'd love to know if it's true or not!

Explosive Newt wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2023 9:25 pm Update: a very good dog has identified that an accelerant was used in the fire.

In other news the pope is indeed a catholic