To think that if your average British citizen cant just buy a field and live on it in a caravan...

[Saggyoldclothcatpuss]

without being slung off in weeks for not having planning permission, then there's no reason that travellers should be allowed to either?
Controversial, I know, but this really bugs me!

Can't they? Given you can park a caravan in your drive that seems very odd

I would love to live in a caravan in a field

you can't live in a caravan on your drive, or you're not supposed to!

Travellers can't either. Many of my friends are travellers and many have applied for planning on bits of land, very few get it. The ones that do tend to have forked out for specialist gypsy/traveller legal representation and they have to prove that they have been a traveller for a certain number of years.

The ones that do stay on bits of land long term tend to just appeal again and again until finally it's game over and they have to move.

But I agree. It's a nice idea isn't it. I spent 5 years living in a caravan in a field and I fully enjoyed it.

oh sorry it;s the living in bit rather than the parking bit

You cannot buy a piece of land and live on it without the appropriate planning permission. You can park a van on your drive because your house is already has residential status, and the van is an extension of your house. for your personal use. Try to rent it out, you also need PP.

Oh dear.

Travellers can't either.

Basically they're in a shit situation where there aren't enough council sites, they can't set up on public or empty ground, and they can't buy land to live on. Not sure what people expect them to do?

RitaMorgan - people expect them to fuck off and die go Somewhere Else Far Away.

Some of my best friends are caravans.

oh dear bramblebasher ....maybe you should take your own advice

That's about the long and short of it bramblebasher.

A typical case of NIMBY.

sorry wrong end of the stick I think

I agree OP. Some at Dale Farm are legal and have PP, the rest who had planning refused should have pissed off long ago. They are not above the law. They refuse to go and their removal will cost 10million to the tax payers of Essex. Rumour has it they have started laying booby traps in readiness for the eviction, so let's hope our coppers come away unscathed.......

can someone explain - and this is a genuine question, i'm not being anti anybody, why won't travellers, who will happily live on one site for years, in static caravans not just live in houses? I can understand that there are travellers that do actually travel and their homes are mobile, but there are others that live in static homes, how if this different to a house?

I expect they would prefer to be free to travel nancy, so living in a static caravan on a site is a compromise. Unless you could move a whole travelling culture/community onto a housing estate, it is not very like living on a site populated by other people from your community, is it?

usualsuspect - that's not my opinion! Its what it appears is the majority opinion though, and it disgusts me tbh.

Oh I like caravans.

I know ,sorry again, I read it wrong

I don't like the rubbish they leave behind, but I don't like the rubbish anyone leaves behind - instead of taking it to the refuge tip.

You can buy a field and keep a caravan there, but you can't stay in it for more than 28 days a year, or it becomes a residence with no PP then.
That's what dh and I were told when we bought our field.
There have been travellers near us for ages, far more than 28 days, and they look set to be there a lot longer.

bramble I am not in that majority group but I don't feel they should overstay if PP refused I would say the same regardless of whether they were a member of a travelling group or not.

All councils are under a duty to make provision for members of the travelling community, so there are places for them to go.

Oh yes ,just me and my caravan

nobody objects to Centreparcs!

I object to centre parcs - I can't ride a bike so I would never go on holiday to one!