Made To Feel Like Outcasts

[MattR]

yes in europe they do build transit camps for travellers , there are loads of them all over the place .
forget the french name for the sites .
uk is well below how many traveller sites it needs . plus motorhomers in uk do leave a mess ,thats the problem . unfortunately many arent as good as they make out.

Unfortunately mate we hide behind human rights laws that protect everybody but the good. We can't do this or that without a law behind it. Whatever happened to good old common sense. I'm in France at the moment. I spent a few minutes today watching a French man working on a roundabout planting shrubs. His van parked half on half off the island. Not a cone in site no 4 way lights it wasn't busy or dangerous. Health and safety would have him sacked on the spot in the UK. Over here they keep the villages beautiful. They just get on with it. He did a great job by the way

On this very forum I read a report of a municipal aire in France that was occupied by a group of people who refused to pay any got shirty with the guy collecting money. He returned thirty minutes later with the gendarme, guns drawn, who gave the occupants a choice. They paid and left soon after. Equality for all

 

[Allanm]

.......just arrived in the local car park a resident shouted at me "you can't camp there - why not pay for a campsite like other people do?"

And that's why we rarely travel in the UK in our van..........

 

[GJH]

We spent last week (before the BH weekend) at a THS at Chapel St Leonards and took the bus to both Ingoldmells and Skegness.
We saw a number of motorhomes parked in Chapel and Skegness (which has had well documented problems with "travellers") either in car parks or on the road side. There were also a number in more rural spots which were obviously off site camping.
Ingoldmells was stuffed that weekend so goodness knows what it was like over the BH. The number of private car parks with barriers gives testament to the abuse they have suffered.

Over the BH weekend we were in Wells Next The Sea at another THS. During the whole weekend the occupants of an Adria PVC were camping in the centre of the village, at The Buttlands which is the subject of proposals to restrict parking because of abuse already suffered. There was a grey water trail along the road out after they left. Hardly behaviour which will endear motorhomes to locals in general.

 

[John & Joan]

We have just spent a couple of days in the Skegness area taking advantage of our Britstops book (what a great idea) and the locations we chose were brilliant........but, try to get a parking spot in Skegness or Ingoldmells on a Bank Holiday weekend was all but impossible. The only parking spaces available to motorhomes were closed for the weekend because, and wait for this as it was quoted to me by the security guy employed to turn motorhomes away......'All the damage the last lot caused'. I tried to explain that we only wanted to be there a couple of hours but he was having none of it and we had to leave.
On to better things, we stopped at Britstop #532 on Friday night and had a wonderful curry in the restaurant, the people were really friendly and are really trying to make a go of it and on Saturday we stopped at Britstop# 531 and again the food was excellent.
To all you Britstoppers I recommend both locations, shame about East Lindsay Council hving such a down on motorhomers.

Edmund Burke said in 1780, "Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny." and "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

How many others have been affected by this refusal of service?
The council, employees/security guards could be accused of discrimination. It will take a number of claims to get action. Make lot of claims like the guys did with Wetherspoons. It's interesting that in http://www.itv.com/news/2015-05-18/irish-travellers-win-24-000-damages-over-being-refused-entry-to-wetherspoons/ the group denied service was not entirely Travellers. A Police Inspector and a Barrister and a Priest were each awarded £3000. I think this means that, just being mistaken for a Traveller is relevant if the reason for refusal of service is that, if those denying just thought that you're a Traveller. And I've seen somewhere that the National Council for Civil Liberties were involved in that one too.

I guess, the only people who can complain about discrimination are the people who were turned away by security guards. Others might think it a disgrace, but I think the only complaints taken seriously must come from those immediately affected . You must decide for yourself what action to take.

The National Council for Civil Liberties which I think is this lot http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/ might be interested. Height barriers in Skegness might be beneath their notice, so bringing it to their attention may have some effect.

I have contacted the council customerservices@e-lindsey.gov as a representative of the Motorhome Tourism Organisation and await a reply to my comments. I know another person has also contacted the council on this matter.

 

[Crispydoodle]

We have stayed at Eastville Campsite in Chapel St Lenords on a couple of occasions. Its a nice walk down the seafront down to Ingoldmells, when we took the van down to Ingoldmells we ended up parking in a private car park, theres business owners and even homeowners who allow parking on there land, or even driveway! We paid £5, but that was for the entire day, the guy just said as long as your back by 6pm as he locks the compound up. When we got chatting to him regarding the fact that every council car park had a headroom barrier and stated strictly no caravans, tourers or motorhomes! He said the council dont like the fact that a motorhome going in and occupying 2 spaces for the entire day (As we have the ability to chill and have a cuppa in our mobile accomadation ) instead of 8/10 cars for the day will loose them revenue. Typical really, they never seem to see past the end of there noses and realise that the fact were holidaying/visiting the town that were subsidising towards the tourism in other aspects!?!

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

 

[Wildbill]

I just go some whar else if the situation arises where we are not allowed but I have to admit that it can be a tad inconvenient but I am sure that our right as legitimate motorhome owners are being erodes
bill

 

[Tecnikal]

It's especially annoying for me as I bought a van conversion as I use it as my daily vehicle. My job involves travelling a lot and staying overnight. Most car parks seem to have a height restriction. If parking costs more for a van they class me as a van. If there is a no motorhomes policy they class me as a motorhome. If there are no commercial vehicles they class me as one of them. Basically everyone hates me ... sniff! We do go away for about 5 weekends a year and stay on campsites. we also have a couple of weeks holiday on a campsite. But parking somewhere during the day for an hour is a nightmare, especially if it is in a tourist area.

For example some car parks in Llandudno specifically say no commercial vehicles between 8.00am and 6.00pm so I can't park during the day. It also says no motorhomes between 6.00pm and 8.00am so they change my category when it suits them.

 

[GJH]

The council, employees/security guards could be accused of discrimination. It will take a number of claims to get action. Make lot of claims like the guys did with Wetherspoons. It's interesting that in http://www.itv.com/news/2015-05-18/irish-travellers-win-24-000-damages-over-being-refused-entry-to-wetherspoons/ the group denied service was not entirely Travellers. A Police Inspector and a Barrister and a Priest were each awarded £3000. I think this means that, just being mistaken for a Traveller is relevant if the reason for refusal of service is that, if those denying just thought that you're a Traveller. And I've seen somewhere that the National Council for Civil Liberties were involved in that one too.

This case was probably the reason for turning all motorhomes away because that means no discrimination occurs. Had the council tried to turn away just "travellers" and allow "motorhomers" then they would have been asking for trouble.

 

[John & Joan]

This case was probably the reason for turning all motorhomes away because that means no discrimination occurs. Had the council tried to turn away just "travellers" and allow "motorhomers" then they would have been asking for trouble.

Graham the case I quoted arose because they turned everyone away not just the travellers.

 

[jezport]

tipping toilets into flood water drains ,leaving rubbish , having chairs and tables out in the roads or on pavements . satelight dishes and solar on stands again on pvements or on the streets .
washing lines between lamposts . its no wonder its getting harder for m,homes in places like spain .
also hosepipes to fill tanks . at least a container or watering can looks better . this is off street taps or childrens park taps .
but the rubbish cant understand why there are bins all over spain .

I hear this all the time, but Ive done a fair bit of wild camping and never seen it happen. In fact Ive seen the opposite. Car owners BBQ on a car park and then leave a hot BBQ on the road, change babies nappies leaving the soiled one on the tarmac, eat lunch and throw the waste out the window, and I hear cars still dont have toilets so where are these inconsiderate car owners going to do their biz?

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

 

[vwalan]

well i does happen . there is a pic on the n332 stuff some one put on here . thats at la marina . some times its hard to drive down the road because satlites and solars are over the road.
other places its different things . tipping toilets in the fllod drains in spain is horrible . it hardly rains so can just sit there for weeks . then when it rains the drains are blocked so mess is every where.
bins get full so they pile rubbish next to the bins . yet 200yds away in the next street the bin could be empty.
Broken Link Removed
this looks like a quiet day at la marina .

 

[GJH]

Graham the case I quoted arose because they turned everyone away not just the travellers.

No it didn't John. As the report in The Guardian makes clear (as do several other newspapers), only 8 of the 15 people in the group turned away were awarded damages for racial discrimination, not all of them.
The case hinged on the fact that Gypsies and Travellers are classed as separate racial groups under the Race Relations Act. That is why only 8 of them could claim to have been discriminated against.
Had East Lindsay Council only turned away people they decided were "travellers" they would have been liable to similar action. By turning everyone in motorhomes away there was no discrimination against a particular racial group and, therefore, no grounds for action.

 

[gus-lopez]

For example some car parks in Llandudno specifically say no commercial vehicles between 8.00am and 6.00pm so I can't park during the day. It also says no motorhomes between 6.00pm and 8.00am so they change my category when it suits them.

You do the same. During the day you area motorhome & at night a commercial vehicle.

Graham the case I quoted arose because they turned everyone away not just the travellers.

My reading of the report on that case stated that the police inspector, the barrister & the priest were all " travellers " .How can they be when they have permanent jobs ? If they are I'd strip them of there jobs .

If they weren't why were they entitled to damages as you can refuse service /entry to anyone.

No it didn't John. As the report in The Guardian makes clear (as do several other newspapers), only 8 of the 15 people in the group turned away were awarded damages for racial discrimination, not all of them.
The case hinged on the fact that Gypsies and Travellers are classed as separate racial groups under the Race Relations Act. That is why only 8 of them could claim to have been discriminated against.
Had East Lindsay Council only turned away people they decided were "travellers" they would have been liable to similar action. By turning everyone in motorhomes away there was no discrimination against a particular racial group and, therefore, no grounds for action.

It doesn't make it clear to me. Either ALL were discriminated against or none. Or are you saying that the ones who were prevented from entering, who were all together, were denied compensation because they were not " travellers" - Not that the 3 always shown, police inspector, the barrister & the priest are either! Just chancers.
If I was Wetherspoon's I'd ban them sine die.& all the relatives.

 

[Wildman]

it is a shame some of these areas turn us away but in the end they are the losers, motorhoming is growing in popularity and seaside landladies are suffering from a lack of custom. Times and peoples needs change sitting on the beach with a hankie tied on your head belongs in the past. If towns want to prosper they have to cater for the latest trends and that includes motorhoming.

 

[GJH]

You do the same. During the day you area motorhome & at night a commercial vehicle.


My reading of the report on that case stated that the police inspector, the barrister & the priest were all " travellers " .How can they be when they have permanent jobs ? If they are I'd strip them of there jobs .

If they weren't why were they entitled to damages as you can refuse service /entry to anyone.



It doesn't make it clear to me. Either ALL were discriminated against or none. Or are you saying that the ones who were prevented from entering, who were all together, were denied compensation because they were not " travellers" - Not that the 3 always shown, police inspector, the barrister & the priest are either! Just chancers.
If I was Wetherspoon's I'd ban them sine die.& all the relatives.

You read it wrongly. Only 8 of the 15 were travellers so only 8 were discriminated against and could claim damages.

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