Says Naomi Smith
It is all too possible to round a corner on horseback and come upon a group of cattle with no prior warning -this WILL result in a horse being badly spooked at best, bolting at worst -it is only a matter of time ........... read more
Yateley Common, Hampshire
Access is impeded by unlawful bye-laws for horses and open access dog walkers
"Let me stress, the works on common land does not meet with a lawful and honest application."
Says Tony Barnett
You may have been made aware of recent advances towards enclosing Yateley Common by fraudulent measures by HCC and HWT?, my statements accusing both of wanting to enclose this common land is fact, it is endemic throughout England and the Wales by corrupt councils, charities and the Quango Natural England, so no, we are not happy.
The application to PINS by HCC supported by the Quango and HWT is well known because of the information gained from the applicants.
I can also state that emails with attachments have been forwarded to Trinity Mirror, not just from me, yet none of the factual information has ever been printed, so the only voice getting out belongs to the fraudsters, without any examination by yourselves to substantiate the validity of the claims, yet, when persons are willing to stand behind the reasons why the claims made to pins are by false representation and can offer this evidence, your papers clam up.
Your life style is gained from the readers of your paper, so why not tell the council that the true claims and reports of their corrupt actions will be put into the public domain and that you will not be silenced by their threats.
Yateley Common was registered at the same time as town and village greens were registered for the 1965 commons registration act, these lands are public open access from all points of view, these lands are not subject to the 1925 and 1936 lands registration act because they are not freehold/demesne lands of any estate, therefore for the 1965 act such commons were made the award of section 9 of the 1965 act which means they were "vested" into the protection of the regisrering authorities, but, the vesting gave no jurisdiction, so, how can they be let, leased or conveyed? there is no authority to do so.
SSSI, this is only protected, by law on "Privately owned land", yet charities claim that the flora and fauna on common lands is SSSI and so to protect it needs enclosure, for the 1965 act there was also commoners rights for grazing, it pains me to tell you, but the flora and fauna is fodder for commoners livestock, it may be harvested, it is also for public enjoyment to picnic, to walk on.
Of course there are commons not registered for pasture, yet to gain funding from Natural England, councils claim ownership for the funding(mortgage fraud, using property not belonging as collateral) then allow WWT to enclose and introduce livstock who in turn committ fraud by applying to one of many that offer funding for good causes, HLF,Landfill etc, neither have locus stan-di to occupy or to regulate common land, I do not include common lands subject to the 1899 act or the 1876 act.
The 2000 crow act also protects such common lands where there are no commoners rights registered, yet councils greed is so strong that they stoop so low as to gain police and court protection against those like me who is prepared to uncover the criminal acts, I have the same parasitic authorities in my county and yes it is great to have moral victories, but if newspapers were not in collusion with the authorities and printed fact instead of fiction and hearsay, or else, then none of the corruption would survive.
Waverley Borough Council also has police protection, I have written to Chief Constable Lynne Owens for her to become involved in the fraud committed by that council, the National Trust and Farnborough angling society.
There product.grazing, eastovers and fish, are registered rights under the 1965 commons registration act, commoners, may not let ,lease ,sell or extinguish those rights away from the property so no way can statements/claims be accepted that commoners support none commoners rights.
The 1968 theft act schedule 1, the fish on Frensham common are in ponds, there is no escape route, therefore the fish are reduced to possession, and are registered as commoners rights, the above act is a police matter, as is poaching, is an arrestable offence, it is theft, yet the lady will not take action, the rod licence is not valid either, the 2000 crow deals with this as the land is a conservation area as all commons are.
The fraud continues, Waverley Borough Council claims to own the rights to all of the common, land and ponds, so do the National Trust, to this they have claimed rights to lease the ponds for fishing and for boating, also allow bathing, the crow act puts the activities as unlawful, so should the council, the national trust has brought into the equastion the national trust act 1971 (23), this is only for national trust owned land to show evidence to pre-date the 1189 act, they have no such evidence, between them the trust and council are making £1,000's each year, yet cannot disclose public liabilty certificate because the actions are fraudulent, the boating clubs and the fishing clubs are also raking in money for unlawful activities so the fraud is endemic, to make it more serious, Ian Gray, the secretary of the fishing club is also the enforcement officer at the council.
Access is impeded by unlawful bye-laws for horses and open access dog walkers, as are Frensham, Yateley my commons and commons and a lot more also are not subject to regulation by councils bye-laws because they are Rural, even if there was a lord of the manor, the common cannot be enclosed under section 193 of the law of property act.
Says Linda Wright
We moved to a Shropshire location a year ago having surveyed the local OS map and noted the significant number of bridleways around the property. Sadly the map appears a total fiction. Scarce any of the bridleways are usable ........... read more