Neighbour painting my garage wall.

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

I own a freehold garage which is situated in a block of 8.

The garage block backs onto someone's garden, the rear wall of the
block backing onto his garden.

Over the weekend, he has decided to paint the rear wall with white
paint. None of the garage owners gave their permission for this to be
done.

The paint could potentially cause damp problems (Depending on the type
of paint) due to not permiable paint being used-I'm currently seeking
advice on this.

However, the garage owners don't want this to be the start of more
things-we'd like our wall left alone!

What can be done? could we theoretically insist the paint is removed?

We're currently thinking we should write a polite letter to the guy.
The letter would point out that he should not have painted the walls
but we'd turn a blind eye to it if he agrees to:

1. Re-paint the wall at his own expense whenever repainting is
required (Would 5 years be reasonable?).

2. Re-paints it only in white (The colour he has currently chosen)
unless agreed otherwise with the garage owners.

3. Does not attach anything to the wall without the garage owners
permission.

4. These 'rules' are passed onto any subsequent garden owner.

If he doesn't agree to the above he'll have to restore the wall to
it's original state.

Is this fair and reasonable? All we want to do is stop anything else
being done to the wall in future and the paintwork maintained to an
acceptable standard.

(There is nothing in the deeds giving permission to paint this wall)

sponix

[Tone]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
What can be done? could we theoretically insist the paint is removed?

Yes, its trespass to property




--


Just livin the Vida Sofa

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

Post by Tone

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
What can be done? could we theoretically insist the paint is removed?

Yes, its trespass to property

So would a letter laying down a few ground rules and saying "Accept
this or clean the wall" be acceptable and reasonable?

sponix

[Tone]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x

Post by Tone

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
What can be done? could we theoretically insist the paint is removed?

Yes, its trespass to property

So would a letter laying down a few ground rules and saying "Accept
this or clean the wall" be acceptable and reasonable?
sponix

Probably

You could also add that you might get a few graffitti artists to Tab
the wall


--


Just livin the Vida Sofa

[David]

Post by Tone

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
What can be done? could we theoretically insist the paint is removed?

Yes, its trespass to property

Nearer to criminal damage in my view, but that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea, I won't mention the word "Trespass" as I seem to get
verbal abuse, but were there any cranes in the area over the weekend ;-p

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

On 3 Oct 2005 05:31:02 -0700, "David"

Post by David
that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea,

Translation please!

sponix

[Tone]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 05:31:02 -0700, "David"

Post by David
that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea,

Translation please!
sponix

Mens rea= Guilty mind



--


Just livin the Vida Sofa

[David]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 05:31:02 -0700, "David"

Post by David
that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea,

Translation please!

whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order to
convict

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

On 3 Oct 2005 06:13:47 -0700, "David"

Post by David
whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order to
convict

I see.

I'm 99% certain the bloke knew it wasn't his to paint but thought he'd
get away with it. How do I know that he knows it's not his wall? The
garages were rebuilt about a year ago.

However, it'd be virtually impossible to prove and we (The garage
owners) don't want to get in a big argument over this.

I think we'd all be happy with an apology, an assurance that he won't
"vandalise" the wall again and an undertaking to maintain the (now)
white brickwork in a reasonable condition. (Obviously assuming that
the paintwork doesn't lead to damp problems.)

sponix

[David]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
I think we'd all be happy with an apology, an assurance that he won't
"vandalise" the wall again and an undertaking to maintain the (now)
white brickwork in a reasonable condition. (Obviously assuming that
the paintwork doesn't lead to damp problems.)

does this guy live in the sussex, area as i have some painting jobs for
him?

[Dr Zoidberg]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 06:13:47 -0700, "David"

Post by David
whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order
to convict

I see.
I'm 99% certain the bloke knew it wasn't his to paint but thought he'd
get away with it.

Or he thought you wouldn't mind as you never see that wall.
Believing the owner would consent is a perfectly valid defence.

[Tone]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:43:35 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"

Post by Dr Zoidberg

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 06:13:47 -0700, "David"

Post by David
whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order
to convict

I see.
I'm 99% certain the bloke knew it wasn't his to paint but thought he'd
get away with it.

Or he thought you wouldn't mind as you never see that wall.
Believing the owner would consent is a perfectly valid defence.

No it isnt. Not when the owner can be contacted

" I took the car as I believed the owner would consent m'lord"



--

Just livin' the Vida Sofa

[The Todal]

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:43:35 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"

Post by Dr Zoidberg

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 06:13:47 -0700, "David"

Post by David
whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order
to convict

I see.
I'm 99% certain the bloke knew it wasn't his to paint but thought he'd
get away with it.

Or he thought you wouldn't mind as you never see that wall.
Believing the owner would consent is a perfectly valid defence.

No it isnt. Not when the owner can be contacted

Makes no difference. If the wall can only be seen from *your* land, it is a
reasonable assumption to make that nobody would mind you painting it to make
it look nicer. Asking the owner would be polite but maybe the feeling was,
he's the sort who will refuse and will complain that paint will damage his
wall.

Post by Tone
" I took the car as I believed the owner would consent m'lord"

That could work, if the defendant was a family member or close friend. Of
course it could.

[bigbrian]

On 3 Oct 2005 06:13:47 -0700, "David"

Post by David

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 05:31:02 -0700, "David"

Post by David
that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea,

Translation please!

whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order to
convict

How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

Brian

[David]

Post by bigbrian
How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

Easy believe me

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by bigbrian
How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

Easy believe me

How would you know?

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David

Post by bigbrian
How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

Easy believe me

How would you know?

this issue really does tickle me, as it is clear that my being a
barrister either annoys or confounds a minority of you.

That aside, continued negative remarks would only increase my enjoyment
more, so do carry on

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David

Post by bigbrian
How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

Easy believe me

How would you know?

this issue really does tickle me, as it is clear that my being a
barrister either annoys or confounds a minority of you.

Not quite.

The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

[Tone]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David

Post by bigbrian
How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

Easy believe me

How would you know?

this issue really does tickle me, as it is clear that my being a
barrister either annoys or confounds a minority of you.

Not quite.
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all



--

Just livin' the Vida Sofa

[Dave Mayall]

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

[bob]

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

From my law education - none!
Its illegal to pretend to be a solicitor, but not to pretend to be a
barrister.
Not sure why, perhaps most barristers are only pretending to be.

[Alex Heney]

Post by bob

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

From my law education - none!
Its illegal to pretend to be a solicitor, but not to pretend to be a
barrister.
Not sure why, perhaps most barristers are only pretending to be.

Probably down to the fact that historically, barristers have not been
directly approached by clients, but rather have taken "instruction"
from solicitors, who have been the only ones the public could approach
for professional legal services.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall
The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

Life

[Arfur Million]

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

And would he be allowed to defend himself against the charge in court?

Regards,
Arfur

[Dave Mayall]

Post by Arfur Million

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

And would he be allowed to defend himself against the charge in court?

He would.

Whilst only barristers have right of audience on behalf of others, it is
open to any defendant to conduct his own defence, and to be heard by the
court.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall
Whilst only barristers have right of audience on behalf of others, it is
open to any defendant to conduct his own defence, and to be heard by the
court.

WRONG, there are things called solicitors, solicitor advocates and
Mckenzey Friends

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
Whilst only barristers have right of audience on behalf of others, it is
open to any defendant to conduct his own defence, and to be heard by the
court.

WRONG, there are things called solicitors, solicitor advocates and
Mckenzey Friends

Indeed there are, pity you can't spell all of them.

[Cynic]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:53:26 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
Whilst only barristers have right of audience on behalf of others, it is
open to any defendant to conduct his own defence, and to be heard by the
court.

WRONG, there are things called solicitors, solicitor advocates and
Mckenzey Friends

Indeed there are, pity you can't spell all of them.

IIUC, a McKenzie friend does not have right of audience.

[David]

Post by Cynic
IIUC, a McKenzie friend does not have right of audience.

in the small claims court they do

[Alex Heney]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:24:07 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Arfur Million

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

And would he be allowed to defend himself against the charge in court?

He would.
Whilst only barristers have right of audience on behalf of others,

I thought that had changed now, and you could have solicitor
advocates.

Or is that change not yet implemented?

[Dave Mayall]

Post by Alex Heney
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:24:07 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Arfur Million

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Tone
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:39:32 +0100, "Dave Mayall"

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't
is
a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

The question is, just what is the penalty for falsely claiming to be a
barrister?

And would he be allowed to defend himself against the charge in court?

He would.
Whilst only barristers have right of audience on behalf of others,

I thought that had changed now, and you could have solicitor
advocates.

It has.

I simply didn't want to over complicate it for Mr Abbott.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Alex Heney
I thought that had changed now, and you could have solicitor
advocates.

It has.
I simply didn't want to over complicate it for Mr Abbott.

thats funny you were not replying to me in error, you were replying
directly to "Arfur Million" as above.

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by Alex Heney
I thought that had changed now, and you could have solicitor
advocates.

It has.
I simply didn't want to over complicate it for Mr Abbott.

thats funny you were not replying to me in error, you were replying
directly to "Arfur Million" as above.

Yes, but this is a newsgroup, and as I presumed that you might read my
response, I kept it simple for you.

In any case, I thought you weren't Mr Abbott.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David
thats funny you were not replying to me in error, you were replying
directly to "Arfur Million" as above.

Yes, but this is a newsgroup, and as I presumed that you might read my
response, I kept it simple for you.
In any case, I thought you weren't Mr Abbott.

I fully expect MR ABBOTT is now a generic term for me.

But your response was wrong

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David
thats funny you were not replying to me in error, you were replying
directly to "Arfur Million" as above.

Yes, but this is a newsgroup, and as I presumed that you might read my
response, I kept it simple for you.
In any case, I thought you weren't Mr Abbott.

I fully expect MR ABBOTT is now a generic term for me.

It is, because it's your name.

Post by David
But your response was wrong

It was indeed wrong, as it over-simplified something.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David
But your response was wrong

It was indeed wrong, as it over-simplified something.

is that your way of saying, "I was Wrong"?

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David
But your response was wrong

It was indeed wrong, as it over-simplified something.

is that your way of saying, "I was Wrong"?

No, it's my way of saying "I didn't include all the facts".

Still doesn't stop you being a Computer programmer wannabe finanial adviser
who thinks that he's a barrister.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall
No, it's my way of saying "I didn't include all the facts".

allow me to quote you

"Whilst only barristers have right of audience on behalf of others, it
is
open to any defendant to conduct his own defence, and to be heard by
the
court. "

which part of your above post does not include

"i am right, but did not include all the facts, sorry gov"



A bit similar to your mistake with the stone mason bit as well

[David]

Dave Mayall wrote:


How many Scouts look up to you then DAVE? or do you recruit them when
you are doing your postie round in Dukinfield for the Royal Mail Group
or was it consignia?.

I am curious are you in the Royal Mail as a quest to your true vocation
of finding your family:

UK Census Online - http://freecen.rootsweb.com/

Oh and good luck with your boat, Mr Jinks, http://www.mr-jinks.org.uk/

[David]

Post by Alex Heney
I thought that had changed now, and you could have solicitor
advocates.
Or is that change not yet implemented?

entirely correct as above, but i have been told my spelling is in
error, but nothing different there then :-)

[David]

Post by Tone

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

or how about you Tone? do you fancy a week in lovely sussex, or do you
have Abigail's party to go to?

[Tone]

On 3 Oct 2005 10:13:59 -0700, "David"

Post by David

Post by Tone

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

or how about you Tone? do you fancy a week in lovely sussex, or do you
have Abigail's party to go to?

Nahh sorry mate I cant come to you gay parties. Ask Peter Turtill he's
a turdburglar into that type of stuff



--

Just livin' the Vida Sofa

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Tone

Post by Dave Mayall
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

Oh dont ! its probably already uncomfortable enough for him, what with
having his foot in his mouth and all

or how about you Tone? do you fancy a week in lovely sussex, or do you
have Abigail's party to go to?

Oh, is your chambers in West Sussex then?

I thought you were one of those high fliers that lives in Horsham, but works
in London.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall
Oh, is your chambers in West Sussex then?
I thought you were one of those high fliers that lives in Horsham, but works
in London.

I do work the s/e ciruit yes

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall
Not quite.
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

so Dave, are you taking uyp the offer of being my helper for the day or
would not like doing your mini pupillage under my wings?

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
Not quite.
The fact that you purport to be a barrister when you clearly aren't is a
source of endless amusement.

so Dave, are you taking uyp the offer of being my helper for the day or
would not like doing your mini pupillage under my wings?

Haven't seen any such offer, and TBH, I know enough real barristers thanks.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall
Haven't seen any such offer, and TBH, I know enough real barristers thanks.

i thought we could meet and then you could report back to the group

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
Haven't seen any such offer, and TBH, I know enough real barristers thanks.

i thought we could meet and then you could report back to the group

Ah, but;
1) I might reveal your identity.
2) West Sussex is a long way to go to see a crank.

[David]

Dave Mayall wrote:
meet and then you could report back to the group

Post by Dave Mayall
Ah, but;
1) I might reveal your identity.
2) West Sussex is a long way to go to see a crank.

you might just do that, don't come down if thats what you think

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David
meet and then you could report back to the group

Post by Dave Mayall
Ah, but;
1) I might reveal your identity.
2) West Sussex is a long way to go to see a crank.

you might just do that, don't come down if thats what you think

I won't be.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David
meet and then you could report back to the group

Post by Dave Mayall
Ah, but;
1) I might reveal your identity.
2) West Sussex is a long way to go to see a crank.

you might just do that, don't come down if thats what you think

I won't be.

so i see, you are being given indisputable evidence and yet you don't
want to see it, hear it or now as the case seems believe it. Is it
really that hard?

[Dave Mayall]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David
meet and then you could report back to the group

Post by Dave Mayall
Ah, but;
1) I might reveal your identity.
2) West Sussex is a long way to go to see a crank.

you might just do that, don't come down if thats what you think

I won't be.

so i see, you are being given indisputable evidence and yet you don't
want to see it, hear it or now as the case seems believe it. Is it
really that hard?

I'm not being *given* anything.

I'm being offered a chance to travel the length of the country where I will
see the proof.

Well, forgive me for being cynical, but....

If I'd been pretending to be a barrister like you are, and I was rumbled,
then just before I vanished into thin air (ready to appear again in a new
identity), I'd have a final laugh by trying to get loads of people to waste
their time travelling to Brighton.

[David]

Post by Dave Mayall
If I'd been pretending to be a barrister like you are, and I was rumbled,
then just before I vanished into thin air (ready to appear again in a new
identity), I'd have a final laugh by trying to get loads of people to waste
their time travelling to Brighton.

Agreed, is there anyone here from brighton?

[The Todal]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
If I'd been pretending to be a barrister like you are, and I was rumbled,
then just before I vanished into thin air (ready to appear again in a new
identity), I'd have a final laugh by trying to get loads of people to waste
their time travelling to Brighton.

Agreed, is there anyone here from brighton?

Yes, at least one regular who can probably step out of his office and make
the trip in less than 20 minutes. Do we have a venue yet?

[David]

Post by The Todal

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
If I'd been pretending to be a barrister like you are, and I was rumbled,
then just before I vanished into thin air (ready to appear again in a new
identity), I'd have a final laugh by trying to get loads of people to waste
their time travelling to Brighton.

Agreed, is there anyone here from brighton?

Yes, at least one regular who can probably step out of his office and make
the trip in less than 20 minutes. Do we have a venue yet?

instruct that poster to email me direct

[The Todal]

Post by David

Post by The Todal

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
If I'd been pretending to be a barrister like you are, and I was rumbled,
then just before I vanished into thin air (ready to appear again in a new
identity), I'd have a final laugh by trying to get loads of people to waste
their time travelling to Brighton.

Agreed, is there anyone here from brighton?

Yes, at least one regular who can probably step out of his office and make
the trip in less than 20 minutes. Do we have a venue yet?

instruct that poster to email me direct

He doesn't work for me so I can't instruct him to do anything. Am I to
understand that you won't be publicising the venue in this newsgroup but
only to a few selected people who approach you?

You can reach me at moderation(at)beeb dot net

[Cynic]

On 4 Oct 2005 05:21:44 -0700, "David"

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall
If I'd been pretending to be a barrister like you are, and I was rumbled,
then just before I vanished into thin air (ready to appear again in a new
identity), I'd have a final laugh by trying to get loads of people to waste
their time travelling to Brighton.

Agreed, is there anyone here from brighton?

Yes - tell me where & when. Can't promise, but if the dates & times
are OK I could pop in for a brief visit witholut putting myself to a
lot of effort, you can show me your bone-fides & I'll confirm to the
newsgroup that you are a barrister without revealing your identity.
My e-mail address is OK if you prefer to do it that way.

I must confess to being astounded that you are able to prepare Reports
and other necessary paperwork for the Court and your clients with the
lack of ability you display in grammar and spelling, which appear
worse than could be handled by any automatic software. It must be a
great handicap, akin to an engineer who does not understand decimal
fractions, or a mechanic who has not learnt how to use a spanner.

[David]

Post by Cynic
I must confess to being astounded that you are able to prepare Reports
and other necessary paperwork for the Court and your clients with the
lack of ability you display in grammar and spelling, which appear
worse than could be handled by any automatic software. It must be a
great handicap, akin to an engineer who does not understand decimal
fractions, or a mechanic who has not learnt how to use a spanner.

not really, as i do not run my postings through any software which
corrects errors for this group. But of course i do for submissions and
in anycase my wife pre-reads them

[Mr X]

Post by David

Post by Dave Mayall

Post by David
meet and then you could report back to the group

Post by Dave Mayall
Ah, but;
1) I might reveal your identity.
2) West Sussex is a long way to go to see a crank.

you might just do that, don't come down if thats what you think

I won't be.

so i see, you are being given indisputable evidence and yet you don't
want to see it, hear it or now as the case seems believe it. Is it
really that hard?

"indisputable evidence"?

That has certain connotations in uk.legal that will indicate to some
that you are definitely a crank.

[David]

Post by Mr X
"indisputable evidence"?
That has certain connotations in uk.legal that will indicate to some
that you are definitely a crank.

LOL

[The Todal]

Post by David

Post by bigbrian
How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

Easy believe me

I could have been a Judge, but I never had the Latin for the judgin'. I
never had it, so I'd had it, as far as being a judge was concerned.

[Alex Heney]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 06:13:47 -0700, "David"

Post by David

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 05:31:02 -0700, "David"

Post by David
that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea,

Translation please!

whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order to
convict

How does one get to be a barrister without knowing that "acteus rea"
is actually "actus reus"?

I think even David accepts that spelling is not his strong point :-)

[David]

Post by Alex Heney
I think even David accepts that spelling is not his strong point :-)

very gracious, maybe i misjudged you

[The Todal]

Post by David

Post by Alex Heney
I think even David accepts that spelling is not his strong point :-)

very gracious, maybe i misjudged you

So-o-o-o-o-o.... what is your strong point?

[The Todal]

Post by David

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 05:31:02 -0700, "David"

Post by David
that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea,

Translation please!

whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order to
convict

No, there's no such thing as an acteus rea, I promise you.

[David]

Post by The Todal

Post by David
whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order to
convict

No, there's no such thing as an acteus rea, I promise you.

idiot

[The Todal]

Post by The Todal

Post by David
whether it could be deemed as crim damage is the guilty mind and the
guilty act ie mens rea and acteus rea both must be present in order to
convict

No, there's no such thing as an acteus rea, I promise you.

idiot

But I put it to you that only a moment ago you said "continued negative
remarks would only increase my enjoyment
more".

[David]

Post by The Todal
But I put it to you that only a moment ago you said "continued negative
remarks would only increase my enjoyment
more".

it does, but repitition is boring, and idiot is a clinical term

[The Todal]

Post by David

Post by The Todal
But I put it to you that only a moment ago you said "continued negative
remarks would only increase my enjoyment
more".

it does, but repitition is boring, and idiot is a clinical term

Okay. Let's talk about something more interesting. Go on, tell me about
this Brighton case. What sort of issues are involved? Presumably you have
the brief now. You won't want to compromise client confidentiality but you
could give the gist of what it's about.

[David]

Post by The Todal
Okay. Let's talk about something more interesting. Go on, tell me about
this Brighton case. What sort of issues are involved? Presumably you have
the brief now. You won't want to compromise client confidentiality but you
could give the gist of what it's about.

Oh, really, thats right I am about to give up my name, my chambers and
where i work and you want me to discuss the next case i am doing. DREAM
ON

[The Todal]

Post by David

Post by The Todal
Okay. Let's talk about something more interesting. Go on, tell me about
this Brighton case. What sort of issues are involved? Presumably you have
the brief now. You won't want to compromise client confidentiality but you
could give the gist of what it's about.

Oh, really, thats right I am about to give up my name, my chambers and
where i work and you want me to discuss the next case i am doing. DREAM
ON

Oh dear. I thought you wanted us to come along and watch you at work. I
even thought you were inviting me, specifically. For those who
unfortunately can't make it, I am sure it would be interesting if you
explained a little about the case.

But please don't, if it would cause a problem. Especially if it would result
in you having your tongue cut out at high tide on the pebbly beach beside
the busted West Pier of Brighton.

[David]

Post by The Todal
Oh dear. I thought you wanted us to come along and watch you at work. I
even thought you were inviting me, specifically. For those who
unfortunately can't make it, I am sure it would be interesting if you
explained a little about the case.

most welcome to attend

Post by The Todal
But please don't, if it would cause a problem. Especially if it would result
in you having your tongue cut out at high tide on the pebbly beach beside
the busted West Pier of Brighton.

partial knowledge is a dangerous thing

[Alex Heney]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On 3 Oct 2005 05:31:02 -0700, "David"

Post by David
that would depend on the mens
and acteus rea,

Translation please!

Intent and Action.

i.e. what their reason for doing it was, and whether it was actually
them that did it at all.

[Terry]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
I own a freehold garage which is situated in a block of 8.
The garage block backs onto someone's garden, the rear wall of the
block backing onto his garden.
Over the weekend, he has decided to paint the rear wall with white
paint. None of the garage owners gave their permission for this to be
done.
The paint could potentially cause damp problems (Depending on the type
of paint) due to not permiable paint being used-I'm currently seeking
advice on this.
However, the garage owners don't want this to be the start of more
things-we'd like our wall left alone!
What can be done? could we theoretically insist the paint is removed?
We're currently thinking we should write a polite letter to the guy.
The letter would point out that he should not have painted the walls
1. Re-paint the wall at his own expense whenever repainting is
required (Would 5 years be reasonable?).
2. Re-paints it only in white (The colour he has currently chosen)
unless agreed otherwise with the garage owners.
3. Does not attach anything to the wall without the garage owners
permission.
4. These 'rules' are passed onto any subsequent garden owner.
If he doesn't agree to the above he'll have to restore the wall to
it's original state.
Is this fair and reasonable? All we want to do is stop anything else
being done to the wall in future and the paintwork maintained to an
acceptable standard.
(There is nothing in the deeds giving permission to paint this wall)
sponix

It all sounds very petty to me. Do you want to involve yourselves
in neighbour wars ?

Regards

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:56:39 +0100, "Terry"

Post by Terry
It all sounds very petty to me. Do you want to involve yourselves
in neighbour wars ?

No.

Firstly, as the wall has been painted with the wrong type of paint
(Looks like gloss paint) there is a possibility of it causing moisture
problems.

He should have asked before painting the wall should he not?

Secondly, we don't want this guy to do anything more to the wall.

We are reasonable people in that if the guy wanted to put up hanging
baskets or suchlike we'd let him. However, that's not to say we'd be
happy if he attached a balcony to it or whatever.

sponix

[Steve Robinson]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:56:39 +0100, "Terry"

Post by Terry
It all sounds very petty to me. Do you want to involve yourselves
in neighbour wars ?

No.
Firstly, as the wall has been painted with the wrong type of paint
(Looks like gloss paint) there is a possibility of it causing moisture
problems.
He should have asked before painting the wall should he not?
Secondly, we don't want this guy to do anything more to the wall.
We are reasonable people in that if the guy wanted to put up hanging
baskets or suchlike we'd let him. However, that's not to say we'd be
happy if he attached a balcony to it or whatever.
sponix

ask him what type of paint he has used first , if its masonry paint then
fine as long as it has micropourous properties gloss no
garages are damp places at best , keeping moisture within the walls is not a
good idea on unheated properties , causes bricks to spall in the winter

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:33:14 GMT, "Steve Robinson"

Post by Steve Robinson
ask him what type of paint he has used first , if its masonry paint then
fine as long as it has micropourous properties gloss no
garages are damp places at best , keeping moisture within the walls is not a
good idea on unheated properties , causes bricks to spall in the winter

Exactly.

sponix

[bob]

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:56:39 +0100, "Terry"

Post by Terry
It all sounds very petty to me. Do you want to involve yourselves
in neighbour wars ?

No.
Firstly, as the wall has been painted with the wrong type of paint
(Looks like gloss paint) there is a possibility of it causing moisture
problems.
He should have asked before painting the wall should he not?
Secondly, we don't want this guy to do anything more to the wall.
We are reasonable people in that if the guy wanted to put up hanging
baskets or suchlike we'd let him. However, that's not to say we'd be
happy if he attached a balcony to it or whatever.
sponix

ask him what type of paint he has used first , if its masonry paint then
fine as long as it has micropourous properties gloss no
garages are damp places at best , keeping moisture within the walls is not a
good idea on unheated properties , causes bricks to spall in the winter

But if the wall is only painted on the outside, its not a problem then?
sponix, scrape the paint off the inside of the wall!

[Steve Robinson]

Post by bob

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:56:39 +0100, "Terry"

Post by Terry
It all sounds very petty to me. Do you want to involve yourselves
in neighbour wars ?

No.
Firstly, as the wall has been painted with the wrong type of paint
(Looks like gloss paint) there is a possibility of it causing moisture
problems.
He should have asked before painting the wall should he not?
Secondly, we don't want this guy to do anything more to the wall.
We are reasonable people in that if the guy wanted to put up hanging
baskets or suchlike we'd let him. However, that's not to say we'd be
happy if he attached a balcony to it or whatever.
sponix

ask him what type of paint he has used first , if its masonry paint then
fine as long as it has micropourous properties gloss no
garages are damp places at best , keeping moisture within the walls is
not a good idea on unheated properties , causes bricks to spall in the
winter

But if the wall is only painted on the outside, its not a problem then?
sponix, scrape the paint off the inside of the wall!

yes it is it prevents any moisture evaporating from the building , if the
moisture evaporates into the garage then it has nowhere to go , as the
garage is cool its ability to accommodate the extra moisture within the air
is relatively low so condensation is likely to form either within the
garage or the cavity if that's the construction method or on the vehicle
inside

[bob]

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by bob

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:56:39 +0100, "Terry"

Post by Terry
It all sounds very petty to me. Do you want to involve yourselves
in neighbour wars ?

No.
Firstly, as the wall has been painted with the wrong type of paint
(Looks like gloss paint) there is a possibility of it causing moisture
problems.
He should have asked before painting the wall should he not?
Secondly, we don't want this guy to do anything more to the wall.
We are reasonable people in that if the guy wanted to put up hanging
baskets or suchlike we'd let him. However, that's not to say we'd be
happy if he attached a balcony to it or whatever.
sponix

ask him what type of paint he has used first , if its masonry paint then
fine as long as it has micropourous properties gloss no
garages are damp places at best , keeping moisture within the walls is
not a good idea on unheated properties , causes bricks to spall in the
winter

But if the wall is only painted on the outside, its not a problem then?
sponix, scrape the paint off the inside of the wall!

yes it is it prevents any moisture evaporating from the building , if the
moisture evaporates into the garage then it has nowhere to go , as the
garage is cool its ability to accommodate the extra moisture within the air
is relatively low so condensation is likely to form either within the
garage or the cavity if that's the construction method or on the vehicle
inside

I think this is a red herring - most freestanding garages I've ever seen
are very poorly draught(or is it draft!) proofed, plenty of air gaps
around corrugared roofs for instance, so any moisture would have plenty
of scope for exit.
Likewise, any water getting into the garage is likely to be due to rain
water soaked walls allowing water in - so surely a painted wall is more
likely to prevent water entering than to prevent water exiting the garage.

[--s-p-o-n-i-x--]

Post by bob
I think this is a red herring - most freestanding garages I've ever seen
are very poorly draught(or is it draft!) proofed, plenty of air gaps
around corrugared roofs for instance, so any moisture would have plenty
of scope for exit.
Likewise, any water getting into the garage is likely to be due to rain
water soaked walls allowing water in - so surely a painted wall is more
likely to prevent water entering than to prevent water exiting the garage.

Ordinarily, water wouldn't get through to the inside, it'd soak in
then evaporate from the outside.

Anyway, that isn't the point. The garage walls are privately owned and
the owners did NOT want the outside wall painted.

Whether it actually causes problems at a later date is immaterial.

sponix

[bob]

Post by --s-p-o-n-i-x--

Post by bob
I think this is a red herring - most freestanding garages I've ever seen
are very poorly draught(or is it draft!) proofed, plenty of air gaps
around corrugared roofs for instance, so any moisture would have plenty
of scope for exit.
Likewise, any water getting into the garage is likely to be due to rain
water soaked walls allowing water in - so surely a painted wall is more
likely to prevent water entering than to prevent water exiting the garage.

Ordinarily, water wouldn't get through to the inside, it'd soak in
then evaporate from the outside.
Anyway, that isn't the point. The garage walls are privately owned and
the owners did NOT want the outside wall painted.
Whether it actually causes problems at a later date is immaterial.
sponix

But your original post said

"The paint could potentially cause damp problems (Depending on the type
of paint) due to not permiable paint being used-I'm currently seeking
advice on this.

However, the garage owners don't want this to be the start of more
things-we'd like our wall left alone!"

So does yor complaint hinge on potential damage or you don't like people
molesting your property?

If the latter, regardless of your legal rights I think you are being petty!
As long as the paint is NOT going to cause problems, why should you
worry if the only people who see your wall wish to prettyfy it a bit?

I bet you wouldn't think twice about trimming bushes overhanging your
garden , regardless of any potential harm that could be cause by severe
pruning.

Do you know that the rear wall of the garages is actually inside (and
part of) your property or is it on the boundary line?

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

Post by bob
But your original post said
"The paint could potentially cause damp problems (Depending on the type
of paint) due to not permiable paint being used-I'm currently seeking
advice on this.

Yes?

If the paint is not permiable (and it looks like gloss paint) then any
moisture that gets into the brickwork will be unable to escape.

[PeteM]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x

Post by bob
But your original post said
"The paint could potentially cause damp problems (Depending on the type
of paint) due to not permiable paint being used-I'm currently seeking
advice on this.

Yes?
If the paint is not permiable (and it looks like gloss paint) then any
moisture that gets into the brickwork will be unable to escape.

Painting walls with gloss paint is perfectly normal. My DIY manual says
it's perfectly acceptable (unless the wall already has rising damp). And
plenty of the houses around here have their front walls painted with
gloss over facing brick.

[Steve Robinson]

Post by PeteM

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x

Post by bob
But your original post said
"The paint could potentially cause damp problems (Depending on the type
of paint) due to not permiable paint being used-I'm currently seeking
advice on this.

Yes?
If the paint is not permiable (and it looks like gloss paint) then any
moisture that gets into the brickwork will be unable to escape.

Painting walls with gloss paint is perfectly normal. My DIY manual says
it's perfectly acceptable (unless the wall already has rising damp). And
plenty of the houses around here have their front walls painted with gloss
over facing brick.
--
PeteM

exactly its a diy manual written for numbties who think they are skilled
tradesmen .
brickwork needs to breath sealing it in any way causes the slow decay of the
brick or spalling in frosty weather if moisture cannot get out .

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

Post by PeteM
Painting walls with gloss paint is perfectly normal.

Errr..I have been reading up on the subject and exterior walls should
NOT be painted with a non-permiable paint.

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

Post by bob
So does yor complaint hinge on potential damage or you don't like people
molesting your property?

Both.

[Steve Robinson]

Post by bob

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by bob

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:56:39 +0100, "Terry"

Post by Terry
It all sounds very petty to me. Do you want to involve yourselves
in neighbour wars ?

No.
Firstly, as the wall has been painted with the wrong type of paint
(Looks like gloss paint) there is a possibility of it causing moisture
problems.
He should have asked before painting the wall should he not?
Secondly, we don't want this guy to do anything more to the wall.
We are reasonable people in that if the guy wanted to put up hanging
baskets or suchlike we'd let him. However, that's not to say we'd be
happy if he attached a balcony to it or whatever.
sponix

ask him what type of paint he has used first , if its masonry paint then
fine as long as it has micropourous properties gloss no
garages are damp places at best , keeping moisture within the walls is
not a good idea on unheated properties , causes bricks to spall in the
winter

But if the wall is only painted on the outside, its not a problem then?
sponix, scrape the paint off the inside of the wall!

yes it is it prevents any moisture evaporating from the building , if
the moisture evaporates into the garage then it has nowhere to go , as
the garage is cool its ability to accommodate the extra moisture within
the air is relatively low so condensation is likely to form either
within the garage or the cavity if that's the construction method or on
the vehicle inside

I think this is a red herring - most freestanding garages I've ever seen
are very poorly draught(or is it draft!) proofed, plenty of air gaps
around corrugared roofs for instance, so any moisture would have plenty of
scope for exit.
Likewise, any water getting into the garage is likely to be due to rain
water soaked walls allowing water in - so surely a painted wall is more
likely to prevent water entering than to prevent water exiting the garage.

The op said the garage was built recently so one has to assume it meets
current building regulations on venting of roof's
not many new built garages now use corrugate sheeting as it has a short life
expectancy and from a thief's point of view is easily broken into

Most newly built garages are quite the opposite they are pretty draught free

[bob]

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by bob
I think this is a red herring - most freestanding garages I've ever seen
are very poorly draught(or is it draft!) proofed, plenty of air gaps
around corrugared roofs for instance, so any moisture would have plenty of
scope for exit.
Likewise, any water getting into the garage is likely to be due to rain
water soaked walls allowing water in - so surely a painted wall is more
likely to prevent water entering than to prevent water exiting the garage.

The op said the garage was built recently so one has to assume it meets
current building regulations on venting of roof's
not many new built garages now use corrugate sheeting as it has a short life
expectancy and from a thief's point of view is easily broken into
Most newly built garages are quite the opposite they are pretty draught free

He didn't say it was built recently (at least not in the OP).
In fact, in a recent post he has discovered that a footpath might have
once existed at the rear of the garages, which has been subsequently be
encroached on by garden users.
Also, the garage is in a block of 8, how many modern developments do you
see with this pattern of garage building - none!

All of which points to an old block of garages.

[Steve Robinson]

Post by bob

Post by Steve Robinson

Post by bob
I think this is a red herring - most freestanding garages I've ever seen
are very poorly draught(or is it draft!) proofed, plenty of air gaps
around corrugared roofs for instance, so any moisture would have plenty
of scope for exit.
Likewise, any water getting into the garage is likely to be due to rain
water soaked walls allowing water in - so surely a painted wall is more
likely to prevent water entering than to prevent water exiting the garage.

The op said the garage was built recently so one has to assume it meets
current building regulations on venting of roof's
not many new built garages now use corrugate sheeting as it has a short
life expectancy and from a thief's point of view is easily broken into
Most newly built garages are quite the opposite they are pretty draught free

He didn't say it was built recently (at least not in the OP).
In fact, in a recent post he has discovered that a footpath might have
once existed at the rear of the garages, which has been subsequently be
encroached on by garden users.
Also, the garage is in a block of 8, how many modern developments do you
see with this pattern of garage building - none!
All of which points to an old block of garages.

he posted that the garages where rebuilt about 12 months ago (so that msakes
them new garages )

it is still common practice to erect garage blocks for private flats or
apartments , or buildings being converted into such

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

Post by bob
He didn't say it was built recently (at least not in the OP).
In fact, in a recent post he has discovered that a footpath might have
once existed at the rear of the garages, which has been subsequently be
encroached on by garden users.
Also, the garage is in a block of 8, how many modern developments do you
see with this pattern of garage building - none!

To clarify the garages were re-built from the ground up about a year
ago, following vitually the same design as the old ones.

sponix

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 12:09:02 GMT, "Steve Robinson"

Post by Steve Robinson
The op said the garage was built recently so one has to assume it meets
current building regulations on venting of roof's
not many new built garages now use corrugate sheeting as it has a short life
expectancy and from a thief's point of view is easily broken into
Most newly built garages are quite the opposite they are pretty draught free

These were recently re-built and are pretty well sealed-they even
include rubber seals around the garage doors to stop rain getting in!

The only gap is under the garage door but as there are no other gaps
there is very little through draught.

sponix

[Francis Burton]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
These were recently re-built and are pretty well sealed-they even
include rubber seals around the garage doors to stop rain getting in!
The only gap is under the garage door but as there are no other gaps
there is very little through draught.

Yet well ventilated, one would hope/expect.

Francis

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

Post by Francis Burton

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
These were recently re-built and are pretty well sealed-they even
include rubber seals around the garage doors to stop rain getting in!
The only gap is under the garage door but as there are no other gaps
there is very little through draught.

Yet well ventilated, one would hope/expect.

No more than a modern garage door permits.

sponix

[Francis Burton]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x

Post by Francis Burton
Yet well ventilated, one would hope/expect.

No more than a modern garage door permits.

In that case, doesn't it become damp inside? I believe that's
what happens to houses that aren't well ventilated.

Francis

[Lee]

No offence, but this sounds very petty. There are more important things in
life to worry about a wall that you never see.

FFS! What is the world coming to???

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
I own a freehold garage which is situated in a block of 8.
The garage block backs onto someone's garden, the rear wall of the
block backing onto his garden.
Over the weekend, he has decided to paint the rear wall with white
paint. None of the garage owners gave their permission for this to be
done.
The paint could potentially cause damp problems (Depending on the type
of paint) due to not permiable paint being used-I'm currently seeking
advice on this.
However, the garage owners don't want this to be the start of more
things-we'd like our wall left alone!
What can be done? could we theoretically insist the paint is removed?
We're currently thinking we should write a polite letter to the guy.
The letter would point out that he should not have painted the walls
1. Re-paint the wall at his own expense whenever repainting is
required (Would 5 years be reasonable?).
2. Re-paints it only in white (The colour he has currently chosen)
unless agreed otherwise with the garage owners.
3. Does not attach anything to the wall without the garage owners
permission.
4. These 'rules' are passed onto any subsequent garden owner.
If he doesn't agree to the above he'll have to restore the wall to
it's original state.
Is this fair and reasonable? All we want to do is stop anything else
being done to the wall in future and the paintwork maintained to an
acceptable standard.
(There is nothing in the deeds giving permission to paint this wall)
sponix

[--s-p-o-n-i-x--]

Post by Lee
No offence, but this sounds very petty. There are more important things in
life to worry about a wall that you never see.

Would it be OK for me to plaster the underside of your car with gloss
paint? It could cause your car to rust but it's OK 'cos you'll never
see it..

The wall appears to have been painted in GLOSS paint. As a poster said
above this could cause damp and subsequent frost damage to the
brickwork. A wall of this type of construction needs to "breathe".

Presumably the possible long term damage is something to worry about?

sponix

[Palindr☻me]

Post by --s-p-o-n-i-x--

Post by Lee
No offence, but this sounds very petty. There are more important things in
life to worry about a wall that you never see.

Would it be OK for me to plaster the underside of your car with gloss
paint? It could cause your car to rust but it's OK 'cos you'll never
see it..
The wall appears to have been painted in GLOSS paint. As a poster said
above this could cause damp and subsequent frost damage to the
brickwork. A wall of this type of construction needs to "breathe".
Presumably the possible long term damage is something to worry about?

If you are really fussed about the wall - what are the odds that the
painter will bother to keep to any agreement to keep it well painted and
tidy and what are the odds that his successors will do so? Some time or
another there will be someone living there who can't be botherered to
paint it, will paint it in gloss, paint it pink, or hang a dighy rack
off it. The logic of, "If I have to paint it, it must be mine"..springs
to mind.

Presumably the paint is still soft now and will come off relatively
eaisly. There are companies that specialise in removing paint/graffiti
from walls who would do the job, if the painter isn't willing.

IANAL but it sounds like criminal damage to me. Tell him to return it to
its original state, or you will hire a professional company to do so and
so him for all the costs.

Or let the paint remain and either forget about it and get used to the
idea of anything being done to your walls.

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:15:33 +0100, =?UTF-8?B?UGFsaW5kcuKYu21l?=

Post by Palindr☻me
IANAL but it sounds like criminal damage to me. Tell him to return it to
its original state, or you will hire a professional company to do so and
so him for all the costs.

Late last night one of the other garage owners called me to say that
they think the painter has extended his garden over the years and
originally the rear walls would have faced onto a footpath!

Methinks I shall investigate some more..

sponix

[s--p--o--n--i--x]

Post by s--p--o--n--i--x
On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:15:33 +0100, =?UTF-8?B?UGFsaW5kcuKYu21l?=

Post by Palindr☻me
IANAL but it sounds like criminal damage to me. Tell him to return it to
its original state, or you will hire a professional company to do so and
so him for all the costs.

Late last night one of the other garage owners called me to say that
they think the painter has extended his garden over the years and
originally the rear walls would have faced onto a footpath!
Methinks I shall investigate some more..
sponix

Have contacted the Council who are to investigate whether the guy has
illegally extended his garden.

sponix