Excuse me... by raistlin


User avatar
raistlin
while I HARRUMPH quietly down my sleeve:-

http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/news/article/10626/first_rioter_given_eviction_notice

And the justification for this will be?

What then, of social housing tenants who don't pay their TV licences, or steal 5 gallons of petrol, or smack somebody in the face after a night on the beer?

As I understand it, the tenant of the social housing involved wasn't taking part in the riots.

If the Courts are unable to "visit the sins of the child on the parent" then by what divine right do the local authority do so?

What of the sanctions then, against those who own or are buying their own property? What about the girl who admitted guilt and who lives in her parents' house, worth considerably more than one million pounds?

Does anybody else see this as a half-baked, knee-jerk, "sound-bite" and intrinsically unfair and discriminatory reaction which will never (I hope) get off the ground?

And yes, I heard Ravi Govindia's trite and somewhat tenuous reasoning.
Paul

Cogito ergo sum... maybe?

Click the image to go to Nano-Meet Website
Image

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 16:21 #1 

Last edited by raistlin on 16 Aug 2011, 19:39, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jürgen
So this so called council leader endorses kin liability? He should be expelled from office for that. At least it isn't him, but a judge, who'll have the final word.
Jürgen

75ZT Community & Midlands Nano Meets & 75 & ZT Enthusiasts

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 16:54 #2 

User avatar
JohnDotCom
They will only end up paying B&B in a Hotel somewhere.
It is after all what Cameron said would happen, just a bit quicker thats all.
John

"My lovely car now sold onto a very happy new owner.
I still love this marque and I will still be around, preferred selling to breaking, as a great runner and performer"

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 16:58 #3 

User avatar
Tourerfogey
JohnDotCom wrote:They will only end up paying B&B in a Hotel somewhere.
It is after all what Cameron said would happen, just a bit quicker thats all.


Exactly. The council have a legal responsibility to house them - somewhere.

A farcical case in Hampshire recently and still on-going. A 'family from hell' were evicted by Hampshire County Council and somehow passed to Southampton Council who had to house them. They have now been evicted from that property for the same reasons as before - so the council then had to stump up £2K for the 1st month's rent and deposit on another house run by a housing society. They will, no doubt, in time be evicted from there too.

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 18:21 #4 

User avatar
JohnDotCom
Once evicted through misuse or as above neighbours from hell, they should in law forfeit all rights and not be rehoused or put in B&B then they may think twice.
John

"My lovely car now sold onto a very happy new owner.
I still love this marque and I will still be around, preferred selling to breaking, as a great runner and performer"

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 18:28 #5 

User avatar
raistlin
I think you're missing the thrust of my argument chaps :)

Bearing in mind that I am known as one of the most hard-line Magistrates in Wolverhampton and I think this is grossly unfair, discriminatory and probably unenforceable in law, am I alone in holding that opinion?

Oh, and as a matter of interest, a work colleague's son has been involved in trying to get a "family from hell" evicted from their social housing of the last six years without any discernible movement, notwithstanding the fact that the entire family, adults and children alike have multiple criminal convictions and ASBOs. His local authority say that it would be "against their human rights" for the authority to act "without evidence".

Hmm... I still think this is a politically motivated "soundbite" from Wandsworth council.
Paul

Cogito ergo sum... maybe?

Click the image to go to Nano-Meet Website
Image

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 18:40 #6 

User avatar
Tourerfogey
We understood Paul - just went off at a tangent :)

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 19:31 #7 

User avatar
Zeb
Methinks the council will get this to court, knowing it will be thrown out and then be able to legitimately claim to be the ones who are 'tough' on anti-social behaviour...and that it is others who are not. Cynical vote winning ploy which ultimately will send out the wrong message to the antisocials because the 'eviction' will not happen...

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 20:10 #8 

User avatar
Ragman
As a victim of neighbours from hell and ASBO behaviour - from my perspective the law favours those that commit - indeed the police said 'the only real solution is for you to move'

thanks a bunch i'm the flipping victim here

Posted 12 Aug 2011, 21:26 #9 


PaulT
Paul I suppose the difference between social housing and someone owning their own home is that often the social housing is subsidised.

You and I will pay for the riot damage either through raised insurance premiums or, as I was reading in a law book, victims can sue the police for not protecting their property and it is the taxpayer who funds the police.

It would seem that a lot of trouble is caused by those living on certain housing estates and perhaps this is an attempt to make the parents control their and their childrens actions more.

There was one estate shown on the BBC news last night where older residents are frightened to go out - is that right?

Also listening to an interview with as magistrate who was complaining that they can lock up a child for 5 years but an adult for only 6 months. This was supposed to change but never came about.

I will admit I do sometimes think what value to society are some people.
Paul

That apart Mrs Lincoln, did you enjoy the play

Image

Posted 16 Aug 2011, 07:34 #10 

User avatar
JohnDotCom
If you fiddle Tax, VAT or any Government collection you will always get a heavy sentence!
John

"My lovely car now sold onto a very happy new owner.
I still love this marque and I will still be around, preferred selling to breaking, as a great runner and performer"

Posted 16 Aug 2011, 08:02 #11 

User avatar
raistlin
JohnDotCom wrote:If you fiddle Tax, VAT or any Government collection you will always get a heavy sentence!



Unless, of course, you are an MP: :lol:
Paul

Cogito ergo sum... maybe?

Click the image to go to Nano-Meet Website
Image

Posted 16 Aug 2011, 09:17 #12 

User avatar
Tourerfogey
JohnDotCom wrote:If you fiddle Tax, VAT or any Government collection you will always get a heavy sentence!


No different to looting or mugging an old lady in my book - if you fiddle your tax, VAT, benefits etc you are still stealing from Society as a whole.

Posted 16 Aug 2011, 15:18 #13 

User avatar
geesmith
I agree that this can't work, and, as some riot participants are untouchable due to their circumstances not including a council tenancy, it isn't an all encompassing solution. I'm reluctant to mention unfairness.
This tactic is pure folly as it only highlights another aspect of societal differences.

Posted 16 Aug 2011, 19:20 #14 


Top