Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Neighbour and big lorry

120 replies

Senzi · 02/06/2023 09:38

Neighbour A lives a few doors down from neighbour B. A runs a business from home and has a weekly delivery where a large lorry enters the street to deliver stock.

B doesn’t like the lorry as she likes her kids to play out in nice weather and worries a lorry is imposing some danger towards her children. B reports A to the local council. Council investigate and finds nothing unreasonable or untoward.

A has since found alternative premises to receive deliveries but has outed B on the neighbourhood WhatsApp group. A has said B is nothing but spiteful and deceitful as could have quite easily had a chat with A and come to an agreement about any concerns or issues rather than reporting A anonymously to the council. B maintains they have done nothing wrong as she just wants her children to feel safe outside their own home.

who is being unreasonable A or B?

OP posts:
Azandme · 02/06/2023 10:08

Well neither have covered themselves in glory.

B is predominantly in the wrong for trying to control the traffic.

But what a load of petty crap!

DemonicCaveMaggot · 02/06/2023 10:11

B was silly as a lorry can use a public road. She should either supervise them if they are too young to get out of the way of traffic or teach them not to play on the road.

A is a hypocrite as they should have talked to B about it rather than making a drama on the Whatsapp group.

reelcat · 02/06/2023 10:11

B

Whowhatwherewhenwhy1 · 02/06/2023 10:12

B - public highway, once a week delivery. Should have spoken to A. B sounds entitled and . A remedied the situation but is right to feel very annoyed with B for at least not having the courtesy to approach them to discuss the problem. Especially as A was only using this address while they sought alternative location. B is just embarrassed at being called out. A would be entitled to have a lorry to their door daily via the public highway should they need to. Perhaps B should contain her kids within the bounds of her own property. Kids should not be playing on the roads and pavements anyway

INeedAnotherName · 02/06/2023 10:12

I'm assuming if a big lorry is delivering once a week then there are multiple small vans taking away to deliver said goods to others. So its not about the one lorry but the massive increase in vehicles this home business is generating? If so then the wrong thing is being focused on.

Paperlate · 02/06/2023 10:14

B was a dick.

MolkosTeenageAngst · 02/06/2023 10:19

A is in the wrong. It was reasonable for B to report if she thought that the lorry was breaking some sort of law. Obviously it wasn’t and nothing came of it.

B shouldn’t have outed.

CleanCar · 02/06/2023 10:22

A road is for vehicles not for kids to play in

GasPanic · 02/06/2023 10:22

Tough one for me.

I think people should be ok to run businesses from their homes, so long as it does not impact other people. Problem is though you always get piss takers who push it too far and end up impacting the local neighbourhood with their business activities which really isn't on or fair.

B clearly feels her life has been impacted, but I think most people would feel that one lorry a week is not excessive. It would probably be more serious if the lorry posed some sort of "greater risk" to her kids, but the reality is that a large lorry is unlikely to move at fast speeds round a housing estate, unlike zooming cars and cyclists. My guess is that the risk posed to her kids by the general constate traffic dwarfs the risk posed by a once a week lorry, so her fear to some degree is illogical.

OTOH if your business requires heavy delivery once a week, is that reasonable to conduct from a domestic house. What happens if the business takes off ? Or requires larger deliveries at some point ? My guess is that the operations would have continued. So one lorry, then possibly two at some point in the future. So either the business would have remained static, or most likely at some point would have needed to move. And would it have moved of the owners violation, or would it eventually have had to move because of neighbour complaints ?

I think B should have held off a bit longer to when the business was more impactful, and A should realise that if people are complaining, it's probably time to move to a more appropriate site, rather than spend their energy kicking off at B.

JulieHoney · 02/06/2023 10:22

B was a busybody dick.

A was a petty grass.

Personally, OP, I’d leave the neighbourhood WhatsApp if it’s for petty grievances and sniping.

FiveShelties · 02/06/2023 10:24

Are you B OP?

shams05 · 02/06/2023 10:24

B is unreasonable. She can't control traffic using the road but she can reach her kids to play safely.
I don't think the lorry was the actual issue here, B has probably been itcing to report A to the council for ages. The lorry was just an excuse. It's backfired though, not only has she been outed on WA but the council have confirmed A is doing nothing wrong running her business from her home.
Which one are you op?

WhereYouLeftIt · 02/06/2023 10:25

B started something that didn't need to be started.

"B doesn’t like the lorry as she likes her kids to play out in nice weather and worries a lorry is imposing some danger towards her children."
B doesn't own the street. If the lorry really bothered B, they should have asked A to let them know when the weekly delivery was dues so that they could keep their kids in for the - what, 30 minutes, an hour? that the lorry was present.

"B reports A to the local council."
Anonymously. Very cowardly. What were they hoping would happen? THat the lorry delivery wouldn't happen, or that A's business would be found in breach of some by-law and shut down? And all because they didn't just ask A for info.

"A has since found alternative premises to receive deliveries but has outed B on the neighbourhood WhatsApp group. A has said B is nothing but spiteful and deceitful as could have quite easily had a chat with A and come to an agreement about any concerns or issues rather than reporting A anonymously to the council."
In my opinion, A was "spiteful and deceitful". They could have talked to B. I'd probably have just said that to their face and sounded off about it to the neighbours I was friendly with in real life rather than on a WhatsApp group; but I can understand that A was upset by being investigated by the council - it could have put their livelihood at risk. A's stress levels from this must have been pretty high. I don't think B had any right to expect A not to tell other people. And if I was a neighbour, I would want to know; because would I get reeported for having furniture delivered, or would B decide cars were a danger to her children and start hassling me about my car? If they're batshit enough to complain to the council about one lorry delivering once per week, they batshit enough to escalate.

"B maintains they have done nothing wrong as she just wants her children to feel safe outside their own home."
B has done something wrong, and their refusal to acknowledge that is, in my opinion, almost as big a problem as their running to the council to do their dirty work against a neighbour.

So B has been massively unreasonable. A has lashed out in response, which, whilst uncomfortable for B, I do not think it unreasonable.

FatAgainItsLettuceTime · 02/06/2023 10:27

Has B complained about the bin and recycling lorries too? Or just the weekly lorry that comes to her neighbour?

B sounds like a twit.

IamNannyPlum · 02/06/2023 10:29

A is being a dick.

Want2beme · 02/06/2023 10:30

Once a week is not an issue. B needs to be more accommodating.

JauntyJinty · 02/06/2023 10:34

mackerella · 02/06/2023 09:56

Which one are you, OP: A or B? (My money's on B...)

My money son b too - it's all a bit "Won't somebofy think of the children"!

Has B explained why this 1 specific Lorry is a danger to her children and all the other traffic through the week isn't?

fancreek · 02/06/2023 10:34

IamNannyPlum · 02/06/2023 10:29

A is being a dick.

Disagree!

Shakirasma · 02/06/2023 10:37

Both have handled things in an unreasonable manner.

B for selfishly thinking they can dictate what happens on the public road and running to the council rather than having a grown up conversation with their neighbour.

A for waiting until the thing that irritates B is coming to an end before taking revenge and publicity calling them out, rather than having a grown up conversation with their neighbour.

magicstar1 · 02/06/2023 10:39

B. Her children shouldn’t be out playing in the middle of the road anyway.

Thehippowife · 02/06/2023 10:43

So B wanted A to approach them for a chat rather than put them on social media, but B went straight to the council and reported the lorry rather than talk to A in the first place. B sounds like an entitled moron.

HappiestSleeping · 02/06/2023 10:43

WhereYouLeftIt · 02/06/2023 10:25

B started something that didn't need to be started.

"B doesn’t like the lorry as she likes her kids to play out in nice weather and worries a lorry is imposing some danger towards her children."
B doesn't own the street. If the lorry really bothered B, they should have asked A to let them know when the weekly delivery was dues so that they could keep their kids in for the - what, 30 minutes, an hour? that the lorry was present.

"B reports A to the local council."
Anonymously. Very cowardly. What were they hoping would happen? THat the lorry delivery wouldn't happen, or that A's business would be found in breach of some by-law and shut down? And all because they didn't just ask A for info.

"A has since found alternative premises to receive deliveries but has outed B on the neighbourhood WhatsApp group. A has said B is nothing but spiteful and deceitful as could have quite easily had a chat with A and come to an agreement about any concerns or issues rather than reporting A anonymously to the council."
In my opinion, A was "spiteful and deceitful". They could have talked to B. I'd probably have just said that to their face and sounded off about it to the neighbours I was friendly with in real life rather than on a WhatsApp group; but I can understand that A was upset by being investigated by the council - it could have put their livelihood at risk. A's stress levels from this must have been pretty high. I don't think B had any right to expect A not to tell other people. And if I was a neighbour, I would want to know; because would I get reeported for having furniture delivered, or would B decide cars were a danger to her children and start hassling me about my car? If they're batshit enough to complain to the council about one lorry delivering once per week, they batshit enough to escalate.

"B maintains they have done nothing wrong as she just wants her children to feel safe outside their own home."
B has done something wrong, and their refusal to acknowledge that is, in my opinion, almost as big a problem as their running to the council to do their dirty work against a neighbour.

So B has been massively unreasonable. A has lashed out in response, which, whilst uncomfortable for B, I do not think it unreasonable.

This 👆

AgentProvocateur · 02/06/2023 10:52

B is being completely unreasonable and the sort of neighbour you’d dread having.

donquixotedelamancha · 02/06/2023 11:07

Both unreasonable. More so A for the abusive comments.

Iceicebabytoocold · 02/06/2023 11:09

B is unreasonable