Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
I appreciate the concern over my eyesight but I can read and have read the documents. It is clear that the landowner has not maintained his roadway for a number of years, resulting in the current state of disrepair. Asking the tax payer to pay for repairs to his (private) road seems inappropriate given the source of the funds and his wealth.
I mean when the Mail is against it and even the Mail Readers comments are, then your know the Tories are in trouble here - best rated comment on that page linked earlier:
Let's face it, Daily Mail readers normally to the right of Atilla The Hun
|
I wonder whether you have really read it, as you’re still missing a salient point: it isn’t his. It belongs to the estate company, which is a fairly common state of affairs after the inheritance tax changes of the 20th century.
So yes, it’s still a private road and yes, if it’s that badly potholed then its owner may have been culpable (but see my comments earlier - liability for maintenance is not necessarily with the landowner. The leaseholder (the museum in this case) may have some responsibility).
Ultimately you may not feel any different about it but I think if we’re going to have an opinion on something it’s as well to try to ensure it’s an informed one.