Deep hole that's about 2 meters deep and they don't know what's down there?

Um, maybe shine a flashlight/torch down there?

Why are they calling anyone, if they have a hole in their lawn, fix it.

I was thinking the same thing. But then I remembered that they have different property rules there. Maybe they are technically/legally leasing it from the Queen? Maybe it's the local council's problem if the residents don't actually own the land the way we own land here?

I have a very poor understanding of UK real estate laws. I just know they are bizarre.

The general consensus of opinion is that the hole is an access chamber to a sewer which serves all the houses along the road.
It seems that the steel, or possibly iron, cover was turfed over many years ago and has finally rusted through.
The square indentation in the surface is a bit of a giveaway.
When Sundae brought this to my attention, I thought that my dungeon, nuclear fallout shelter and all purpose man cave had been discovered.
One can rest easy in one's bed tonight. ;)

Ah yes, I forgot about that socialist set up. In that case, if someone falls into that hole, I wonder who gets sued?

Either the local authority or the water company with responsibility for sewerage in that area I'd have thought.

Most houses in England and Wales are owned 'freehold'.
The owner owns the structure and the plot on which it sits lock, stock and barrel.
In the property deeds there will be details of utilities which cross the land and who is responsible for them.
Sometimes, a specific public utility will be shown to have access for necessary work to be carried out.*
In this instance, although I cannot be certain, I think that the property owner will be responsible for maintenance and repairs.


*ETA We have a pole on the boundary with our neighbour which carries power and telephone cables.
Occasionally, when work is required, one of the crew knocks on the door and asks if it is OK to do so.
It's all done on an informal basis and it's very unlikely that someone will march to your door waving a High Court order.

Big V, thanks for posting that Seattle Fire audio. It took me back to when I was into scanning/ham/shortwave.

I still say it ain't safe there. GTFO, man!!

Same here, in that you own the property and buildings on it, but there are utility right of ways on the deed which entitle them to use the land (usually over or under) for their systems. My deed even has a gas pipeline like this one, a half mile away because when it was laid one guy owned the whole road. When the properties were broken off, everything on the original deed is copied onto each deed although it doesn't pertain to that property.
This past summer the township sewer authority* took a 50 foot swath by eminent domain, the whole length of my property to cut all the trees and bury a 3 ft diameter sewer line through my backyard.

* We have the authority to do anything we want, and there's not a fucking thing you can do about it.
If you doubt it see SCOTUS ruling Kelo v. the city of New London.

I knew some of the people involved in the development plans, it was all to make the place pretty and nice for pfizer because with the anticipated influx of well payed employees and no place to live nearby that was suitable to them, knockng down the shitty ghetto and building an upscale yuppie ghetto seemed like a good plan. It was semi-successful in that New London was elevated a bit and got some more culture, and the town was in a downward spiral before so the improvements ended up 'revitalizing' the town.

The other aspect about the case before it went to trial was that the guy who was holding out refused their initial offer of far more than the property was worth because he was the last hold out and he thought he could squeeze even more out of the development corp. His motives were greed, OK, but he made a gamble and then lost. He went on to fight it and played the "My poor old home means so much to me..." card to gain sympathy for his cause.

In a real way, if you want to lay the blame for the effects of the SCOTUS ruling on eminent domain, it could go directly on the shoulders of the guy who was a holdout. Had he not made such a fuss it wouldn't have gone to the supreme court and perhaps (for better or worse) pfizer may not have chosen to leave. I'd be willing to bet the bad press, bad blood, and general hassle contributed to their decision to "fuck this place, they are pains in the ass." Had pfizer stayed in the town its residents undoubtedly would have savored the crumbs that fell from the mouth of the company's $48 billion annual revenue (at the time)

Frankkly the guy was being a greedy douche ad only thinking of himself. The development corporation actually did have the improvement of the town in mind. As I said, I know people involved and neighborhood and town rejuvenation is a consistent theme.

I think it is possible to be a good business person and have consideration for other people. Unless you have an MBA.

To whom? Who the fuck are they to tell him what anything is worth to him. Does every fucking thing is the world come down to dollars and cents? Then if I run over your kids we just get an appraisal from an actuary, and I pay you?
Oh, is that what he said? I didn't read that quote.
Objection, your honor, conjecture.
Here we go, blame the victim. Did he dress slutty in court?
SCOTUS of all people should be able to see the long range effect of this ruling. They had to know full well they were killing the sanctity of private property. So if some deep pockets comes along, the powers can take your property, pay you what they decide it's worth, and give it to deep pockets on the promise it will return to them more tax revenue than you would. That ain't right! :meanface:

SCOTUS are full of shit and they ruled incorrectly in my opinion. Just like politicians (from which they are descended) they are full of shit. The legal system from the top to the bottom is based on people doing the wrong things in the name of the letter of the law and interpreting the law to suit someone's agenda, not to mete out justice. Anyone who labors under the fantasy that petitioning the court with their problem is likely to result in a positive outcome for them, deserves what they get. Especially if they don't have the $ to pay off the people in charge. (conjecture)

I disagree with the court's ruling in every way AND I think the guy was a fuckstick. Even if he did manage to keep his property who is to say anyone would buy it? And if the development went on all around him and taxes were raised, he'd be forced out by not being able to pay his taxes.

But he can go down in history as being the guy who went to court not over the principle of the matter but because he wanted more money than he was offered. And now we have that totally fucked up ruling.

HE DIDN"T WANT TO SELL IT. That was the whole cause of this fiasco. He didn't want to sell, and he doesn't have to give, or even have, a reason. So after the fucked him and took his home, what did they do with it? Did they reap tons of tax money? No.
A whole bunch of people were driven out of their homes for nothing, but fuck them they're only little people. This is how it works.

The(w)hole mystery is solved.

Mix 96.

Not much happens around here. ;)

He did want to sell it, he just wanted more money than they were offering. He didn't want to sell it at that price, he was holding out for more.

And yes, that is how it works.

Just so you know, I think the whole thing was a colossal abortion and ended badly.