Court date for church bells dispute (From Watford Observer)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting WO to 80360, or email us
Magistrates to hear arguments for bells at All Saints Church, Croxley Green
4:04pm Friday 28th December 2012 in News
Arguments for and against reinstating historic bells at All Saints Church in Croxley Green will be heard by magistrates early next year.
Hourly chimes have not rung out across the village since September 26 when the church in The Green was served with a noise abatement notice by Three Rivers District Council.
The silencing of the church bells prompted widespread anger across the community as it emerged the action had been taken in response to a single complaint from a resident.
The notice only requires the bells not to sound during night time hours but the historic mechanism is such that it cannot be set hourly so has had to be switched off completely.
Reverend Miriam Mugan thanked residents for their ongoing support which has included dozens of letters of support to the church.
The hearing at Watford Magistrates’ Court has been scheduled for 10am on Tuesday February 26.
Comments(17)
gusgreen
says...
10:10pm Fri 28 Dec 12
Croxley Comet
says...
7:13am Sat 29 Dec 12
Wacko Jacko
says...
10:57am Sat 29 Dec 12
Nascot
says...
3:10pm Sat 29 Dec 12
Razor Sharp
says...
3:15pm Sat 29 Dec 12
LSC
says...
5:52pm Sat 29 Dec 12
Razor Sharp wrote:Anyone could make that argument about anything though. What's wrong with rap music? You'd get used to it if I lived next door and blasted it out at all hours...
Crazy. What's wrong with bells? One gets used to them and they can be quite pleasant. The whole affair is a waste of public funds. It's the first I have heard of a single complaint triggering such a response from a District Council. I wonder who took the delegated decision and I wonder whether they will regret it.
I think the Council were quite right to investigate, but came to the wrong conclusion, and I hope the bell will be restored soon or a compromise reached.
It really wouldn't cost a lot to employ a sound damping system at night for instance, but the resident complaining should pay for it.
Razor Sharp
says...
5:59pm Sat 29 Dec 12
LSC wrote:Rather an extreme example, but I guess there might be some nexus if one recalls De La Soul's song 'ring, ring, ring'.
Razor Sharp wrote:Anyone could make that argument about anything though. What's wrong with rap music? You'd get used to it if I lived next door and blasted it out at all hours...
Crazy. What's wrong with bells? One gets used to them and they can be quite pleasant. The whole affair is a waste of public funds. It's the first I have heard of a single complaint triggering such a response from a District Council. I wonder who took the delegated decision and I wonder whether they will regret it.
I think the Council were quite right to investigate, but came to the wrong conclusion, and I hope the bell will be restored soon or a compromise reached.
It really wouldn't cost a lot to employ a sound damping system at night for instance, but the resident complaining should pay for it.
LSC
says...
6:31pm Sat 29 Dec 12
Razor Sharp
says...
6:53pm Sat 29 Dec 12
De La Soul were good as well.
Aussie Hornet
says...
12:49am Mon 31 Dec 12
LSC wrote:Yes, they're called ear plugs!
Razor Sharp wrote:Anyone could make that argument about anything though. What's wrong with rap music? You'd get used to it if I lived next door and blasted it out at all hours...
Crazy. What's wrong with bells? One gets used to them and they can be quite pleasant. The whole affair is a waste of public funds. It's the first I have heard of a single complaint triggering such a response from a District Council. I wonder who took the delegated decision and I wonder whether they will regret it.
I think the Council were quite right to investigate, but came to the wrong conclusion, and I hope the bell will be restored soon or a compromise reached.
It really wouldn't cost a lot to employ a sound damping system at night for instance, but the resident complaining should pay for it.
garston tony
says...
7:50am Mon 31 Dec 12
LSC wrote:Common sense in this situation does say that the complaint shouldnt stand and all this is a waste of time and money.
He he, perhaps it was, but you get the point I was making. The Council have a duty to investigate complaints; we'd all be up in arms quick enough on here if they didn't.
However you have a point LSC, the law is there to protect all and due process has to be followed in all cases otherwise the consequences would be even greater travesties
Razor Sharp
says...
11:46am Mon 31 Dec 12
http://www.watford.g
ov.uk/ccm/navigation
/community-and-livin
g/pollution/pollutio
n-control---noise/
Razor Sharp
says...
11:51am Mon 31 Dec 12
Roy Stockdill
says...
8:47pm Mon 31 Dec 12
As most people here know, I am a non-believer. However, the ringing of church bells has been a quintessential part of the British scene for centuries and anyone who doesn't like them should have thought twice before buying a house in the vicinity of a church.
garston tony
says...
10:10am Wed 2 Jan 13
Roy Stockdill wrote:No Roy, the principle remains the same. If you decide to move near a Mosque where there is a call to prayer then you cant then complain about it. Its no different to moving next to Heathrow and then complaining about noise from aircraft.
I wonder if this had been a complaint about a Muslim Mosque calling the faithful to prayer a dozen times a day and wailing "Praise be to Allah" and all that crap there would have been any response from the council? I suspect not because we all know that in this lunatic politically correct world of Britain today local councils are running scared of offending the Muslims. As most people here know, I am a non-believer. However, the ringing of church bells has been a quintessential part of the British scene for centuries and anyone who doesn't like them should have thought twice before buying a house in the vicinity of a church.
Another story with the same principle appeared last year, some new houses were built near a river or pond and the residents then complained about ducks and other birds that lived there loosening their bowels in the area and they actually asked for the birds to be shot to stop the problem!
The principle is if you move to an area where something that might disturb you already exists then that’s your problem, it was your choice to put yourself within its reach.
MarsLander
says...
1:19pm Wed 2 Jan 13
As someone said before, where is the common sense? Clearly the council officer never acted proportionately and by his actions has caused a lot of discontent not to mention the hassle and costs involved in all this going to court.
A quiet word "Sorry mate, but unless you've been there longer than the church bells have been ringing you haven't got a leg to stand on" would have done the trick and put the madman in his place.
If you don't like church bells, live somewhere where there are none. Don't spoil it for everyone else.
The complainant should withdraw their complaint and this could all be dealt with sensibly and quickly.
drunkenduck says...
5:57pm Fri 28 Dec 12