Anyone we know? (1 Viewer)

[stevewagner]

Maybe it done in the Rat Rod style?

Registered 1972 so @ 52 years old is it not MOT & Tax exempt, subject to "no ‘substantial changes’", so it has an MOT & Tax?
That does not stop it looking a total reck though.

The modern white/yellow reflective registration plates, really spoil the overall look.

For a better appreciation of the 14 year renovation:

Fuming dad banned from parking vintage motorhome on driveway

A fuming dad has been banned from parking his vintage motorhome on his own driveway – after council bosses said it was "damaging the area". Mike Perkins has spent 14 years restoring his beloved 1972 Ford Transit Landliner CI, which he calls his “pride and joy”. The 63-year-old kept the motorhome...

uk.news.yahoo.com

It did have an MOT in 2010 than historic MOT check site lists as expired 2011.

Registered 1972 so @ 52 years old is it not MOT & Tax exempt, subject to "no ‘substantial changes’", so it has an MOT & Tax?
That does not stop it looking a total reck though.

Historic (classic) vehicles: MOT and vehicle tax
Vehicles that do not need an MOT
You do not need to get an MOT if:

• the vehicle was built or first registered more than 40 years ago
• no ‘substantial changes’ have been made to the vehicle in the last 30 years, for example replacing the chassis, body, axles or engine to change the way the vehicle works

Vehicles exempt from vehicle tax

• If your vehicle was built before 1 January 1984, you can stop paying vehicle tax from 1 April 2024.

But you have to register it as historical and still apply for the free tax every year

 

[Yorick]

If he got a tin of metal paint and gave it a quick makeover, it would look bearable.

 

[Pausim]

I am struggling to see what he has achieved in 14 years and I wonder if some of the neighbours who are supposedly supporting him are also the ones that complained. I think there is a lot missing from the journalists reports.

 

[Jim]

Years ago in a street down south, we had someone who had a massive boat on blocks in his front garden for years, It was almost as wide and as tall as his little house and it looked awful, all rust, primer and rot, the wooden wheelhouse was rotten and was poorly protected by a rotting grey slimy canvas lashed to it. He was always pottering at it though, it was his dream. But he was knocking on bit and was full of arthritis and everyone knew he'd probably be dead before that boat saw water again.

One day this snotty guy, who'd only been in the road less than a year came to me asking to sign a petition to get this dangerous eye-sore removed. I was little wilder back then, and took the guy aside and told him quietly that if he succeeded in getting the boat removed he would come to seriously regret it, or something like that.

The old boy died about a year later project unfinished, but the boat was still there for a while, I don't think the petition was ever handed in.

So if you're asking me, I guess I'd let the scruffy old bugger keep his tatty van, it's his project, and his garden.

 

[Mikexx]

A little heavy handed but I do agree ....it's a shed and a good job it is MOT exempt as it looks like it would never pass

Interesting claim. First impressions aren't always very accurate.
1) It has had extensive welding some years ago and is structurally sound.
2) 6 slave cylinders have been replaced in recent months (6 on account of twin leading shoe drums on the front)
3) New Master cylinder
4) New flexible hoses
5) Replaced some rigid line brake pipe.
6) New Fuel tank.
7) Refurbished electrics, outstanding issue is the windscreen wipers don't self-park (not a MOT issue)
8) New carburettor.
9) Replaced rotten internal structure on side and rear.
10) Number of new tyres
11) New Rear wheel bearings and seals. The old bearings were serviceable but seals leaking.

Plus many other items.

I guess if it looked shiny the assumption it would be instantly roadworthy?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Mikexx]

14 years restoring and it looks like a rust heap?

Timescale has been lost in translation. Restoration has largely taken place in the past few months. It's been in the family for 25 years and been on my driveway for 14 years.

 

[Yorick]

I am struggling to see what he has achieved in 14 years and I wonder if some of the neighbours who are supposedly supporting him are also the ones that complained. I think there is a lot missing from the journalists reports.View attachment 892978

Blimey. A bomb exploded inside. Quite recently

 

[DuxDeluxe]

I suspect the owner (= Mike Perkins) has a strong chance of winning his Section 215 appeal based upon precedent High Court Judgements against corrupt or ultra vires "Function Creep" actions by Local Councils.

For example :-

Section 215 of the Act empowers a local planning authority to issue a notice to the owner of land or a property where it adversely affects the local area, and the notice can specify what remedial action is required. Sub-section 1 states,



It was under this provision that a notice was served in 2015 by the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea on Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring, after the property developer had painted the front of her house in red-and-white candy cane stripes. However, following judicial review by the High Court of Justice, Mr Justice Gilbart ruled,



Thus overturning the notice, and allowing Lisle-Mainwaring to keep the stripes on her house.

Yes, she did it to piss her neighbours off

 

[Mikexx]

Personally I think it is ridiculous to allow a vehicle on the road without some sort of inspection, to ensure it is at least roadworthy.

I might agree with you. However, statistically the MOT has never save lives through preventable mechanical failure. We ought to test drivers more often than once in a lifetime.

 

[DuxDeluxe]

Timescale has been lost in translation. Restoration has largely taken place in the past few months. It's been in the family for 25 years and been on my driveway for 14 years.

Welcome on board. Good to hear it from the horse’s mouth, so to speak

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jim]

Timescale has been lost in translation. Restoration has largely taken place in the past few months. It's been in the family for 25 years and been on my driveway for 14 years.

Best of luck with the council, it's always an uphill struggle negotiating with them.

 

[Mikexx]

It was under this provision that a notice was served in 2015 by the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea on Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring, after the property developer had painted the front of her house in red-and-white candy cane stripes. However, following judicial review by the High Court of Justice, Mr Justice Gilbart ruled,

I found a similar Judgment with Allsop v Derbyshire Dales District Council [2012] and indeed your Judgment quotes this.

That's very useful indeed as I am currently putting a supplementary statement together and will be able to use this as further case-law. I'm hoping that the Council will see sense before the next hearing on the 14th May. They are requiring the removal of vehicles contrary to Section III of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Section III is about the use and continued use of land.

Another interesting snippet. The Council said to a reporter that there was a complaint some 4 years ago, presumably to justify their behaviour. Yet they have all but denied the existence of a complaint in all their communication and including their bundle despite requests for details of any complaint/enquiry or query. They even cited case law where a council acted upon their own volition as an attempt to obfuscate the true basis of their action.

I cannot thank my neighbours enough for their support. Some have even given me cups of coffee while I've been working on the camper. That's one hell of a neighbourly spirit.

 

[Mikexx]

Welcome on board. Good to hear it from the horse’s mouth, so to speak

Many thanks for your message. A friend found a media link and forwarded it onto me.

 

[Widge]

I might agree with you. However, statistically the MOT has never save lives through preventable mechanical failure. We ought to test drivers more often than once in a lifetime.

Although i agree with your comment regarding controling drivers, i do not understand you argument on the mot. Statically the majority of vehicles are tested, of those a significant number are failed due to safety issues that have to be corrected before an mot is issued, so there are no statistics on what the situation would be if an mot was not required.

I reminds me of a conversation i had with somebody about the y2k bug testing (of which I did rather a lot of at the time).

He said all that time and money that was spent on the y2k bug, and come the millennium nothing happend, what a waste! I couldn't get it through to him that nothing happening, was exactly the result that everyone working on it was trying to achive.

 

[Bobbejaan]

So if you're asking me, I guess I'd let the scruffy old bugger keep his tatty van, it's his project, and his garden.

Excellent Post, Jim ..... Thank you kindly.

In regards to the (above) last sentence of your post ..... Welcome to MY world & attitude !

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Bobbejaan]

I found a similar Judgment with Allsop v Derbyshire Dales District Council [2012] and indeed your Judgment quotes this.

That's very useful indeed as I am currently putting a supplementary statement together and will be able to use this as further case-law. I'm hoping that the Council will see sense before the next hearing on the 14th May. They are requiring the removal of vehicles contrary to Section III of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Section III is about the use and continued use of land.

Another interesting snippet. The Council said to a reporter that there was a complaint some 4 years ago, presumably to justify their behaviour. Yet they have all but denied the existence of a complaint in all their communication and including their bundle despite requests for details of any complaint/enquiry or query. They even cited case law where a council acted upon their own volition as an attempt to obfuscate the true basis of their action.

I cannot thank my neighbours enough for their support. Some have even given me cups of coffee while I've been working on the camper. That's one hell of a neighbourly spirit.

Hi Mike, WELCOME to the Asylum !

It's good to hear from you in person, and below are a couple of tips which you MAY find useful, depending on your precise circumstances.

I haven't needed to deal with the ENGLISH Town and Country Planning Acts in recent years but I have often been dealing with the SCOTTISH Town and Country Planning Acts over the past 30 years or so
..... And whilst the "Section numbers" and precise wording varies slightly, BOTH sets of Acts are broadly very similar in phrasing and Legal meaning, so you would have to do the English-version research yourself.

Having said that .... I suspect you may well find it useful for your Case-Submissions to read & research the Sections on :-

(A) ... "Enforcement Time limits", especially if your vehicle has been on your premises for more than 10 Years ... (The time limit for "Use as a Dwelling" is only 4 years, but you'd probably be pushing it to convince the Council/Inspectorate that your "MotorHome" had been a "Dwelling" for the past 4 years. )

&

(B) ... "Lawful Use or Development", and perhaps specifically a "Certificate of Lawful Use or Development" (= aka "CLUD") IF your fight gets to the stage where you need to metaphorically 'club your local council to death'.

These are both some of the very few Sections which help to work in favour of the Applicant/Appellant rather than the Planning Authorities. ..... and I am very pleased to be able to say that I have never failed yet to beat said authorities into submission over the course of the past few decades. .... As a result of which, my local council arrogant jobsworths hate me with something of a vengeance, which also pleases me greatly.

I would be most grateful (as would possibly some of the other thread-followers) if you would kindly come back & post to tell us how you get on and the results of your Appeal when you know the outcome.

Cheers & Best Wishes for your Case,
Bob

 

[Gromett]

Many thanks for your message. A friend found a media link and forwarded it onto me.

Good luck and I hope you win quickly and with minimal stress and cost to yourself. I think that van will be a cracker once you get done with the project.

 

[ChrisL]

He said all that time and money that was spent on the y2k bug, and come the millennium nothing happend, what a waste! I couldn't get it through to him that nothing happening, was exactly the result that everyone working on it was trying to achive.

Indeed, they don’t realise that people like you and I spent three years trawling through millions of lines of code for date fields to make sure they were the correct size and populated correctly and then testing the programs to ensure all went smoothly, I'll never forget the trepidation our team felt as midnight approached with all of us on standby incase we'd missed something, but it did go smoothly without a single incident, a great relief and a pat on the back for all the hard work.

 

[Gromett]

Indeed, they don’t realise that people like you and I spent three years trawling through millions of lines of code for date fields to make sure they were the correct size and populated correctly and then testing the programs to ensure all went smoothly, I'll never forget the trepidation our team felt as midnight approached with all of us on standby incase we'd missed something, but it did go smoothly without a single incident, a great relief and a pat on the back for all the hard work.

Three years. You were a late starter then We were dealing with it at the launch of Windows 95 as we were converting some Window 3.11 software to Win95 going from 16 bit to 32 bit and checking for 2 byte years while we were at it

But you main point. There were no problems because everyone worked like a whatsit to fix it before it caused problems. I did enjoy reading the "Plane's falling out of the sky" style stories though. We had bets in the office as to what the funniest, scariest most far out one would be.

 

[VXman]

So if you're asking me, I guess I'd let the scruffy old bugger keep his tatty van, it's his project, and his garden.

Excellent Post, Jim ..... Thank you kindly.

In regards to the (above) last sentence of your post ..... Welcome to MY world & attitude !

Interesting one. You see, people who keep their property in a mess (not suggesting this is the case in this situation) or those who play loud music that disturb others, or other anti social behaviour might not see the problem. Noise and mess are difficult to ignore, tidiness and quiet tend not to upset.

I recently camped at a motor race meeting. One group decided to party with very loud music until 4am and when the weekend was over left all their rubbish, and their tent for someone else to clear up. Some folks just don't care about the impact their behaviour can have on others. We've all got to live in this world together so thinking about how what we do affects others should be part of that.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[SpeedyDux]

Yesterday I saw a restored similar Landliner in the Waitrose car park.

I do like similar classic motorhomes.

 

[Widge]

Three years. You were a late starter then We were dealing with it at the launch of Windows 95 as we were converting some Window 3.11 software to Win95 going from 16 bit to 32 bit and checking for 2 byte years while we were at it

But you main point. There were no problems because everyone worked like a whatsit to fix it before it caused problems. I did enjoy reading the "Plane's falling out of the sky" style stories though. We had bets in the office as to what the funniest, scariest most far out one would be.

Even then there were various minor problems, one of the more amusing ones was somebody who was informed that they had collected about 150 weeks of unused holiday, and that they should take it before the end of the year.