Buy all your VW California Accessories at the Club Shop Visit Shop


The trespass trap

MattBW

MattBW

Here to help
Moderator
Top Poster
Lifetime VIP Member
Messages
5,704
Location
Bedworth, United Kingdom
Vehicle
T5 Beach
In the England at least you can only wild camp with the land owners permission anyway, some places have blanket approval like parts of Dartmoor whereas others don't.

Wild camping by its true definition is considered camping by only carrying what you need in a backpack, being at least 100m from a road and not leaving anything behind etc. Most of what us camper owners tend to think of as wild camping isn't really its just parking. From what I can read in that article the change that it will go from trespass which is civil to a criminal offence?

If so that is quite a big change.

In my town we now have a high court injunction in place that stops un-authorised encampments on public land. Our parks are no longer being trashed and torn up but its just moved the problem to the local industrial estates. It put a stop to regular traveller invasions of playing fields and parks, but it has broadly hit the courteous and tidy ones as hard as the ones who leave all their litter behind. LIke many things in life thoughtless folks spoiling it for everyone.

There needs to places for travelling folks to stay clearly, but likewise if it was my land I wouldn't want it used by others without my permission, trashed or damaged. If we came home to a caravan on our lawn we might be upset.

I can kind of see both sides of the arguments.
 
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
In the England at least you can only wild camp with the land owners permission anyway, some places have blanket approval like parts of Dartmoor whereas others don't.

Wild camping by its true definition is considered camping by only carrying what you need in a backpack, being at least 100m from a road and not leaving anything behind etc. Most of what us camper owners tend to think of as wild camping isn't really its just parking. From what I can read in that article the change that it will go from trespass which is civil to a criminal offence?

If so that is quite a big change.

In my town we now have a high court injunction in place that stops un-authorised encampments on public land. Our parks are no longer being trashed and torn up but its just moved the problem to the local industrial estates. It put a stop to regular traveller invasions of playing fields and parks, but it has broadly hit the courteous and tidy ones as hard as the ones who leave all their litter behind. LIke many things in life thoughtless folks spoiling it for everyone.

There needs to places for travelling folks to stay clearly, but likewise if it was my land I wouldn't want it used by others without my permission, trashed or damaged. If we came home to a caravan on our lawn we might be upset.

I can kind of see both sides of the arguments.
Yes, it becomes a criminal offence, even to stay t the side of the road. The police will have the power to confiscate any van, Campervan or motorhome permanently without any prior warning or request to move on if it’s enacted. It’s draconian and means you cannot stop overnight anywhere on public land in peace.
 
Amarillo

Amarillo

Tom
Top Poster
VIP Member
Messages
5,601
Location
Royal Borough of Greenwich
Vehicle
T6 Beach 150
Yes, it becomes a criminal offence, even to stay t the side of the road. The police will have the power to confiscate any van, Campervan or motorhome permanently without any prior warning or request to move on if it’s enacted. It’s draconian and means you cannot stop overnight anywhere on public land in peace.
I didn’t read it like that. As always the devil will be in the detail, but the article quotes a question from the consultation which uses the word “reside”. To me that suggests some degree of permanence, not just a night or two.

Two years ago we went through a gargantuan effort to secure a place in a school for our four year old son. The problem was that we were travelling around Europe in our campervan and to afford the year away we had rented out our home and weren’t paying the council tax. Greenwich Council categorised us as travellers. Fortunately, the law states that the home local authority is where the child normally “resides”, and we were able to successfully argue that our home was where we normally reside, and not the various campgrounds and wild parking spots around Europe where we stayed overnight.

So while a traveller encampment on private land might be a place where they “reside”, especially if they have no other home, that may not be the case for a casual camper who has a home to return to.

Looking at it that way, the proposal is even worse. It appears to be a way of treating the homeless less favourably than those with a home.
 
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
I didn’t read it like that. As always the devil will be in the detail, but the article quotes a question from the consultation which uses the word “reside”. To me that suggests some degree of permanence, not just a night or two.

Two years ago we went through a gargantuan effort to secure a place in a school for our four year old son. The problem was that we were travelling around Europe in our campervan and to afford the year away we had rented out our home and weren’t paying the council tax. Greenwich Council categorised us as travellers. Fortunately, the law states that the home local authority is where the child normally “resides”, and we were able to successfully argue that our home was where we normally reside, and not the various campgrounds and wild parking spots around Europe where we stayed overnight.

So while a traveller encampment on private land might be a place where they “reside”, especially if they have no other home, that may not be the case for a casual camper who has a home to return to.

Looking at it that way, the proposal is even worse. It appears to be a way of treating the homeless less favourably than those with a home.
There is no time limit defined and there is no alternative address provision. As you say the devil is I. The detail, in the absence of explicit exclusions or limitations the law applies as written.
 
Amarillo

Amarillo

Tom
Top Poster
VIP Member
Messages
5,601
Location
Royal Borough of Greenwich
Vehicle
T6 Beach 150
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
Yes, I’ve responded to that consultation survey online. The wording used is ‘intention to reside in the land for any period’. The consultation then goes on to propose including the highway under the proposal.

It’s clearly aimed at gypsies and travellers, but it is certainly not limited to them.
 
Stoneybroke

Stoneybroke

VIP Member
Messages
1,022
Location
Staffordshire
Vehicle
T6 Beach 150
New proposals would need landowner to ask the person to leave first and two or more vehicles required.
That said, this is creeping into new territory which is worrying.
 
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
New proposals would need landowner to ask the person to leave first and two or more vehicles required.
That said, this is creeping into new territory which is worrying.
The two or more vehicles is reduced from six in current legislation. If you park up alone or with one other van friend and go to sleep, or if somebody parks up next to you in the night you are a criminal under this legislation.

The new proposals do not require the landowner to ask them to leave first A specific question in the consultation is wether you agree with this.

Q3: To what extent do you agree or disagree that the landowner or representatives of the landowner should take reasonable steps to ask persons occupying their land to remove themselves and their possessions before occupation of the land can be considered a criminal offence?
 
Digger

Digger

VIP Member
Messages
1,213
Location
caledonia
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 150
I would not worry too much. Some see doom and gloom everywhere but reality and practicality normally see a reasonable outcome. We in Scotland have a right to roam but closer reading notice it specifically excludes motor vehicles - and driving onto private land is a criminal offence wheras before there was no law of trespass in Scotland before this legislation (although a land owner could throw you off ). No, wait , respond to the document and save up for you ID Buzz if you can afford it. Me, I'm making the most of my time on this planet rather than worrying about what may or not happen in some time in the future.
 
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
I would not worry too much. Some see doom and gloom everywhere but reality and practicality normally see a reasonable outcome. We in Scotland have a right to roam but closer reading notice it specifically excludes motor vehicles - and driving onto private land is a criminal offence wheras before there was no law of trespass in Scotland before this legislation (although a land owner could throw you off ). No, wait , respond to the document and save up for you ID Buzz if you can afford it. Me, I'm making the most of my time on this planet rather than worrying about what may or not happen in some time in the future.
Well, as this proposal includes van dwellers on the highway it has the potential to reduce the enjoyment of my time on this planet, as I live in my van on the highway at the moment, and I don’t want it confiscated or the risk of it being confiscated without warning! I also can no longer go and live in Europe in my van for more than 90 days after 2020. So, as I am stuck here and I have a long time left on this and as the consultation is now open to influence the outcome, now is a good time to address the issue.
It’s still ok to camp on the highway in Scotland by the way.

Buying the next camper is separate problem but I hope mine will last at least 30 years.
 
Amarillo

Amarillo

Tom
Top Poster
VIP Member
Messages
5,601
Location
Royal Borough of Greenwich
Vehicle
T6 Beach 150
Yes, I’ve responded to that consultation survey online. The wording used is ‘intention to reside in the land for any period’. The consultation then goes on to propose including the highway under the proposal.

It’s clearly aimed at gypsies and travellers, but it is certainly not limited to them.
I had an ironic laugh when I read "intention to reside in the land for any period". I had already googled the definition of "reside" which returned "have one's permanent home in a particular place." I.e. a campsite is not where you reside if the stay is temporary. Then in a way only public bodies can, the definition becomes befuddled.

Elsewhere in the document the term "encampment" is used, and that is a temporary arrangement.
 
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
I had an ironic laugh when I read "intention to reside in the land for any period". I had already googled the definition of "reside" which returned "have one's permanent home in a particular place." I.e. a campsite is not where you reside if the stay is temporary. Then in a way only public bodies can, the definition becomes befuddled.

Elsewhere in the document the term "encampment" is used, and that is a temporary arrangement.
I think it’s possibly intentionally vague so that it can be interpreted in whichever way suits them, until it’s tested in court.
 
Amarillo

Amarillo

Tom
Top Poster
VIP Member
Messages
5,601
Location
Royal Borough of Greenwich
Vehicle
T6 Beach 150
New proposals would need landowner to ask the person to leave first and two or more vehicles required.
If that is indeed the proposal, it makes some sense. If someone parks on my driveway and camps without consent it is civil trespass. If I ask them to leave and they do so there matter ends there unless I sue for damages. If I ask them to leave and they refuse it then becomes criminal trespass, enforceable by the police.

If that is the correct interpretation of the proposal, it has my support.
 
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
If that is indeed the proposal, it makes some sense. If someone parks on my driveway and camps without consent it is civil trespass. If I ask them to leave and they do so there matter ends there unless I sue for damages. If I ask them to leave and they refuse it then becomes criminal trespass, enforceable by the police.

If that is the correct interpretation of the proposal, it has my support.
It is not the correct interpretation. It’s a possible outcome. It’s an open question in the consultation as to whether this is how it should be or not. This includes the highway.
 
T6 CFO

T6 CFO

Mike
Top Poster
VIP Member
Messages
3,343
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204 4Motion
I think it’s possibly intentionally vague so that it can be interpreted in whichever way suits them, until it’s tested in court.
There’s no way I’m reading all this but in my experience laws are nearly always tested to breaking point by lawyers or those wishing to interpret them in a manner that suits them. It’s all noise and money for lawyers.
At the end of the day by either redrafting or case law they get back to enforcing whatever the original purpose was.
Those seeking to bend it to their will rather than its intention usually end up the poorer.
I doubt in this case it’s to stop us enjoying our Cali’s.




Mike
 
L

Lightning

Messages
349
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204
There’s no way I’m reading all this but in my experience laws are nearly always tested to breaking point by lawyers or those wishing to interpret them in a manner that suits them. It’s all noise and money for lawyers.
At the end of the day by either redrafting or case law they get back to enforcing whatever the original purpose was.
Those seeking to bend it to their will rather than its intention usually end up the poorer.
I doubt in this case it’s to stop us enjoying our Cali’s.




Mike
So without reading what’s actually being proposed, you are sure it will be ok. That’s a relief!

it’s not intended to stop us enjoying our Cali’s, but it can and probably will be used that way. Bans will no longer be necessary as it will become a criminal offence to park up anywhere.
 
Top