On 2006-11-09 12:33:50 +0000, "Christian McArdle"
said:

That was not about the merits or demerits of Conservation Areas but
about the behaviour of people who would seek to snitch on their
neightbours to petty bureaucrats.

Personally, I don't care as long as the plastic gets replaced with wood.

The crime of uPVCing existing wooden sash conservation area windows is
vastly greater than "snitching" on your neighbours. Your neighbours had
the choice to comply with the law or act like *******s. It was their
choice. What happened was that some wanky developer could save a few
hundred quid by fitting substandard ugly tat and did so. They do this
sort of thing all the time. Intentionally, knowing that they won't get
caught. Each transgression by a developer should result in proper four
digit fines. A third offence should involve five figure fines.

If the alternative to non-snitching is to end up with crappy ugly uPVC
windows next door, then I know what I would do.

Christian.

Fair enough, but it wasn't my issue.

Really there should be agreement by polling the residents in a CA or
proposed CA that that is what they want. Then they should pay for the
cost to enforce it.