OAP's fury over bill to cut high hedges (From Gazette Series)

OAP's fury over bill to cut high hedges

A PENSIONER who a few weeks ago was celebrating a victory for human rights was this week outraged that in order to take advantage of it he will have to shell out more than five times his weekly pension, money that he and others like him can ill afford.

Last month John Machin, of North Nibley, was celebrating the introduction of new high hedge legislation giving British citizens the right to the "reasonable enjoyment of their property" unimpeded by the high hedges of any of their neighbours.

Mr Machin is just one of many people throughout the land who has had to live literally under the shadow of a neighbour's high hedge.

Indeed, when an article appeared in the Gazette in April asking for people in a similar predicament to get in touch with him he received 10 responses concerning 17 households.

All were looking forward to using the full force of the new law when it comes into effect on June 1 to oblige their neighbours to cut their hedges down to size.

Mr Machin then wrote to Stroud District Council, the authority which will have to enforce the legislation, to enquire how much he would be charged for the council's involvement.

He was horrified when this week he received a reply quoting the figure of £550. "It is extortionate," he said. "Particularly if you live on an old age pension. Of the 10 people who wrote to me, eight were pensioners. I don't know why, perhaps they are easier to bully, but on the state pension of under £100 a week they just can't afford that kind of money."

Mr Machin has since learned that in the Gloucestershire districts of Cheltenham and Tewkesbury the charge for the councils to enforce the law is £320, still high but a lot cheaper than the Stroud figure.

Cllr David Wride, SDC's cabinet member for community cohesion, told the Gazette on Wednesday that the cost of enforcing the legislation in a rural district like Stroud was bound to be greater than in urban communities such as Cheltenham and Gloucester.

"It is also probably the case that these councils are absorbing more of the costs themselves," he said.

He stressed, however, that the figure of £550 was not yet set in stone. It is due to be discussed by the cabinet on Thursday, June 2 and then has to be ratified by full council.

And even then, Cllr Wride added, the final figure would be reviewed after six months when the council had had a chance to see how the new legislation was working.

There is a reduced figure of £100 for those in receipt of benefit. Mr Machin, however, is not appeased.

"Is this the thin end of the wedge?" he asked. "Will you have to get your credit card out every time you call in the council for a bit of natural justice?"