TRF Forums

It is currently Tue Sep 17, 2019 9:29 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:32 pm 
Offline
200 cc
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 446
Steve Sharp wrote:
Thanks Sven, excellent video!

Steve


From counting the comments, messages, questions and other communications the objection letters are WELL into double figures from the video.

I'm pulling my finger out and writing mine today.

_________________
Greenlaning in Sussex, Surrey and Kent interactive guide - click here


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:14 pm 
Offline
80 cc

Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 55
Thats great news, thanks.

Steve


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:20 pm 
Offline
650 cc Monster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:34 pm
Posts: 4279
Location: East Sussex
email objections to:

hannah.gutteridge@surreycc.gov.uk


.......................

My objection letter:

Dear Mrs Gutteridge,

I wish to submit an objection to the proposed TRO's on byways 538 and 539 on the following grounds.

The proposals to TRO these lanes conflict with Surrey County Councils byway policy and advice given by the countryside access team.

The process to date hasn't been fair and impartial as required by Human Rights legislation when determining civil liberties. Specifically, cllr f. Harrison lives on byway 539. The aforementioned councillor appears to have been the driving force for these proposed TRO's in recorded parish council minutes.

Surrey County Council has a duty to perform a "balancing act" under section 122 (1) of the Road Traffic Act. There is no evidence that this duty has been performed.

I request that the TRO proposals be reffered to an independent committee or public enquiry so as to afford a just process on determination that's unnaffected by vested interests and prejudice.

I also wish to register a formal complaint with regard to the process to date.
These TRO proposals have been approved and driven by councillors that aren't in a position to provide a fair and impartial process as required by the Human Rights Act. Surrey County Council has failed to identify and address this breach of human rights, caused by the flawed procedures, that allowed these proposals to be approved.
I'm also dissatisfied that a significant amount of public funds has been spent on establishing an expert countryside access team whose time and efforts were requested only for their expert report to be disregarded by the councillors approving this TRO proposal. The process which empowers councillors, who are not in a position to be impartial, to approve TRO's, also creates potential for decisions to be made effectively before the countryside access team submit expert advice, and reports, in conjunction with the Surrey CC TRO policy. This not only exposes the requisition of expert reports as a waste of public funds but the commissioning of a TRO policy as well.
Rights of way management is an extremely complex and technically demanding subject. Do the councillors that approved this TRO proposal have relevant and sufficient qualifications in rights of way management? If not, why have they been allowed to disregard the Countryside Access team's reccomendation?

I currently have the right to exercise my civil liberty to ride a motorcycle on byways 538 and 539. If this liberty is removed by process that is then judged to be incompatible with article 6 of the Human Rights Act I shall seek legal advice with a view to civil proceedings for compensation for subsequent, unlawfull, deprivation of liberty. I would remind individual councillors that they would be potentially liable to proceedings if it's ruled that they have acted, or failed to act, in a way that breaches Human Rights Act.

Yours sincerely

_________________
John Vannuffel

Technical Director


KTM 690 Enduro R

Husqvarna TE250 2014


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 8:13 pm 
Offline
80 cc

Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 55
Thanks John, good letter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 8:41 pm 
Offline
200 cc
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:15 pm
Posts: 446
That's not a good letter, that's a fan-flippin-tastic letter. Nice one John.

_________________
Greenlaning in Sussex, Surrey and Kent interactive guide - click here


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:12 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:03 pm
Posts: 5005
Location: East Sussex
Well written, lets see about the reply.

When writting these types of letter, should we be requesting a reply within a certain time or a least confirmation of receipt?

Well done, a good basis of a template for future letters

_________________
Red


WR400F..Gone for a song.
CRF250L now on the lanes.
Novice off roader for years


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:33 pm 
Offline
400 cc

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:44 pm
Posts: 1463
If you have questions to ask, then ask them and insist that you get a reply. If you don't then chase them up!

And there do appear to be plenty of valid questions to ask in this case.

Also remember that you don't need to wait until after they've robbed you of your legal rights to make a complaint. If you think there may have been maladministration here (ie they're failing in their duties or abusing their powers) then use th eformal complaints proceedure to hold them to account!

I've Emailed a few questions myself. i'll post te answers I get when I have them.

Cheers

Richard


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:48 pm 
Offline
650 cc Monster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:34 pm
Posts: 4279
Location: East Sussex
Cllr F Harrison declared interest at horsley parish council meeting.

This declaration should've been relayed at the committee stage.

It appears that this hasn't happened.

Also worth noting that Cllr C French lives very close to Silkmore Lane - no declaration of interest.

Even if the Cllr's wanted to be impartial the nature of their position - vocationally and geographicaly - compromises their ability to be so.

By all means they should be involved in requesting TRO's. They shouldn't be allowed to impose them though.

This case has "legs". It has the potential to expose current procedures, and ALL TRO's generated by them, as incompatible with Human Rights requirements.

As said before - it's like a school board comprising predominantly of BNP members deciding that a muslim girl can't wear a veil to lessons.

The successfull ruling in Gorbeck illustrates that these appeals for objections and member's involvement are about so much more than the mileage of a given lane. We are now strengthened by the gorbeck ruling as demonstrated by objections lodged against this TRO.

Get stuck in!!!!!

_________________
John Vannuffel

Technical Director


KTM 690 Enduro R

Husqvarna TE250 2014


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 5:18 pm 
Offline
80 cc

Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 55
This is an excellent example of how undemocratic the whole TRO process is... I wish we could somehow change the process across the country, because this has happened many times before, not just in Surrey but across the country..

Cheers
Steve


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Surrey TROs
PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:41 pm 
Offline
125cc
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:58 pm
Posts: 140
Location: St.Leonards on Sea.
Objection sent tonight. Good luck.

_________________
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group. Color scheme by ColorizeIt!