Connect with us

Australia

Owner of house that collapsed ordered to pay £55,000

Ponke Miah's home in Rawtenstall, Lancashire, collapsed into a stream running beneath it in Aug..

Published

on

  • Ponke Miah's home in Rawtenstall, Lancashire, collapsed into a stream running beneath it in August this year
  • He has been told he must fork out £55,000 in repair works or Rossendale Council will demolish his property
  • Council officials say they cannot comment on whether or not they are liable for the damage

By Katie French For Mailonline

Published: 03:43 EST, 7 December 2017 | Updated: 06:27 EST, 7 December 2017

The owner of a house that collapsed into a stream running beneath it has been ordered to pay £55,000 for repairs or the council will demolish it.

From the outside, it looks like an typical end-terrace house, but the ground floor partially collapsed into the subterranean tunnel in August.

Rossendale Council say that the damage is the responsibility of the owner of 37 Burnley Road in Rawtenstall, Lancashire, but as no work has been done to make the house safe they have been granted an order by magistrates to demolish the house.

From the outside, it looks like an typical end-terrace house, but the ground floor partially collapsed into the subterranean tunnel in August

From the outside, it looks like an typical end-terrace house, but the ground floor partially collapsed into the subterranean tunnel in August

They advised residents of three neighbouring houses to evacuate, as the damage represented a 'danger to the public'They advised residents of three neighbouring houses to evacuate, as the damage represented a 'danger to the public'

They advised residents of three neighbouring houses to evacuate, as the damage represented a 'danger to the public'

Rossendale council say they were informed of the original collapse in April 2016 and had asked Mr Miah to make the property safe so that the culvert could be accessed for repairRossendale council say they were informed of the original collapse in April 2016 and had asked Mr Miah to make the property safe so that the culvert could be accessed for repair

Rossendale council say they were informed of the original collapse in April 2016 and had asked Mr Miah to make the property safe so that the culvert could be accessed for repair

They advised residents of three neighbouring houses to evacuate, as the damage represented a 'danger to the public'.

But owner Ponke Miah, who lives elsewhere in Rossendale, says the repairs are estimated to cost upwards of £55,000, which he cannot afford.

He argues that as the culvert extends beneath the adjacent footpath, Lancashire County Council (LCC) share responsibility for fixing the damage.

He said: 'The culvert, I can't repair it on my own, I need LCC to step in.

'The council have taken an estimate of £55,000, plus VAT.

'It's not possible to raise that money for repairs on my own because the cost is enormous. It's very stressful.

'I am the biggest loser here. I am losing a house which is worth £100,000. Yes it is a danger – but something can be done about this.'

County hall say upon inspection of the culvert, their bridges team found the damage was not affecting the bridge which supports the footpath, known as Lark Hill LaneCounty hall say upon inspection of the culvert, their bridges team found the damage was not affecting the bridge which supports the footpath, known as Lark Hill Lane

County hall say upon inspection of the culvert, their bridges team found the damage was not affecting the bridge which supports the footpath, known as Lark Hill Lane

Rossendale Council say that the damage is the responsibility of the owner of 37 Burnley Road in Rawtenstall, LancashireRossendale Council say that the damage is the responsibility of the owner of 37 Burnley Road in Rawtenstall, Lancashire

Rossendale Council say that the damage is the responsibility of the owner of 37 Burnley Road in Rawtenstall, Lancashire

Ponke Miah, who lives elsewhere in Rossendale, says the repairs are estimated to cost upwards of £55,000, which he cannot affordPonke Miah, who lives elsewhere in Rossendale, says the repairs are estimated to cost upwards of £55,000, which he cannot afford

Ponke Miah, who lives elsewhere in Rossendale, says the repairs are estimated to cost upwards of £55,000, which he cannot afford

Following further collapse in March this year, the council has given Mr Miah until December 1 to comply with a court order or the building will be demolishedFollowing further collapse in March this year, the council has given Mr Miah until December 1 to comply with a court order or the building will be demolished

Following further collapse in March this year, the council has given Mr Miah until December 1 to comply with a court order or the building will be demolished

County hall say upon inspection of the culvert, their bridges team found the damage was not affecting the bridge which supports the footpath, known as Lark Hill Lane.

A spokesman said: 'This confirmed that the collapse was not affecting the bridge, apart from the collapsed masonry causing a weir effect, causing a deepening of the stream bed.

'Once the privately-owned section of the culvert has been repaired we will be able to make repairs to the stream bed within the limits of the adopted structure to ensure it does not erode any further.'

Rossendale council say they were informed of the original collapse in April 2016 and had asked Mr Miah to make the property safe so that the culvert could be accessed for repair.

Following further collapse in March this year and no work being carried out, they have given Mr Miah until December 1 to comply with a court order granted at Burnley Magistrates Court in October, otherwise the building will be demolished as the most 'cost effective way forward'.

In a statement, Rossendale Council said: 'In April 2016 the local authority were informed of a collapsed culvert along Burnley Road which had compromised the stability of 37 Burnley Road.

'Officers of the council visited the site along with our appointed consultants where it was agreed that the property represented a danger to the public due to the proximity to the highway and the neighbouring properties.

'The residents of 37, 39, 41 and 43 Burnley Road were advised to vacate their properties from a safety perspective.

'It is clear that the culvert needs to be repaired, however 37 Burnley Road first needs to be made safe to enable the culvert to be accessed to repair.

'Over the next year the council contacted the owner of 37 Burnley Road, Mr Ponke Miah, on several occasions requesting that he make the building safe.

'On 29th March 2017 the Environment Agency advised that the culvert had suffered further collapse.

'Mr Miah was then advised that the council would be applying to the Magistrates Court under Section 77 of the Building Act to require him to either make the property safe or demolish the property given that a significant time period had lapsed without any work being undertaken to make the property safe.

'On 6th October 2017 Burnley Magistrates Court issued an Order pursuant to Section 77 which requires the owner to execute such work as may be necessary to obviate the danger or demolish the dangerous part of the building.

'Mr Miah has until December 1, 2017 to comply with the Order. If this does not occur the local authority may execute the order in such manner as they see fit.

'If the Local Authority step in then the property will be demolished as this is a more cost effective way forward compared to making the property safe.

'Lark Hill Lane, which runs adjacent to the property, is an adopted highway and Mr Miah mentioned to the judge that he considered that LCC were partly responsible in respect of repairing the culvert.

'Rossendale Borough Council cannot comment on whether LCC are liable for any repairs in respect of the culvert however the Order issued relates to making the property safe not the culvert.

'Either making the property safe/ demolishing the property would allow access to the culvert to allow the necessary repairs to be carried out.

'The Order was issued as the property is unsafe and the Local Authority are keen to ensure that this situation is rectified as a matter of urgency.'

Original Article

Continue Reading

Australia

Why Australia decided to quit its vaping habit

Published

on

He’s talking about students in his class, teenagers, who can’t stop vaping.

He sees the effect of the candy-flavoured, nicotine-packed e-cigarettes on young minds every day, with children even vaping in class.

“The ones who are deepest into it will just get up out of their seat, or they’ll be fidgeting or nervous. The worst offenders will just walk out because they’re literally in withdrawal.”

Those who are most addicted need nicotine patches or rehabilitation, he says, talking about 13 and 14-year-olds.

is enough and introduced a range of new restrictions. Despite vapes already being illegal for many, under new legislation they will become available by prescription only.

The number of vaping teenagers in Australia has soared in recent years and authorities say it is the “number one behavioural issue” in schools across the country.

And they blame disposable vapes – which some experts say could be more addictive than heroin and cocaine – but for now are available in Australia in every convenience store, next to the chocolate bars at the counter.

For concerned teachers like Chris, their hands have been tied.

“If we suspect they have a vape, all we can really do is tell them to go to the principal’s office.

“At my old school, my head teacher told me he wanted to install vape detector alarms in the toilet, but apparently we weren’t allowed to because that would be an invasion of privacy.”

E-cigarettes have been sold as a safer alternative to tobacco, as they do not produce tar – the primary cause of lung cancer.

Some countries continue to promote them with public health initiatives to help cigarette smokers switch to a less deadly habit.

Last month, the UK government announced plans to hand out free vaping starter kits to one million smokers in England to get smoking rates below 5% by 2030.

But Australia’s government says that evidence that e-cigarettes help smokers quit is insufficient for now. Instead, research shows it may push young vapers into taking up smoking later in life.

‘Generation Vape’

Vapes, or e-cigarettes, are lithium battery-powered devices that have cartridges filled with liquids containing nicotine, artificial flavourings, and other chemicals.

The liquid is heated and turned into a vapour and inhaled into the user’s lungs.

Vaping took off from the mid-2000s and there were some 81 million vapers worldwide in 2021, according to the Global State of Tobacco Harm Reduction group.

Fuelling the rise is the mushrooming popularity of flavoured vapes designed to appeal to the young.

These products can contain far higher volumes of nicotine than regular cigarettes, while some devices sold as ‘nicotine-free’ can actually hold large amounts.

The chemical cocktail also contains formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde – which have been linked to lung disease, heart disease, and cancer.

There’s also a suggestion of an increased risk of stroke, respiratory infection, and impaired lung function.

Experts warn not enough is known about the long-term health effects. But some alarming data has already been drawn out.

In 2020, US health authorities identified more than 2,800 cases of e-cigarette or vaping-related lung injury. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found 68 deaths attributed to that injury.

In Australia, a major study by leading charity The Cancer Council found more than half of all children who had ever vaped had used an e-cigarette they knew contained nicotine and thought that vaping was a socially acceptable behaviour.

School-age children were being supplied with e-cigarettes through friends or “dealers” inside and outside school, or from convenience stores and tobacconists, the report said.

Teens also reported purchasing vapes through social media, websites and at pop-up vape stores, the Generation Vape project found.

“Whichever way teenagers obtain e-cigarettes, they are all illegal, yet it’s happening under the noses of federal and state authorities”, report author and Cancer Council chair Anita Dessaix said.

“All Australian governments say they’re committed to ensuring e-cigarettes are only accessed by smokers with a prescription trying to quit – yet a crisis in youth e-cigarette use is unfolding in plain view.”

In addition to the government’s move to ban the import of all non-pharmaceutical vaping products – meaning they can now only be bought with a prescription – all single-use disposable vapes will be made illegal.

The volume and concentration of nicotine in e-cigarettes will also be restricted, and both flavours and packaging must be plain and carrying warning labels.

But these new measures are not actually all that drastic, says public health physician Professor Emily Banks from the Australian National University.

“Australia is not an outlier. It is unique to have a prescription-only model, but other places actually ban them completely, and that includes almost all of Latin America, India, Thailand and Japan.”

‘We have been duped’

Health Minister Mark Butler said the new vaping regulations will close the “biggest loophole in Australian healthcare history”.

“Just like they did with smoking… ‘Big Tobacco’ has taken another addictive product, wrapped it in shiny packaging and added sweet flavours to create a new generation of nicotine addicts.”

“We have been duped”, he said.

Medical experts agree. Prof Banks argues that the promotion of e-cigarettes as a “healthier” alternative was a classic “sleight-of-hand” from the tobacco industry.

As such vaping has become “normalised” in Australia, and in the UK too.

“There’s over 17,000 flavours, and the majority of use is not for smoking cessation”, she tells the BBC.

“They’re being heavily marketed towards children and adolescents. People who are smoking and using e-cigarettes – that’s the most common pattern of use, dual use.”

Professor Banks says authorities need to “de-normalise” vaping among teenagers and make vapes much harder to get hold of.

“Kids are interpreting the fact that they can very easily get hold of [vapes] as evidence [they’re safe], and they’re actually saying, ‘well, if they were that unsafe, I wouldn’t be able to buy one at the coffee shop’.

But could stricter controls make it harder for people who do turn to vapes hoping to quit or cut down on tobacco?

“It is important to bear in mind that for some people, e-cigarettes have really helped. But we shouldn’t say ‘this is great for smokers to quit’, says Prof Banks.

“We know from

Australia, from the US, from Europe, that two-thirds to three-quarters of people who quit smoking successfully, do so unaided.”

“You’re trying to bring these [vapes] in saying they’re a great way to quit smoking, but actually we’ve got bubble gum flavoured vapes being used by 13-year-olds in the school toilets. That is not what the community signed up for.”

 

Read from: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-65522841

Continue Reading

Australia

Australia: Scott Morrison saga casts scrutiny on Queen’s representative

Published

on

In the past fortnight, Australia has been gripped by revelations that former Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison secretly appointed himself to several additional ministries.

The move has been labelled a “power grab” by his successor as prime minister, and Mr Morrison has been scolded by many – even his own colleagues.

But the scandal has also dragged Australia’s governor-general into the fray – sparking one of the biggest controversies involving the Queen’s representative in Australia in 50 years.

So does Governor-General David Hurley have questions to answer, or is he just collateral damage?

‘Just paperwork’

Governors-general have fulfilled the practical duties as Australia’s head of state since the country’s 1901 federation.

Candidates for the role were initially chosen by the monarch but are now recommended by the Australian government.

The job is largely ceremonial – a governor-general in almost every circumstance must act on the advice of the government of the day. But conventions allow them the right to “encourage” and “warn” politicians.

Key duties include signing bills into law, issuing writs for elections, and swearing in ministers.

Mr Hurley has run into trouble on the latter. At Mr Morrison’s request, he swore the prime minister in as joint minister for health in March 2020, in case the existing minister became incapacitated by Covid.

Over the next 14 months, he also signed off Mr Morrison as an additional minister in the finance, treasury, home affairs and resources portfolios.

Mr Morrison already had ministerial powers, so Mr Hurley was basically just giving him authority over extra departments.

It’s a request the governor-general “would not have any kind of power to override or reject”, constitutional law professor Anne Twomey tells the BBC.

“This wasn’t even a meeting between the prime minister and the governor-general, it was just paperwork.”

But Mr Morrison’s appointments were not publicly announced, disclosed to the parliament, or even communicated to most of the ministers he was job-sharing with.

Australia’s solicitor-general found Mr Morrison’s actions were not illegal but had “fundamentally undermined” responsible government.

But the governor-general had done the right thing, the solicitor-general said in his advice this week.

It would have been “a clear breach” for him to refuse the prime minister, regardless of whether he knew the appointments would be kept secret, Stephen Donaghue said.

Critics push for investigation

Ultimately, Mr Hurley had to sign off on Mr Morrison’s requests, but critics say he could have counselled him against it and he could have publicised it himself.

But representatives for the governor-general say these types of appointments – giving ministers the right to administer other departments – are not unusual.

And it falls to the government of the day to decide if they should be announced to the public. They often opt not to.

Mr Hurley himself announcing the appointments would be unprecedented. He had “no reason to believe that appointments would not be communicated”, his spokesperson said.

Emeritus professor Jenny Hocking finds the suggestion Mr Hurley didn’t know the ministries had been kept secret “ridiculous”.

“The last of these bizarre, duplicated ministry appointments… were made more than a year after the first, so clearly by then the governor-general did know that they weren’t being made public,” she says.

“I don’t agree for a moment that the governor-general has a lot of things on his plate and might not have noticed.”

The historian says it’s one of the biggest controversies surrounding a governor-general since John Kerr caused a constitutional crisis by sacking Prime Minister Gough Whitlam in 1975.

Prof Hocking famously fought for transparency around that matter – waging a lengthy and costly legal battle that culminated in the release of Mr Kerr’s correspondence with the Queen.

And she says the same transparency is needed here.

The Australian public need to know whether Mr Hurley counselled the prime minister against the moves, and why he didn’t disclose them

The government has already announced an inquiry into Mr Morrison’s actions, but she wants it to look at the governor-general and his office too.

“If the inquiry is to find out what happened in order to fix what happened, it would be extremely problematic to leave out a key part of that equation.”

Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull – Mr Morrison’s predecessor – has also voiced support for an inquiry.

“Something has gone seriously wrong at Government House,” he told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

“It is the passive compliance along the chain… that did undermine our constitution and our democracy… that troubles me the most. This is how tyranny gets under way.”

PM defends governor-general

Prof Twomey says the criticism of Mr Hurley is unfair – there’s was no “conspiracy” on his part to keep things secret.

“I don’t think it’s reasonable for anyone to expect that he could have guessed that the prime minister was keeping things secret from his own ministers, for example.

“Nobody really thought that was a possibility until about two weeks ago.”

Even if he had taken the unprecedented step to publicise the appointments or to reject Mr Morrison’s request, he’d have been criticised, she says.

“There’d be even more people saying ‘how outrageous!'” she says. “The role of governor-general is awkward because people are going to attack you either way.”

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has also defended Mr Hurley, saying he was just doing his job.

“I have no intention of undertaking any criticism of [him].”

A role fit for purpose?

Prof Hocking says it’s a timely moment to look at the role of the governor-general more broadly.

She points out it’s possible the Queen may have been informed about Mr Morrison’s extra ministries when Australia’s parliament and people were not.

“It does raise questions about whether this is fit for purpose, as we have for decades been a fully independent nation, but we still have… ‘the relics of colonialism’ alive and well.”

Momentum for a fresh referendum on an Australian republic has been growing and advocates have seized on the controversy.

“The idea that the Queen and her representative can be relied upon to uphold our system of government has been debunked once and for all,” the Australian Republic Movement’s Sandy Biar says.

“It’s time we had an Australian head of state, chosen by Australians and accountable to them to safeguard and uphold Australia’s constitution.”

But Prof Twomey says republicans are “clutching at straws” – under their proposals, the head of state would also have been bound to follow the prime minister’s advice.

“It wouldn’t result in any changes that would have made one iota of difference.”

 

Read from: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-62683210

Continue Reading

Australia

Australia election: PM Morrison’s security team in car crash in Tasmania

Published

on

A car carrying the Australian prime minister’s security team has crashed in Tasmania during an election campaign visit.

Four police officers were taken to hospital with “non-life threatening injuries” after the car and another vehicle collided, authorities said.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison was not in the car, but the accident prompted him to cancel the rest of his campaign events on Thursday.

The other driver involved was not hurt.

Tasmania Police said initial investigations suggested the second car had “collided with the rear of the police vehicle, while attempting to merge”. It caused the unmarked security vehicle to roll off the road.

The two Tasmania Police officers and two Australian Federal Police officers were conscious when taken to hospital for medical assessment, the prime minister’s office said.

“Family members of the officers have been contacted and are being kept informed of their condition,” a statement said.

“The PM is always extremely grateful for the protection provided by his security team and extends his best wishes for their recovery and to their families.”

Australians go to the polls on 21 May. Mr Morrison – prime minister since 2018 – is hoping to win his conservative coalition’s fourth term in office.

Polls suggest the opposition Labor Party, led by Anthony Albanese, is favoured to win. However, Mr Morrison defied similar polling to claim victory at the last election in 2019.

Mr Morrison’s Liberal-National coalition holds 76 seats in the House of Representatives – the minimum needed to retain power.

Political observers say the cost of living, climate change, trust in political leaders, and national security will be among key issues in the campaign.

In recent weeks, the prime minister has faced accusations of being a bully and once sabotaging a rival’s career by suggesting the man’s Lebanese heritage made him less electable. Mr Morrison has denied the allegations.

Mr Albanese stumbled into his own controversy this week when he failed to recall the nation’s unemployment or interest rates.

Read from: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-61103987

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 , madridjournals.com