Comments

DAMESATHOME@YAHOO.CO.UK
send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Monday, 9 May 2011

Exclude me! Portobello crusader is banned

Portobello champion Ms Gettleson has received a banning order from entering a swathe of properties in Portobello Road by the owners following her stirling efforts in having planning applications that would rip the heart out of the area rejected.

Accusing the campaigner of "persistent leafletting/agitation of market traders" she has been told of an "Exclusion Notice" ordering that she is not allowed to enter seventeen numbered properties on the famous London Street for 12 months.

The bully boy tactics even state her personal data will be retained as will an image of her "for the purpose of enforcing the Exclusion Notice".

So they make a planning application, that goes through the planning process and following public reaction is rejected. The councillors did as the people wanted and threw it out.

So what do they do? Issue a banning order!

Now the Dame couldnt stop laughing at seeing the notice, and it really does show these people for what they are. Exclusion Notices are only enforceable by Police officers, not jumped up office administrators smarting over a failed planning application.

Of course they may have banned you from entering these premises, but there is absolutely nothing to stop you standing just outside them; or better still gather a group of people to enter them and carry on the good work and take the fight right up to them.

Hornet salutes Ms Gettleson and all those connected to the Portobello Campaign. Well done.
Stick it to them!

10 comments:

  1. Marion needs more support from thise she is fighting for. It's not only the traders who stand to lose from the ghastly warren and his bullyboy cousin Lee but Londoners who love
    Portobello. I doubt whether they have the right to do what they have done

    ReplyDelete
  2. They can do what they want, they own the property.

    But enforcing it is another matter.

    If Ms G. goes into the property and is manhandled by building "security" or anyone then that could constitute an assault opening up the possibility of prosecution.

    As the piece says, it can only be enforced by the Police and I am sure they have far more important things to attend to than to satisfy the spite of these people.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No wish to correct the Dame, but Cllrs on the Planning committee did not 'do what the people wanted'; they followed planning guidelines and listened to representations before making their independent decision.

    Perhaps the loathsome WT would now like to come after them? K&C gets more like Naples every day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Landlords of tenanted properties may not exclude people. That right rests with the tenants, unless there is evidence of damage to the landlords property. Leafleting and agitation of tenants does not constitute such damage.

    ReplyDelete
  5. These two bullies will be in the Standard today.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree - the freeholders cannot ban you. Only their tenants can do that.
    This action is bullying pure and simple with no legal basis whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Three cheers for Ms G. I am not a trader and live 15 mins walk from Portobello but love the market and hate to see what is happening to it - All Saints.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Here is the link to the Standard article.
    It would be good to post in support of Marion
    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23948506-portobello-road-agitator-banned-from-landlords-antiques-shops.do

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sweeny WarrenTodd the demon clown of Portobello!

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.