On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 23:03:01 -0000, "Peter Crosland"
wrote:

She might find that once in jail, her front door was even more
difficult to open!

This article is typical journalistic hyperbole, it has more holes in it
that net curtains.


The only thing full of holes is the argument that the defendant put put
up.

Her reported argument is what I meant. We don't KNOW that it was actually
the case. Do we? It certainly doesn't make sense.

Mary

The bottom line is she will end up in prison with a far bigger bill than
if she had the sense to obey the law.

It a long running saga that has been reported at length in The Tines and
elsewhere. A Google search will reveal more. In essence her argument is that
she should not have to obey the law relating to listed buildings. She has
put up all sorts of arguments none of which stand up to even cursory
scrutiny. An absolute classic case of pig headed stupidity all too common in
planning disputes where the building owner thinks they are above the law.
Almost without exception it ends up with them losing and with a large bill.
Why do they do it?


The lady has had polio and is in a wheelchair, Peter.

She should not be put into a position of being unable to use her home.



--

..andy