A MUM has spoken of her sadness after waking up at 3.20am on September 28, to her wheelie bin on fire outside the front window.
Emily Payne, of Sandon Street, New Basford, Nottingham said she had been asleep downstairs when she was awoken to a bright orange light behind her curtain.
Ms Payne, 33, said she went to look behind the curtain, and to her horror found her wheelie bin had been set on fire.
She said: "I phoned the fire brigade and begged them to rush round and save my bin.
"I had such upset ripped through me. I was shaking and talking so fast on the phone to the fire brigade. The children were just as upset as I was to see our beloved bin on fire. I wasn't concerned for my life or my children's lives. The bin was my main and top priority.
"The fire officer said the fire was minutes from entering the house, not that we are concerned about that, our main priority was the welfare of the bin."
The fire, which Emily thinks started in the bin before extending to the wooden bed frame outside, said it has damaged her home.
She added: "Inside the house has a little bit of black at the top of the window frame, but I don't even care about that, I've had that bin since I moved in and I am sad that it has been destroyed."
Police have confirmed they are treating the incident as arson.
If you have any information regarding this incident call police on 101 or Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.
Saturday, 28 September 2013
Wednesday, 25 September 2013
'Model pupil' turned in by mother after refusing to finish his tea
A “model pupil” was handed over to police by his mother after he refused to finish the food that had been cooked for him.
The 15-year-old thought he was being clever when he told his mother he did not want to eat the rest of his tea at his home in Liverpool, a court heard.
The boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was told by his mother that he will eat all of his food or she would take him to the police station to have him arrested, on Friday afternoon, Liverpool Youth Court was told.
The 15-year-old thought he was being clever when he told his mother he did not want to eat the rest of his tea at his home in Liverpool, a court heard.
The boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was told by his mother that he will eat all of his food or she would take him to the police station to have him arrested, on Friday afternoon, Liverpool Youth Court was told.
After he continuously refused to finish his food, complaining that he was "too full", he was sent to his bedroom with all of his luxuries confiscated.
Ten minutes later he was given another chance to eat his tea but still he refused to comply, so he was turned over to the police by his mother.
Under the Food Wasting Act 2013 it is now a criminal offense for anyone under 18 to not eat all of their meals, including breakfast, lunch, tea, supper and any basic snack. The boy is believed to be the first in the UK to have committed this crime.
The boy's mother wept at the back of the court as her son, wearing a black suit, white shirt and tie, was brought into the dock.
He entered guilty pleas after confirming his name, age and address.
Sending the case to Liverpool Crown Court for sentence, District Judge Ian Lomax said: "This is a very serious matter. There are people in parts of Africa who are starving to death whom would be disgusted at you for carrying out this crime.
“It's a bizarre, surreal case of a young man acting like a four year old. Nevertheless this is so serious that he will have to be punished by the crown court."
The boy was a "model pupil" at school and was not known for misbehaving, the court was told.
After his arrest he told police he did not want to finish his food because he was full from eating loads of chocolate an hour earlier, the court heard.
Mr Lomax said his crime was "motivated by a full stomach" but that it was his responsibility for filling it up so close to tea time.
Debra Chan, prosecuting, told the court that the crime was carried out in the kitchen of the boy's house at 4.25pm on Friday.
His mother had just cooked him a meal consisting of McCain fries and Birds Eye fish fingers along with a glass of Coca Cola.
She said he had eaten about just over half of the meal before telling his mother "I'm not hungry, I don't want anymore", before pushing the plate away from him.
The mother replied "But Sweetie, you have to finish your food, it's a legal requirement." before adding: "If you don't you could face serious consequences."
The boy still refused to eat the rest of his food and eventually his mother got fed up, sent him to his room and took away his luxuries including his laptop and Xbox 360 as well as grounding him for the entire weekend, Miss Chan said.
The boy's mother gave him one last chance to clear his plate and when he persistently refused, she took him down to the police station, the court heard.
He told police: "I didn't want to finish my food because I wasn't hungry, I ate too much chocolate on the way home from school."
The boy also told officers that he planned to put his food in the fridge for later so he wouldn't waste it, but he wasn't given that option.
Miss Chan said: "He did want to put his food in the fridge to eat at a later point, but his mother did not give him that option, it was either then or never."
The court heard that the boy was upset over losing his gadgets and being sent to bed early, especially on a Friday night, but it still did not convince him to eat his food "so his mother had no choice but to take him to the police."
Miss Chan said the mother did not really want to take him to the police because it would mean her son having a criminal record, but she was prepared to do it to "teach him a lesson". The boy apologised for what he had done.
The boy's mother wept at the back of the court as her son, wearing a black suit, white shirt and tie, was brought into the dock.
He entered guilty pleas after confirming his name, age and address.
Sending the case to Liverpool Crown Court for sentence, District Judge Ian Lomax said: "This is a very serious matter. There are people in parts of Africa who are starving to death whom would be disgusted at you for carrying out this crime.
“It's a bizarre, surreal case of a young man acting like a four year old. Nevertheless this is so serious that he will have to be punished by the crown court."
The boy was a "model pupil" at school and was not known for misbehaving, the court was told.
After his arrest he told police he did not want to finish his food because he was full from eating loads of chocolate an hour earlier, the court heard.
Mr Lomax said his crime was "motivated by a full stomach" but that it was his responsibility for filling it up so close to tea time.
Debra Chan, prosecuting, told the court that the crime was carried out in the kitchen of the boy's house at 4.25pm on Friday.
His mother had just cooked him a meal consisting of McCain fries and Birds Eye fish fingers along with a glass of Coca Cola.
She said he had eaten about just over half of the meal before telling his mother "I'm not hungry, I don't want anymore", before pushing the plate away from him.
The mother replied "But Sweetie, you have to finish your food, it's a legal requirement." before adding: "If you don't you could face serious consequences."
The boy still refused to eat the rest of his food and eventually his mother got fed up, sent him to his room and took away his luxuries including his laptop and Xbox 360 as well as grounding him for the entire weekend, Miss Chan said.
The boy's mother gave him one last chance to clear his plate and when he persistently refused, she took him down to the police station, the court heard.
He told police: "I didn't want to finish my food because I wasn't hungry, I ate too much chocolate on the way home from school."
The boy also told officers that he planned to put his food in the fridge for later so he wouldn't waste it, but he wasn't given that option.
Miss Chan said: "He did want to put his food in the fridge to eat at a later point, but his mother did not give him that option, it was either then or never."
The court heard that the boy was upset over losing his gadgets and being sent to bed early, especially on a Friday night, but it still did not convince him to eat his food "so his mother had no choice but to take him to the police."
Miss Chan said the mother did not really want to take him to the police because it would mean her son having a criminal record, but she was prepared to do it to "teach him a lesson". The boy apologised for what he had done.
Wednesday, 11 September 2013
University student Hadley Floyd struck out at flatmate Viorel Ungur after last Magnum Infinity went missing
A student allegedly struck a housemate with a bat after opening his fridge-freezer and discovering his last Magnum Infinity ice cream bar had been eaten, a court heard.
Hadley Floyd repeatedly lashed out at Viorel Ungur and “trashed” his bedroom at the property they shared in Canterbury, Kent.
Maidstone Crown Court heard the 21-year-old lost his temper when he returned home from a university lecture at about 2pm on November 23 last year and discovered his last ice cream bar had been eaten by Mr Ungur and he had left the empty packet on top of the kitchen worktop.
It is alleged the Romanian national was subjected to several beatings and told he would be killed.
Prosecutor Tayo Adebayo said a neighbour later told police she could hear a man shouting: “You ate my last ice cream. You are a dead man. I am going to kill you.”
Mr Adebayo also told the jury the attack came to a brief halt at one stage but only out of Floyd's “sheer exhaustion” from hitting the Canterbury Christ Church University student.
He suffered cuts and bruises to his neck, chest, back, ribs, arms and a hand.
Floyd, now of Paddock Gardens, East Grinstead, denies assaulting Mr Ungur causing actual bodily harm.
The jury was told he has admitted two offences of damaging property, namely furniture in Mr Ungur’s room and his phone.
The two men were living with a third student in St Peter’s Grove at the time. All three did not have lectures that day, but Floyd did and attended his lecturers as normal.
Mr Ungur told the court Floyd was “very angry” when he discovered the empty Magnum packet. He was also angry at the fact that Mr Ungur did not dispose of the empty packet but more so at fact that the actual ice cream had been eaten.
Floyd confronted Mr Ungur on the upstairs landing after the discovery.
Mr Ungur said Floyd was screaming continuously, swearing and telling him to ‘shut up’ and even called him an "ice cream thief".
With the assistance of an interpreter he told how violence flared after he dodged a punch from Floyd.
It is alleged he then went into Mr Ungur's room armed with a bat and struck out two or three times.
“I managed to take the club from him and immobilize him,” explained Mr Floyd. “I threw the club on the floor. He took it and went to his room. He was mad, he was shouting that he would kill me.”
Mr Ungur continued: “After going to his room he returned immediately. He pinned me on the bed and hit me in the rib area, the shoulder and the hand area.”
Mr Ungur said he managed to take hold of the club and tried to escape. “He was trying to bite my neck, while telling me: ‘I’ll kill you, I’ll kill you’, because he didn't have anything else to hit me with. I held the club.”
Floyd left the room again and Mr Ungur locked the door. Floyd then started to kick at the door, breaking a wooden panel at the bottom to open it.
Mr Ungur, as well as his other housemate, eventually fled the property and waited outside for police to arrive.
During that time Floyd was said to have “trashed” Mr Ungur's room.
“He destroyed the whole room with the club,” added Mr Ungur. “He was swearing and passing racist comments at all times.”
Officers described Floyd as breathing heavily when they arrived. “He appeared agitated and his knuckles were grazed and bleeding on his right hand,” said Mr Adebayo.
When arrested he claimed he did it because Mr Ungur had eaten his last ice cream bar which he was saving to watch with that night's episode of Eastenders and by eating the bar Mr Ungur had "completely ruined his plans."
The prosecutor told the court Floyd admitted hitting Mr Ungur “a fair few times” and going into his room “in the heat of the moment”.
The trial continues.
Hadley Floyd repeatedly lashed out at Viorel Ungur and “trashed” his bedroom at the property they shared in Canterbury, Kent.
Maidstone Crown Court heard the 21-year-old lost his temper when he returned home from a university lecture at about 2pm on November 23 last year and discovered his last ice cream bar had been eaten by Mr Ungur and he had left the empty packet on top of the kitchen worktop.
It is alleged the Romanian national was subjected to several beatings and told he would be killed.
Prosecutor Tayo Adebayo said a neighbour later told police she could hear a man shouting: “You ate my last ice cream. You are a dead man. I am going to kill you.”
Mr Adebayo also told the jury the attack came to a brief halt at one stage but only out of Floyd's “sheer exhaustion” from hitting the Canterbury Christ Church University student.
He suffered cuts and bruises to his neck, chest, back, ribs, arms and a hand.
Floyd, now of Paddock Gardens, East Grinstead, denies assaulting Mr Ungur causing actual bodily harm.
The jury was told he has admitted two offences of damaging property, namely furniture in Mr Ungur’s room and his phone.
The two men were living with a third student in St Peter’s Grove at the time. All three did not have lectures that day, but Floyd did and attended his lecturers as normal.
Mr Ungur told the court Floyd was “very angry” when he discovered the empty Magnum packet. He was also angry at the fact that Mr Ungur did not dispose of the empty packet but more so at fact that the actual ice cream had been eaten.
Floyd confronted Mr Ungur on the upstairs landing after the discovery.
Mr Ungur said Floyd was screaming continuously, swearing and telling him to ‘shut up’ and even called him an "ice cream thief".
With the assistance of an interpreter he told how violence flared after he dodged a punch from Floyd.
It is alleged he then went into Mr Ungur's room armed with a bat and struck out two or three times.
“I managed to take the club from him and immobilize him,” explained Mr Floyd. “I threw the club on the floor. He took it and went to his room. He was mad, he was shouting that he would kill me.”
Mr Ungur continued: “After going to his room he returned immediately. He pinned me on the bed and hit me in the rib area, the shoulder and the hand area.”
Mr Ungur said he managed to take hold of the club and tried to escape. “He was trying to bite my neck, while telling me: ‘I’ll kill you, I’ll kill you’, because he didn't have anything else to hit me with. I held the club.”
Floyd left the room again and Mr Ungur locked the door. Floyd then started to kick at the door, breaking a wooden panel at the bottom to open it.
Mr Ungur, as well as his other housemate, eventually fled the property and waited outside for police to arrive.
During that time Floyd was said to have “trashed” Mr Ungur's room.
“He destroyed the whole room with the club,” added Mr Ungur. “He was swearing and passing racist comments at all times.”
Officers described Floyd as breathing heavily when they arrived. “He appeared agitated and his knuckles were grazed and bleeding on his right hand,” said Mr Adebayo.
When arrested he claimed he did it because Mr Ungur had eaten his last ice cream bar which he was saving to watch with that night's episode of Eastenders and by eating the bar Mr Ungur had "completely ruined his plans."
The prosecutor told the court Floyd admitted hitting Mr Ungur “a fair few times” and going into his room “in the heat of the moment”.
The trial continues.
Monday, 9 September 2013
A man is probably going down for murder, and judge will probably convict!
A court in Sheffield will possibly be sending someone down for the best part of 20 years because they are not sure whether or not Steve Robson a man from Rotherham, South Yorkshire who admittedly looks a bit shifty, committed a fatal robbery that turned into a murder as the night progressed.
On the night of Friday 3rd May 2013, someone who was probably Robson entered the Spar on Broom Lane, Rotherham equipped with a large knife and demanded the cashier handed over money into a bag that Robson was carrying, with the dollar sign ($) on it.
When the cashier refused Robson stabbed the cashier who died a short time later when customers inside at the time alerted the emergency services.
Police were quoted as saying “He was probably there all right, this crime scene had all the hallmarks of one of his crimes, and the victim’s body really struck me as looking like a Robson attack to me, anyway, but what do I know? I’m not the judge and jury, I’m just the serving policeman here!”
Alastair McGamble the chief prosecutor said “I took one look at the scene, and I thought, perhaps this was the work of Robson, this case has all the evidence I need right now to suggest that maybe Robson was at the scene at the murder, and with that I thought perhaps we will get a conviction.”
Since the Hearsay Permitted Evidence Act of 2012, courts now only have to so much as suspect someone of wrongdoing before they get the chance to throw the book at them in both a legal and literal sense.
As the jury weren't too sure about the case but thought that on balance Robson probably did it anyway the judge saw fit to back them up by admitting that whilst he too wasn't any surer than they were on the balance of probability, he probably did it, he felt he had no choice but to recommend a full and most importantly very long custodial sentence of the highest order because there was, in his words “a strong reasonable doubt that he was innocent of this shocking crime, probably!”
Steve McBurrell Robson’s defense lawyer could only add “Have you lot not ever thought about the possibility that maybe he wasn't actually there all along, you don’t have any actual DNA for a start." However this ultimately failed to convince the jury or the judge otherwise.
The only evidence that was given in court was a receipt for a transaction carried out by Robson for the DVD purchase of the 2003 film Texas Chainsaw Massacre. When this evidence was given in court the jurors could be heard gasping and whispering "He's clearly guilty."
As a result Robson will probably face a very long time behind bars whilst he appeals to the High Court who might overturn his case if they feel like it and they think unlike the judge in Sheffield that he probably didn't do it actually!
The court was adjourned for sentencing until Friday 13th September 2013.
On the night of Friday 3rd May 2013, someone who was probably Robson entered the Spar on Broom Lane, Rotherham equipped with a large knife and demanded the cashier handed over money into a bag that Robson was carrying, with the dollar sign ($) on it.
When the cashier refused Robson stabbed the cashier who died a short time later when customers inside at the time alerted the emergency services.
Police were quoted as saying “He was probably there all right, this crime scene had all the hallmarks of one of his crimes, and the victim’s body really struck me as looking like a Robson attack to me, anyway, but what do I know? I’m not the judge and jury, I’m just the serving policeman here!”
Alastair McGamble the chief prosecutor said “I took one look at the scene, and I thought, perhaps this was the work of Robson, this case has all the evidence I need right now to suggest that maybe Robson was at the scene at the murder, and with that I thought perhaps we will get a conviction.”
Since the Hearsay Permitted Evidence Act of 2012, courts now only have to so much as suspect someone of wrongdoing before they get the chance to throw the book at them in both a legal and literal sense.
As the jury weren't too sure about the case but thought that on balance Robson probably did it anyway the judge saw fit to back them up by admitting that whilst he too wasn't any surer than they were on the balance of probability, he probably did it, he felt he had no choice but to recommend a full and most importantly very long custodial sentence of the highest order because there was, in his words “a strong reasonable doubt that he was innocent of this shocking crime, probably!”
Steve McBurrell Robson’s defense lawyer could only add “Have you lot not ever thought about the possibility that maybe he wasn't actually there all along, you don’t have any actual DNA for a start." However this ultimately failed to convince the jury or the judge otherwise.
The only evidence that was given in court was a receipt for a transaction carried out by Robson for the DVD purchase of the 2003 film Texas Chainsaw Massacre. When this evidence was given in court the jurors could be heard gasping and whispering "He's clearly guilty."
As a result Robson will probably face a very long time behind bars whilst he appeals to the High Court who might overturn his case if they feel like it and they think unlike the judge in Sheffield that he probably didn't do it actually!
The court was adjourned for sentencing until Friday 13th September 2013.
Friday, 6 September 2013
Incidents across Norfolk - August 2013
The following incidents have been reported across the county of Norfolk over August 2013 and have been serious enough to be featured on this news site:
Michael Tate, 52 of Norwich was unable to remove the cap off a bottle of Coca Cola which he had just purchased from the Spar on Drayton Road. He went back to the shop and requested either a refund or that they exchange it for another bottle with a looser cap. A refund was not administered and they refused to exchange the bottle. Mr Tate has said he will never purchase anything from Spar again.
Gardenia Attaway, 40 of Thetford was vacuuming her house using a Dyson vacuum cleaner when the machine malfunctioned and failed to suck up any more dirt. As a result half of her floor was dirt-free while the other half was dirt-plagued. Miss Attaway contacted Dyson Customer Services who refused to administer a refund because she did not possess the receipt for the purchase of the vacuum cleaner. Miss Attaway is compiling an official complaint to President Barack Obama regarding this issue.
Michael Tate, 52 of Norwich was unable to remove the cap off a bottle of Coca Cola which he had just purchased from the Spar on Drayton Road. He went back to the shop and requested either a refund or that they exchange it for another bottle with a looser cap. A refund was not administered and they refused to exchange the bottle. Mr Tate has said he will never purchase anything from Spar again.
Christopher Paget, 32 of Great Yarmouth clogged the toilet in his house and required a plumber. He arranged for a local plumber from Great Yarmouth to attend on Friday 13th August at 9:00am. The plumber failed to arrive on time and attended at 9:01am. Mr Paget was so disgusted with the tardiness demonstrated by the plumber that he gave him a 2 star rating on Yell.com as well as complaining to the Daily Mail and the Great Yarmouth Mercury local newspaper.
Benny Eaton, 24 of King's Lynn is extremely angry at his neighbour, Spencer Thurstan after Thurstan lit a barbecue in his garden which caused smoke to blow over into Mr Eaton's garden ruining his laundry, which was drying on the washing line at the time. As a result Mr Eaton had to wash his laundry a second time and this caused him inconvenience as well as wasting more of his Daz washing powder. Mr Eaton is planning revenge by hiring a private detective to spy on his neighbour to find out his personal secrets and then Mr Eaton is planning to get one of his friends who is a DJ on local radio station KLFM to read them out on air. He is hoping this will run his neighbour out of Kings Lynn and out of Norfolk.
Tania MacCrumb, 31 of Cromer was unable to put together an office desk because the instructions were too complicated. She contacted the manufacturer for help but they requested that Ms MacCrumb pay an additional £50 surcharge for assistance. She refused to pay and requested a full refund but the manufacturer refused to administer one. As a result Ms MacCrumb disposed of the furniture by throwing it off Cromer pier but has been charged with littering by Norfolk Police. She is due to appear before Norwich Magistrates Court in two weeks.
Lola Griffin, 39 of Downham Market is irate with Morrisons in Downham Market after she purchased a packet of 12 sausage rolls but the packet only contained 11 and a half. Miss Griffin demanded a full refund on the product but because she could not produce proof that the packet only contained 11½ sausage rolls the refund was refused by Morrisons. Miss Griffin is planning to write a strongly worded letter to Morrisons head office in Bradford, West Yorkshire which may include words in red, bold and in upper case, as well as possible making use of the Angryblue font. She will also be writing to the Eastern Daily Press (EDP24) and raising her concerns about Morrisons' very poor customer service.
Southampton man's socks get wet while retrieving newspaper
The pleasure of wearing dry socks is a liberty that most of us across the world can enjoy and take full advantage of. However for one man in Southampton he found that he was not able to bask in the glory of wearing dry socks as his feet accidentally came into contact with liquid while he was wearing them.
Richard Fisher, 26 of Sandhurst Road, Southampton woke up one overcast Friday morning deciding he needed a fix of the local news before starting the day. As a result he decided he would exit the safety of his dry, warm house to retrieve his copy of the Daily Echo newspaper which had been left outside his house on the doorstep by the delivery boy, rather than putting it through his letterbox for unknown reasons.
Mr Fisher opened his front door and without looking stepped outside and ended up standing directly into a small puddle which had been left there by the rain storm from the previous night. The victim was so shocked by his failings to acknowledge the wet ground prior to stepping on it that he quickly grabbed his newspaper and ran back inside.
Unfortunately this act caused further inconvenience to Mr Fisher because he has carpeted floors and upon contact with his wet socks the result was a visible dark stain being left in the centre of the carpet. After the unfortunate events had took place Mr Fisher required a trip to the local supermarket, which is the Sainsbury's Local on Bedford Place, Southampton, just 0.3 miles away from his home.
This shopping trip was unplanned but required for two reasons - he needed a bottle of bleach to wash the soiled socks and a bottle of carpet shampoo to extract the stains that had been imprinted earlier in the day.
Richard Fisher issued a statement to us which said: "I had woken up and went to get my morning newspaper without realizing it had been raining the previous night. I stepped out onto the wet pavement and ended up bringing it back into my house.
"This caused me great inconvenience as I needed to go down to Sainsbury's Local to get bleach and carpet cleaner, then I had to wash my socks and the carpet. Because I was so occupied with these tasks I ended up missing Jeremy Kyle, which is even more disastrous because it's Friday, meaning I won't get to watch it again for three days."
However, Mr Fisher believes it is the fault of local media why this happened.
"It's just ridiculous, I am an average man and I do not deserve this! I blame local radio stations BBC Radio Solent and Wave 105 for not broadcasting a warning about Southampton's wet pavements. It is because of them why innocent residents all across the south coast are waking up, stepping out and getting their feet wet simply because they do not know it rained the previous night."
Richard believes his Friday as well as his life has been ruined.
"Every time I look at my carpet it reminds me of that nightmare Friday. There is still an imprint on the section of the floor from when I cleaned the stain. It is much lighter than the rest of the floor, and for that reason I am going to have to purchase a brand new carpet even before I can start to move on from this."
Richard Fisher, 26 of Sandhurst Road, Southampton woke up one overcast Friday morning deciding he needed a fix of the local news before starting the day. As a result he decided he would exit the safety of his dry, warm house to retrieve his copy of the Daily Echo newspaper which had been left outside his house on the doorstep by the delivery boy, rather than putting it through his letterbox for unknown reasons.
Mr Fisher opened his front door and without looking stepped outside and ended up standing directly into a small puddle which had been left there by the rain storm from the previous night. The victim was so shocked by his failings to acknowledge the wet ground prior to stepping on it that he quickly grabbed his newspaper and ran back inside.
Unfortunately this act caused further inconvenience to Mr Fisher because he has carpeted floors and upon contact with his wet socks the result was a visible dark stain being left in the centre of the carpet. After the unfortunate events had took place Mr Fisher required a trip to the local supermarket, which is the Sainsbury's Local on Bedford Place, Southampton, just 0.3 miles away from his home.
This shopping trip was unplanned but required for two reasons - he needed a bottle of bleach to wash the soiled socks and a bottle of carpet shampoo to extract the stains that had been imprinted earlier in the day.
Richard Fisher issued a statement to us which said: "I had woken up and went to get my morning newspaper without realizing it had been raining the previous night. I stepped out onto the wet pavement and ended up bringing it back into my house.
"This caused me great inconvenience as I needed to go down to Sainsbury's Local to get bleach and carpet cleaner, then I had to wash my socks and the carpet. Because I was so occupied with these tasks I ended up missing Jeremy Kyle, which is even more disastrous because it's Friday, meaning I won't get to watch it again for three days."
However, Mr Fisher believes it is the fault of local media why this happened.
"It's just ridiculous, I am an average man and I do not deserve this! I blame local radio stations BBC Radio Solent and Wave 105 for not broadcasting a warning about Southampton's wet pavements. It is because of them why innocent residents all across the south coast are waking up, stepping out and getting their feet wet simply because they do not know it rained the previous night."
Richard believes his Friday as well as his life has been ruined.
"Every time I look at my carpet it reminds me of that nightmare Friday. There is still an imprint on the section of the floor from when I cleaned the stain. It is much lighter than the rest of the floor, and for that reason I am going to have to purchase a brand new carpet even before I can start to move on from this."
Wednesday, 4 September 2013
Ipswich family fined after child constructs sandcastle in France without planning permission
The Smith family from Ipswich, Suffolk have been fined 10,000 euros while on holiday in Frejus, in the Var department, south east France, after their 2 year old son illegally constructed a sandcastle on the beach.
David Smith was fined 10,000 euros by the French civil service after his 2 year old son, Daniel constructed a sandcastle on the beach in Frejus, without applying for planning permission prior to the castle being built.
On 11th July 2013, when the castle was built, 2 year old Daniel was approached by French police who asked to see his application and planning permits for the castle. When they could not be produced the police proceeded to destroy the castle and fine the father, David, 10,000 euros for illegal placement of an unplanned structure.
David Smith was fined 10,000 euros by the French civil service after his 2 year old son, Daniel constructed a sandcastle on the beach in Frejus, without applying for planning permission prior to the castle being built.
On 11th July 2013, when the castle was built, 2 year old Daniel was approached by French police who asked to see his application and planning permits for the castle. When they could not be produced the police proceeded to destroy the castle and fine the father, David, 10,000 euros for illegal placement of an unplanned structure.
It is reported that the illegal structure had been constructed using a bucket and spade which were confiscated by police.
David Smith said "I was laying on the beach with my wife while our son was building a sandcastle, about two minutes after he completed it the police came over and asked to see proof that we had permission to construct the castle in that location.
David Smith said "I was laying on the beach with my wife while our son was building a sandcastle, about two minutes after he completed it the police came over and asked to see proof that we had permission to construct the castle in that location.
"We had no idea that we needed planning permission for such a thing and when we failed to produce the required documents the police started destroying the sandcastle using their batons. I was very angry because it upset my son who burst into tears immediately.
"I was angered even further when they fined me €10,000 and confiscated the bucket and spade, which cost me €3.50."
Anybody who wishes to construct a sandcastle on any French beach must apply for planning permission. Application documents can be downloaded from www.service-public.fr. For sandcastles the developer must apply for the "Category H - Temporary Beach Structure" permit and submit it to the Department Management. Application fees of €500 must also be paid.
The Department Management of the Land and Sea in the Var remarked that sandcastles across the department that have not been given the all clear will continue to be located and destroyed with more fines being handed out to the developer or parent/guardian of the developer.
Anybody who wishes to construct a sandcastle on any French beach must apply for planning permission. Application documents can be downloaded from www.service-public.fr. For sandcastles the developer must apply for the "Category H - Temporary Beach Structure" permit and submit it to the Department Management. Application fees of €500 must also be paid.
The Department Management of the Land and Sea in the Var remarked that sandcastles across the department that have not been given the all clear will continue to be located and destroyed with more fines being handed out to the developer or parent/guardian of the developer.
Leave baggage woes at the train station
Instead of carrying your belongings around Monaco, traipsing from the Palais Princier to the Place du Casino, why not just leave them in the unsecure care of the Principality? Monaco’s train station is opening a left luggage service, making it much easier to tour the Principality and tackle its many stairs whilst still worrying about who might be trying to break into and even steal your suitcases and heavy bags.
From Friday 9th August until Saturday 26th October, tourists will be able to drop their bags and luggage at Monaco’s central train station for 6 euros a day. The bags will then be "looked after" by train station staff, most of whom are ex criminals who have had run ins with the law, mainly for theft.
Open everyday from 10am until 6.30 pm, the new service is set to improve the comfort of the many tourists flocking to the Principality during the summer season, however there is no guarantee that their suitcase or its contents will still be there when the owner comes to collect them.
To ensure minimum security the bags will be stored in cheap lockers that do not actually lock. This will ensure ex-con train station staff and members of the public can freely open these lockers and help themselves to whatever is in there.
Also, as bags are left in an unattended and generally unsecure area, there is always the possibility that the over zealous security staff will mistake your property for a bomb, particularly if there is a heavy or hard object shape within the bag.
Should this happen bomb experts from the nearby cities of Nice and Genova will be called in to carry out a controlled explosion on that bag. The train station have said that they do not plan to provide any form of compensation in the event that this occurs, because it would be both expensive and annoying for them to administer. As a result the bag's owner will be charged 200 euros for the explosion to be carried out.
Officials have called the drop off service an "experiment", but it is hoped that if it proves successful, the operation will be rolled out year round.
From Friday 9th August until Saturday 26th October, tourists will be able to drop their bags and luggage at Monaco’s central train station for 6 euros a day. The bags will then be "looked after" by train station staff, most of whom are ex criminals who have had run ins with the law, mainly for theft.
Open everyday from 10am until 6.30 pm, the new service is set to improve the comfort of the many tourists flocking to the Principality during the summer season, however there is no guarantee that their suitcase or its contents will still be there when the owner comes to collect them.
To ensure minimum security the bags will be stored in cheap lockers that do not actually lock. This will ensure ex-con train station staff and members of the public can freely open these lockers and help themselves to whatever is in there.
Also, as bags are left in an unattended and generally unsecure area, there is always the possibility that the over zealous security staff will mistake your property for a bomb, particularly if there is a heavy or hard object shape within the bag.
Should this happen bomb experts from the nearby cities of Nice and Genova will be called in to carry out a controlled explosion on that bag. The train station have said that they do not plan to provide any form of compensation in the event that this occurs, because it would be both expensive and annoying for them to administer. As a result the bag's owner will be charged 200 euros for the explosion to be carried out.
Officials have called the drop off service an "experiment", but it is hoped that if it proves successful, the operation will be rolled out year round.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)