Disgusting disregard of our heritage.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, these are not the points I’m arguing. Yes, clearly the law has been broken and that should carry consequences.

My point is that this obsession we have to list buildings has gone too far and the law needs to change. There will be those buildings we wish to preserve, of course, but if nobody wants to buy it and preserve it, it should be bought by the government.

Total red herring here, OB. You wished them luck ffs.

If you want to go away and campaign for the destruction of anything meaningful and our national heritage knock yourself out. If the pub/land in the current legal framework had no value it should have been sold on that basis - not to someone to burn it down.

If you follow such a flawed logic one could reasonably say the asylum system is failing so “good luck” to make those who wish to make the crossing on small boats.

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by nodrogd

And no doubt the same comment could be made of leaning tower of Pisa. Both buildings have undergone some "stabilization". The pub had huge internal steel beams, some of which were clearly visible after the fire. I visited the place back in 2010 & was very impressed with how they were maintaining it.

Working closely with someone who is in building control I know councils take safety very seriously.

[jfman]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ngham-66514759

I can only assume when OB nods to the entrepreneurial spirit of this couple that’s a euphemism for the accelerant they use.

Originally Posted by jfman

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ngham-66514759

I can only assume when OB nods to the entrepreneurial spirit of this couple that’s a euphemism for the accelerant they use.

They really have had bad luck with things they own burning to ashes in catastrophic fires, haven’t they.

Crooked House: Arson arrests in wonky pub fire probe

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ngham-66608279

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ngham-66514759

I can only assume when OB nods to the entrepreneurial spirit of this couple that’s a euphemism for the accelerant they use.

While I disagree with the restrictive planning laws on so many buildings ‘of interest’, because I believe it’s your own business if you want to pull an old building down on your own land, I accept that legal action must be taken to enforce the law as it stands.

Obviously, there will be some buildings that the government might want to preserve, but I think far too many are being added to the list.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

While I disagree with the restrictive planning laws on so many buildings ‘of interest’, because I believe it’s your own business if you want to pull an old building down on your own land, I accept that legal action must be taken to enforce the law as it stands.

Obviously, there will be some buildings that the government might want to preserve, but I think far too many are being added to the list.

The law of the land is the law of the land, whether you agree with it or not.

It’s not for the Government to have to purchase perfectly acceptable historic buildings to save them from criminal vultures.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

The law of the land is the law of the land, whether you agree with it or not.

I don’t disagree. I said as much.

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s not for the Government to have to purchase perfectly acceptable historic buildings to save them from criminal vultures.

If they want to list them, they should buy them if the owner disagrees.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I don’t disagree. I said as much.

If they want to list them, they should buy them if the owner disagrees.

And if they’re already listed, presumably buyers shouldn’t purchase them to burn them down.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

And if they’re already listed, presumably buyers shouldn’t purchase them to burn them down.

I would just gently point out that the pub wasn’t listed.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I would just gently point out that the pub wasn’t listed.

Not listed but listing.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I would just gently point out that the pub wasn’t listed.

You are the one banging on about the Government having to buy listed buildings.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

My point is that this obsession we have to list buildings has gone too far and the law needs to change.

The building wasnt listed, so you have no point thats relevant to this topic.

[OLD BOY]

The OP mentioned listing in his first post, and it has been raised on several occasions on here by various posters. I was addressing those points.

Yes, it wasn’t listed, but there were moves to do so prior to the fire.

[jfman]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-68414524

A welcome development - they’ve been ordered to rebuild it.

Hopefully some kind of deterrent for future arsonist property developers.