London Borough of Newham Make Tenants Live Behind An Illegal Health Hazard: Imprisonment And Nausea
“No balcony but that view makes up for it”, I said when I moved in. I used to spend hours hanging out of the windows watching the world. Til the nets went up. It is not just that I have lost the view, I have lost the use of the windows for the purpose of looking out of. There’s a difference. It is engendering of a sense of imprisonment to see the netting every time one looks at or out of the window.
“The problem is not focusing the eyes, but rather ‘fusion’ of the
eye’s as they converge on the netting or the more distant objects. What
happens is, when they converge to either, the other images do not fall on
the corresponding regions of the retina. One then gets double vision or
‘rivalry’ as the brain can not combine the images. The point about a net is
that there are a series of positions for which the eyes will find
corresponding points and so give stable vision, but for each the background
objects have different disparities. This is extremely confusing, and can
indeed give nausea.” – from one of the world’s leading authorities on human vision and optics.
Last week I lost the first of several legal battles with the London Borough of Newham Council over this issue on a minor legal technicality. It is only a question of time until I win in court. The Judge last week – despite declaring there was no remedy the law offered him in the current legal approach – also described the netting as “not the best way forward” and a “mistake” and described Newham Council’s handling of the case as poor.
The first independent environmental health officer who visited exclaimed “what on earth made them think they could get away with that. It’s certainly illegal and a health hazard” – that was two years ago. The second confirmed it’s illegality and advised the council should “consult with appropriate experts to avoid further potentially expensive mistakes”.
Having spent thousands on illegally erecting the netting, Newham Council have wasted £8,000 defending the indefensible in court. This is just one of several looming court battles over the issue … meaning that not only have Newham Council been acting against the idependent advice they have had in hand for two years but are prepared to waste thousands and thousands of ratepayers money trying to defend something they know to be an illegal health hazard.
When my housing officer visited when I first complained he said “I can see exactly why you have a problem with it but now its up you will have a hard ime getting it removed”. I wish he hadn’t been so right. Yet for the London Borough Of Newham the rule is: “if you can avoid changing something you have already done then do so”. I wonder how much more of your money Mayor Sir Robin “Everyone Blind” Wales and the Burgesses of Newham Council want to waste, in order that they avoid admitting and rectifying their “mistake”.
An accoustic solution similar to the mice scarers most of us know is available and would have cost Newham Council around £2,000 to purchase and install – a fraction of the costs spent on erecting this illegal health hazard and a quarter of the money they have just wasted in court. details at http://www.pestcontrol-products.com/birdcontrol_repellents_superbird.htm