200 attend meeting in the battle for Blencathra

200 attend meeting in the battle for Blencathra

Lord and Lady Lonsdale at the foot of Blencathra

First meeting of Friends of Blencathra

First published in News
Last updated
The Westmorland Gazette: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

The race is on to snatch Blencathra Mountain from the clutches of several foreign buyers.

A source close to Lord Lonsdale, who owns the land, exclusively confirmed 'there has been a substantial amount of foreign interest' in the £1.75million mountain.

But Lakeland lovers are fighting back.

Friends of Blencathra, an action group which attracted 5,500 members in less than a week, has already pledged £600,000 towards the purchase of the 2,676 acre site.

Donations have come from as far away as America and New Zealand and a tourist spontaneously wrote a cheque for £1,000 during a visit to the Horse and Farrier Inn in Thelkeld.

Several Cumbria-based solicitors have even offered their services to the action group free of charge.

MORE TOP STORIES:

Friends of Blencathra had their first meeting on Sunday, May 11, to discuss their proposed purchase of what Wainwright termed 'the jewel in Lakeland's crown'.

Alan Hudson, newly elected Vice Chairman of the group, said: "The public generosity has been overwhelming. It's amazing. A Cumbrian lady who now lives in America got in touch and pledged £5,000, we've had German TV stations and the French press getting in touch. It's reaching all corners of the world."

With a Russian billionaire reported to have shown interest, many fear the sale could trigger a 'Premier League-style' foreign invasion of Lakeland's landscapes.

Debbie Cosgrove, Chairman of Friends of Blencathra, said: "If someone from Russia buys it it's just another thing in their portfolio. If it's publicly owned we can look after it ourselves. This is an opportunity for everyone who loves the Lake District to give something back."

Comments (31)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:27pm Sat 3 May 14

hogheaven says...

Affordable housing site?
Affordable housing site? hogheaven
  • Score: -7

7:38am Sun 4 May 14

shytalk says...

An unaffordable affordable housing site
An unaffordable affordable housing site shytalk
  • Score: 6

12:32pm Sun 4 May 14

Kendmoor says...

I'm just reading about inheritance tax now, and I'm not sure...it just doesn't seem particularly very fair...feels like more of a money grabbing opportunity for officials. :/
I'm just reading about inheritance tax now, and I'm not sure...it just doesn't seem particularly very fair...feels like more of a money grabbing opportunity for officials. :/ Kendmoor
  • Score: 16

1:31pm Sun 4 May 14

hogheaven says...

Kendmoor wrote:
I'm just reading about inheritance tax now, and I'm not sure...it just doesn't seem particularly very fair...feels like more of a money grabbing opportunity for officials. :/
Its not fair my hardworking father built up a successful business from nothing paid max rate tax on his earnings plus corporation tax and now retired has to pay 40% on his pension, plus when he dies I will have to pay inheritance tax on anything he has left to leave me.That is assuming he will not need to go into a nursing home ,if so we will have to fund that .People say rich people need to pay more taxes!! don't make me laugh.
[quote][p][bold]Kendmoor[/bold] wrote: I'm just reading about inheritance tax now, and I'm not sure...it just doesn't seem particularly very fair...feels like more of a money grabbing opportunity for officials. :/[/p][/quote]Its not fair my hardworking father built up a successful business from nothing paid max rate tax on his earnings plus corporation tax and now retired has to pay 40% on his pension, plus when he dies I will have to pay inheritance tax on anything he has left to leave me.That is assuming he will not need to go into a nursing home ,if so we will have to fund that .People say rich people need to pay more taxes!! don't make me laugh. hogheaven
  • Score: 7

8:56pm Sun 4 May 14

snuggle-bunny says...

what an absolute disgrace when someone can own, let alone sell a mountain. where did they get the moral right to do this. surely the mountains belong to all- not just one person
what an absolute disgrace when someone can own, let alone sell a mountain. where did they get the moral right to do this. surely the mountains belong to all- not just one person snuggle-bunny
  • Score: 5

9:01pm Sun 4 May 14

hogheaven says...

snuggle-bunny wrote:
what an absolute disgrace when someone can own, let alone sell a mountain. where did they get the moral right to do this. surely the mountains belong to all- not just one person
How far back in history do you want to go, perhaps you have a solution to this mans problem?
[quote][p][bold]snuggle-bunny[/bold] wrote: what an absolute disgrace when someone can own, let alone sell a mountain. where did they get the moral right to do this. surely the mountains belong to all- not just one person[/p][/quote]How far back in history do you want to go, perhaps you have a solution to this mans problem? hogheaven
  • Score: 13

10:18pm Sun 4 May 14

tictoc1 says...

hogheaven wrote:
snuggle-bunny wrote:
what an absolute disgrace when someone can own, let alone sell a mountain. where did they get the moral right to do this. surely the mountains belong to all- not just one person
How far back in history do you want to go, perhaps you have a solution to this mans problem?
I think it's awful that a person has to sell their belongings to pay the government yet more tax, whether it be a thimble or land with a mountain! The amount of money concerned is totally irrelevant, it's the principle of the matter.
[quote][p][bold]hogheaven[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]snuggle-bunny[/bold] wrote: what an absolute disgrace when someone can own, let alone sell a mountain. where did they get the moral right to do this. surely the mountains belong to all- not just one person[/p][/quote]How far back in history do you want to go, perhaps you have a solution to this mans problem?[/p][/quote]I think it's awful that a person has to sell their belongings to pay the government yet more tax, whether it be a thimble or land with a mountain! The amount of money concerned is totally irrelevant, it's the principle of the matter. tictoc1
  • Score: 20

9:46pm Mon 5 May 14

brokenbanjo says...

Such a shame someone that was given money has to pay tax on that transaction. He didn't earn that money, that land, it was given. A birth right, apparently. So why shouldn't the public purse benefit from that? Otherwise all land and money would remain with the landed classes, it would remain with William the Conquerors cronies. Inheritance Tax is a way of redistributing wealth. In some circumstances, using an Inheritance Tax Exemption they can use taxpayers money to prevent them from paying tax. It stinks. Pay up and shut up I say, I have to with my PAYE.
Such a shame someone that was given money has to pay tax on that transaction. He didn't earn that money, that land, it was given. A birth right, apparently. So why shouldn't the public purse benefit from that? Otherwise all land and money would remain with the landed classes, it would remain with William the Conquerors cronies. Inheritance Tax is a way of redistributing wealth. In some circumstances, using an Inheritance Tax Exemption they can use taxpayers money to prevent them from paying tax. It stinks. Pay up and shut up I say, I have to with my PAYE. brokenbanjo
  • Score: -6

11:55am Wed 7 May 14

garybillington says...

brokenbanjo wrote:
Such a shame someone that was given money has to pay tax on that transaction. He didn't earn that money, that land, it was given. A birth right, apparently. So why shouldn't the public purse benefit from that? Otherwise all land and money would remain with the landed classes, it would remain with William the Conquerors cronies. Inheritance Tax is a way of redistributing wealth. In some circumstances, using an Inheritance Tax Exemption they can use taxpayers money to prevent them from paying tax. It stinks. Pay up and shut up I say, I have to with my PAYE.
Do you want your children to inherit all that you put aside for their future, or do you want them to be forced to pay a significant portion of it in taxes?

Even though you have to PAYE, anything you have left when you pass on will be taxed again when you leave it to your descendants. That is the issue - income that has already been taxed is subject to further taxes due to Inheritance Tax.

Whether you're talking about millions (as is the case in point) or much smaller amounts that the common person may experience, the issue is the same. This is merely an extreme example of it.
[quote][p][bold]brokenbanjo[/bold] wrote: Such a shame someone that was given money has to pay tax on that transaction. He didn't earn that money, that land, it was given. A birth right, apparently. So why shouldn't the public purse benefit from that? Otherwise all land and money would remain with the landed classes, it would remain with William the Conquerors cronies. Inheritance Tax is a way of redistributing wealth. In some circumstances, using an Inheritance Tax Exemption they can use taxpayers money to prevent them from paying tax. It stinks. Pay up and shut up I say, I have to with my PAYE.[/p][/quote]Do you want your children to inherit all that you put aside for their future, or do you want them to be forced to pay a significant portion of it in taxes? Even though you have to PAYE, anything you have left when you pass on will be taxed again when you leave it to your descendants. That is the issue - income that has already been taxed is subject to further taxes due to Inheritance Tax. Whether you're talking about millions (as is the case in point) or much smaller amounts that the common person may experience, the issue is the same. This is merely an extreme example of it. garybillington
  • Score: 15

12:05pm Wed 7 May 14

hogheaven says...

garybillington wrote:
brokenbanjo wrote:
Such a shame someone that was given money has to pay tax on that transaction. He didn't earn that money, that land, it was given. A birth right, apparently. So why shouldn't the public purse benefit from that? Otherwise all land and money would remain with the landed classes, it would remain with William the Conquerors cronies. Inheritance Tax is a way of redistributing wealth. In some circumstances, using an Inheritance Tax Exemption they can use taxpayers money to prevent them from paying tax. It stinks. Pay up and shut up I say, I have to with my PAYE.
Do you want your children to inherit all that you put aside for their future, or do you want them to be forced to pay a significant portion of it in taxes?

Even though you have to PAYE, anything you have left when you pass on will be taxed again when you leave it to your descendants. That is the issue - income that has already been taxed is subject to further taxes due to Inheritance Tax.

Whether you're talking about millions (as is the case in point) or much smaller amounts that the common person may experience, the issue is the same. This is merely an extreme example of it.
I think you explained it exactly as it is garybillington,but i do not think you will convince broken banjo, that the problem today,little knowledge of important matters.
[quote][p][bold]garybillington[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brokenbanjo[/bold] wrote: Such a shame someone that was given money has to pay tax on that transaction. He didn't earn that money, that land, it was given. A birth right, apparently. So why shouldn't the public purse benefit from that? Otherwise all land and money would remain with the landed classes, it would remain with William the Conquerors cronies. Inheritance Tax is a way of redistributing wealth. In some circumstances, using an Inheritance Tax Exemption they can use taxpayers money to prevent them from paying tax. It stinks. Pay up and shut up I say, I have to with my PAYE.[/p][/quote]Do you want your children to inherit all that you put aside for their future, or do you want them to be forced to pay a significant portion of it in taxes? Even though you have to PAYE, anything you have left when you pass on will be taxed again when you leave it to your descendants. That is the issue - income that has already been taxed is subject to further taxes due to Inheritance Tax. Whether you're talking about millions (as is the case in point) or much smaller amounts that the common person may experience, the issue is the same. This is merely an extreme example of it.[/p][/quote]I think you explained it exactly as it is garybillington,but i do not think you will convince broken banjo, that the problem today,little knowledge of important matters. hogheaven
  • Score: 5

7:58pm Wed 7 May 14

jazzactivist says...

If the Lowthers have to pay £9million in inheritance tax then imagine what a huge amount they actually inherited! We should hardly be feeling sorry for them having to sell off the family mountain when so many younger working people in the area are struggling to be able to afford to buy or rent a poxy little flat to live in.

I don't think it matters at all who owns Blencathra, and there many be a new international owner who doesn't mind about public access as much as old one. The shocking thing is that anyone privately owns it at all, rather than it being common land. The old Lord Lowther could have saved everyone the trouble, and his inheritors some of their tax, by bequeathing it for public use before he died. It would be much more socially valuable that way.

It is right to pay inheritance tax if you inherit a lot of money or property, as hoarding assets within your family means that other people will be poor and need State help to live. If you have more you can contribute more.
If the Lowthers have to pay £9million in inheritance tax then imagine what a huge amount they actually inherited! We should hardly be feeling sorry for them having to sell off the family mountain when so many younger working people in the area are struggling to be able to afford to buy or rent a poxy little flat to live in. I don't think it matters at all who owns Blencathra, and there many be a new international owner who doesn't mind about public access as much as old one. The shocking thing is that anyone privately owns it at all, rather than it being common land. The old Lord Lowther could have saved everyone the trouble, and his inheritors some of their tax, by bequeathing it for public use before he died. It would be much more socially valuable that way. It is right to pay inheritance tax if you inherit a lot of money or property, as hoarding assets within your family means that other people will be poor and need State help to live. If you have more you can contribute more. jazzactivist
  • Score: -19

8:21pm Wed 7 May 14

brokenbanjo says...

GarryBillington - Income tax is levied on YOUR income. When you inherit something, YOU have not paid tax on it. Whether people have paid tax on something or not at an earlier stage is immaterial. It is the transaction to you that counts. Hence YOU pay inheritance tax, you being the benefactors of the estate. In your line of argument, a shareholder should not pay tax on the dividend received because the PLC paid corporation tax on the profits. Which is nonsense.

I have absolutely no problem with either being charged inheritance tax or it being levied on my assets after my death. It may bother you, but that's atypical of modern society. All about me, me, me and not a hoot about society as a whole.

So Hogheaven, perhaps it is you with little knowledge about important matters.

Jazzactivist - Blencathra is common land, and like much of it, the actual land is owned by 'someone'. We now have access rights enshrined in law and commoners have various rights that they can exercise. So for all intents and purposes it is public. But some people collect titles etc, so let him sell it. The whole hoo-haa about 'Johnny Foreigner' owning a fell is a bit UKIP and incredibly xenophobic.
GarryBillington - Income tax is levied on YOUR income. When you inherit something, YOU have not paid tax on it. Whether people have paid tax on something or not at an earlier stage is immaterial. It is the transaction to you that counts. Hence YOU pay inheritance tax, you being the benefactors of the estate. In your line of argument, a shareholder should not pay tax on the dividend received because the PLC paid corporation tax on the profits. Which is nonsense. I have absolutely no problem with either being charged inheritance tax or it being levied on my assets after my death. It may bother you, but that's atypical of modern society. All about me, me, me and not a hoot about society as a whole. So Hogheaven, perhaps it is you with little knowledge about important matters. Jazzactivist - Blencathra is common land, and like much of it, the actual land is owned by 'someone'. We now have access rights enshrined in law and commoners have various rights that they can exercise. So for all intents and purposes it is public. But some people collect titles etc, so let him sell it. The whole hoo-haa about 'Johnny Foreigner' owning a fell is a bit UKIP and incredibly xenophobic. brokenbanjo
  • Score: -5

9:12pm Wed 7 May 14

hogheaven says...

brokenbanjo wrote:
GarryBillington - Income tax is levied on YOUR income. When you inherit something, YOU have not paid tax on it. Whether people have paid tax on something or not at an earlier stage is immaterial. It is the transaction to you that counts. Hence YOU pay inheritance tax, you being the benefactors of the estate. In your line of argument, a shareholder should not pay tax on the dividend received because the PLC paid corporation tax on the profits. Which is nonsense.

I have absolutely no problem with either being charged inheritance tax or it being levied on my assets after my death. It may bother you, but that's atypical of modern society. All about me, me, me and not a hoot about society as a whole.

So Hogheaven, perhaps it is you with little knowledge about important matters.

Jazzactivist - Blencathra is common land, and like much of it, the actual land is owned by 'someone'. We now have access rights enshrined in law and commoners have various rights that they can exercise. So for all intents and purposes it is public. But some people collect titles etc, so let him sell it. The whole hoo-haa about 'Johnny Foreigner' owning a fell is a bit UKIP and incredibly xenophobic.
I am more than aware of tax issues Brokenbanjo through my experience of having paid too much in the past and also at present. Its a question of paying a fair tax ,it seems to me that if save my hard earned cash (after taxes) for a future retirement ,i am doubly taxed for my efforts. Whereas if i spend all the money I earn ,. I can then apply for benefits to top up my state pension.does that seem fair?Penalised for trying not to be a burden on the public purse is that all about me me me,I think not.
[quote][p][bold]brokenbanjo[/bold] wrote: GarryBillington - Income tax is levied on YOUR income. When you inherit something, YOU have not paid tax on it. Whether people have paid tax on something or not at an earlier stage is immaterial. It is the transaction to you that counts. Hence YOU pay inheritance tax, you being the benefactors of the estate. In your line of argument, a shareholder should not pay tax on the dividend received because the PLC paid corporation tax on the profits. Which is nonsense. I have absolutely no problem with either being charged inheritance tax or it being levied on my assets after my death. It may bother you, but that's atypical of modern society. All about me, me, me and not a hoot about society as a whole. So Hogheaven, perhaps it is you with little knowledge about important matters. Jazzactivist - Blencathra is common land, and like much of it, the actual land is owned by 'someone'. We now have access rights enshrined in law and commoners have various rights that they can exercise. So for all intents and purposes it is public. But some people collect titles etc, so let him sell it. The whole hoo-haa about 'Johnny Foreigner' owning a fell is a bit UKIP and incredibly xenophobic.[/p][/quote]I am more than aware of tax issues Brokenbanjo through my experience of having paid too much in the past and also at present. Its a question of paying a fair tax ,it seems to me that if save my hard earned cash (after taxes) for a future retirement ,i am doubly taxed for my efforts. Whereas if i spend all the money I earn ,. I can then apply for benefits to top up my state pension.does that seem fair?Penalised for trying not to be a burden on the public purse is that all about me me me,I think not. hogheaven
  • Score: 9

10:06pm Wed 7 May 14

brokenbanjo says...

If you had paid too much you would be owed a rebate then? Or are you just trolling out some tired cliches... How are you taxed doubly for your efforts? Are you talking about the income derived from your pension contributions, which is taxed (never mind the tax relief you get on your pension contributions initially)? Or interest on your savings, which is taxed?

You never had that money you pay in tax, so why should you whinge about it. I look at my payslip and think well over a quarter I never see. Does it bother me, no. I get free at point of service health care, an exceptional state school system, rubbish collected, proper roads, sanitation, a fair judicial system, and welfare should i ever lose some of my present good fortune.
If you had paid too much you would be owed a rebate then? Or are you just trolling out some tired cliches... How are you taxed doubly for your efforts? Are you talking about the income derived from your pension contributions, which is taxed (never mind the tax relief you get on your pension contributions initially)? Or interest on your savings, which is taxed? You never had that money you pay in tax, so why should you whinge about it. I look at my payslip and think well over a quarter I never see. Does it bother me, no. I get free at point of service health care, an exceptional state school system, rubbish collected, proper roads, sanitation, a fair judicial system, and welfare should i ever lose some of my present good fortune. brokenbanjo
  • Score: 2

7:40am Thu 8 May 14

hogheaven says...

brokenbanjo wrote:
If you had paid too much you would be owed a rebate then? Or are you just trolling out some tired cliches... How are you taxed doubly for your efforts? Are you talking about the income derived from your pension contributions, which is taxed (never mind the tax relief you get on your pension contributions initially)? Or interest on your savings, which is taxed?

You never had that money you pay in tax, so why should you whinge about it. I look at my payslip and think well over a quarter I never see. Does it bother me, no. I get free at point of service health care, an exceptional state school system, rubbish collected, proper roads, sanitation, a fair judicial system, and welfare should i ever lose some of my present good fortune.
You do not get the point,its a question of HOW much is it fair to be taxed?You cannot expect a fortunate few to carry ALL the tax burden, as for getting free services ,nothings free it comes out of yours and my tax contributions!
[quote][p][bold]brokenbanjo[/bold] wrote: If you had paid too much you would be owed a rebate then? Or are you just trolling out some tired cliches... How are you taxed doubly for your efforts? Are you talking about the income derived from your pension contributions, which is taxed (never mind the tax relief you get on your pension contributions initially)? Or interest on your savings, which is taxed? You never had that money you pay in tax, so why should you whinge about it. I look at my payslip and think well over a quarter I never see. Does it bother me, no. I get free at point of service health care, an exceptional state school system, rubbish collected, proper roads, sanitation, a fair judicial system, and welfare should i ever lose some of my present good fortune.[/p][/quote]You do not get the point,its a question of HOW much is it fair to be taxed?You cannot expect a fortunate few to carry ALL the tax burden, as for getting free services ,nothings free it comes out of yours and my tax contributions! hogheaven
  • Score: 8

9:00am Thu 8 May 14

Keeping_it_real says...

Curious... Did the Queen pay inheritance tax when she inherited her astronomical fortune?

Will Charlie pay inheritance tax when he inherits his even great fortune?

Will Will (see what I did there…) pay inheritance tax when he inherits his much greater fortune?

Of course not, the peasants will pay though…

This is not fair to force a family’s history to change because of a ludicrous tax law.
Curious... Did the Queen pay inheritance tax when she inherited her astronomical fortune? Will Charlie pay inheritance tax when he inherits his even great fortune? Will Will (see what I did there…) pay inheritance tax when he inherits his much greater fortune? Of course not, the peasants will pay though… This is not fair to force a family’s history to change because of a ludicrous tax law. Keeping_it_real
  • Score: 5

2:03pm Thu 8 May 14

jazzactivist says...

I can't see how you feel that you, and others fortunate enough to inherit money over a certain amount, pay too much tax, Hogheaven. Of course everyone should pay tax in proportion to their income and assets, with those who don't earn enough to live on paying none and those who earn the most and get free money through inheritance paying the most. There is no pride or dignity in hoarding money, it's what you do with it that counts. I can't see any shame or controversy in paying tax to help fund free medical care and education for all etc, and the more you contribute the more valuable you are anyway.

It isn't the case that anyone can walk anywhere on Blencathra, brokenbanjo. I would prefer the Scottish system of access rights that allows people to access most land wherever and whenever they like, so long as they follow the countryside code. If the Lowthers do allow open access then it seems wrong that they are planning to sell land that by default belongs to everyone anyway. Surely, they could just donate it to a local charitable trust for everyone's use and inform HMRC to get the value taken off their tax bill. I don't like the sound of the campaign to raise money for a community buy-out either if it is based around saving a mountain from 'foreign' ownership.
I can't see how you feel that you, and others fortunate enough to inherit money over a certain amount, pay too much tax, Hogheaven. Of course everyone should pay tax in proportion to their income and assets, with those who don't earn enough to live on paying none and those who earn the most and get free money through inheritance paying the most. There is no pride or dignity in hoarding money, it's what you do with it that counts. I can't see any shame or controversy in paying tax to help fund free medical care and education for all etc, and the more you contribute the more valuable you are anyway. It isn't the case that anyone can walk anywhere on Blencathra, brokenbanjo. I would prefer the Scottish system of access rights that allows people to access most land wherever and whenever they like, so long as they follow the countryside code. If the Lowthers do allow open access then it seems wrong that they are planning to sell land that by default belongs to everyone anyway. Surely, they could just donate it to a local charitable trust for everyone's use and inform HMRC to get the value taken off their tax bill. I don't like the sound of the campaign to raise money for a community buy-out either if it is based around saving a mountain from 'foreign' ownership. jazzactivist
  • Score: -20

3:21pm Thu 8 May 14

ab oatman says...

You are all missing a very pertinent point, if you inherit a lump sum then paying tax on that is all well and good.
But this is an inheritance that only has a financial value on paper, in practical terms it is a vast swathe of land that is actually worthless. He is not making any sort of profit or financial gain from it,
all he has is a piece of paper that says "congratulations, you own a big chunk of mountain that you cannot build on or charge for the use of. By the way, now you own it, here is a bill for 9 million pounds"!

There is a myth that these type of people are fabulously wealthy just because they have ownership of houses and land that cost huge amounts of money to maintain but give little or no financial reward in return.
The fact that none of you even knew he owns it speaks volumes, yet now he needs to sell it to pay off a huge tax bill you are all up in arms!

Put yourself in the same position, you inhereit some huge part of the heritage of the country for which you will be flayed alive if you try to make any sort of financial gain from, then think of how you will pay the bills which come rolling in because you are the owner.
You are all missing a very pertinent point, if you inherit a lump sum then paying tax on that is all well and good. But this is an inheritance that only has a financial value on paper, in practical terms it is a vast swathe of land that is actually worthless. He is not making any sort of profit or financial gain from it, all he has is a piece of paper that says "congratulations, you own a big chunk of mountain that you cannot build on or charge for the use of. By the way, now you own it, here is a bill for 9 million pounds"! There is a myth that these type of people are fabulously wealthy just because they have ownership of houses and land that cost huge amounts of money to maintain but give little or no financial reward in return. The fact that none of you even knew he owns it speaks volumes, yet now he needs to sell it to pay off a huge tax bill you are all up in arms! Put yourself in the same position, you inhereit some huge part of the heritage of the country for which you will be flayed alive if you try to make any sort of financial gain from, then think of how you will pay the bills which come rolling in because you are the owner. ab oatman
  • Score: 18

3:31pm Thu 8 May 14

hogheaven says...

ab oatman wrote:
You are all missing a very pertinent point, if you inherit a lump sum then paying tax on that is all well and good.
But this is an inheritance that only has a financial value on paper, in practical terms it is a vast swathe of land that is actually worthless. He is not making any sort of profit or financial gain from it,
all he has is a piece of paper that says "congratulation
s, you own a big chunk of mountain that you cannot build on or charge for the use of. By the way, now you own it, here is a bill for 9 million pounds"!

There is a myth that these type of people are fabulously wealthy just because they have ownership of houses and land that cost huge amounts of money to maintain but give little or no financial reward in return.
The fact that none of you even knew he owns it speaks volumes, yet now he needs to sell it to pay off a huge tax bill you are all up in arms!

Put yourself in the same position, you inhereit some huge part of the heritage of the country for which you will be flayed alive if you try to make any sort of financial gain from, then think of how you will pay the bills which come rolling in because you are the owner.
I think this sums it up dont you Jazz
[quote][p][bold]ab oatman[/bold] wrote: You are all missing a very pertinent point, if you inherit a lump sum then paying tax on that is all well and good. But this is an inheritance that only has a financial value on paper, in practical terms it is a vast swathe of land that is actually worthless. He is not making any sort of profit or financial gain from it, all he has is a piece of paper that says "congratulation s, you own a big chunk of mountain that you cannot build on or charge for the use of. By the way, now you own it, here is a bill for 9 million pounds"! There is a myth that these type of people are fabulously wealthy just because they have ownership of houses and land that cost huge amounts of money to maintain but give little or no financial reward in return. The fact that none of you even knew he owns it speaks volumes, yet now he needs to sell it to pay off a huge tax bill you are all up in arms! Put yourself in the same position, you inhereit some huge part of the heritage of the country for which you will be flayed alive if you try to make any sort of financial gain from, then think of how you will pay the bills which come rolling in because you are the owner.[/p][/quote]I think this sums it up dont you Jazz hogheaven
  • Score: 11

4:03pm Thu 8 May 14

ab oatman says...

jazzactivist wrote:
I can't see how you feel that you, and others fortunate enough to inherit money over a certain amount, pay too much tax, Hogheaven. Of course everyone should pay tax in proportion to their income and assets, with those who don't earn enough to live on paying none and those who earn the most and get free money through inheritance paying the most. There is no pride or dignity in hoarding money, it's what you do with it that counts. I can't see any shame or controversy in paying tax to help fund free medical care and education for all etc, and the more you contribute the more valuable you are anyway.

It isn't the case that anyone can walk anywhere on Blencathra, brokenbanjo. I would prefer the Scottish system of access rights that allows people to access most land wherever and whenever they like, so long as they follow the countryside code. If the Lowthers do allow open access then it seems wrong that they are planning to sell land that by default belongs to everyone anyway. Surely, they could just donate it to a local charitable trust for everyone's use and inform HMRC to get the value taken off their tax bill. I don't like the sound of the campaign to raise money for a community buy-out either if it is based around saving a mountain from 'foreign' ownership.
In other words, Tax Avoidance!
If he donates it to a chartible trust, what do they gain from it, clearly you wouldn't advocate them charging for access because you disagree with such things.
They would be burdened (as the Lowthers currently are) with a tract of land that costs them money to maintain and which gives nothing in return
.
if you suggest that they do levy charges for access, that means that the less well off wouldnt be able to afford to go and it would become the preserve of those with money!
[quote][p][bold]jazzactivist[/bold] wrote: I can't see how you feel that you, and others fortunate enough to inherit money over a certain amount, pay too much tax, Hogheaven. Of course everyone should pay tax in proportion to their income and assets, with those who don't earn enough to live on paying none and those who earn the most and get free money through inheritance paying the most. There is no pride or dignity in hoarding money, it's what you do with it that counts. I can't see any shame or controversy in paying tax to help fund free medical care and education for all etc, and the more you contribute the more valuable you are anyway. It isn't the case that anyone can walk anywhere on Blencathra, brokenbanjo. I would prefer the Scottish system of access rights that allows people to access most land wherever and whenever they like, so long as they follow the countryside code. If the Lowthers do allow open access then it seems wrong that they are planning to sell land that by default belongs to everyone anyway. Surely, they could just donate it to a local charitable trust for everyone's use and inform HMRC to get the value taken off their tax bill. I don't like the sound of the campaign to raise money for a community buy-out either if it is based around saving a mountain from 'foreign' ownership.[/p][/quote]In other words, Tax Avoidance! If he donates it to a chartible trust, what do they gain from it, clearly you wouldn't advocate them charging for access because you disagree with such things. They would be burdened (as the Lowthers currently are) with a tract of land that costs them money to maintain and which gives nothing in return . if you suggest that they do levy charges for access, that means that the less well off wouldnt be able to afford to go and it would become the preserve of those with money! ab oatman
  • Score: 15

5:03pm Thu 8 May 14

kendalboi says...

If Russians buy it you can expect tanks to roll on Grasmere by dawn. Honestly, has anyone else seen what happened in Crimea??
If Russians buy it you can expect tanks to roll on Grasmere by dawn. Honestly, has anyone else seen what happened in Crimea?? kendalboi
  • Score: -1

9:30pm Thu 8 May 14

jazzactivist says...

No, I don't think that ab oatman's comments sum up the situation at all, hogheaven. S/he is deliberately avoiding the issue of inequality in the area. In Britain, as an island, land = wealth, and only a few people own nearly all of the land, often inherited. It isn't only what wealthy people own on paper and in hard cash that sums up their value, but the privileges to which that title and land gives them access. Haven't you ever watched those films and documentaries where someone has to make a million within X amount of time? They make it by not having to spend anything, as just presenting themselves as millionaires or titled people living in a manor opens doors that are closed to others and generates lots of freebies, goodwill and trust.

The reason people with inheritances have to pay tax now is because, for so long, people were avoiding declaring all of their assets and receiving tax free money and property and keeping it within their own families. Tax was paid when it was first 'earned' (could be generations ago) but then subsequent generations just received a tax-free hand-me-down. It isn't the case, as described by ab oatman, that the Lowthers are poor people who have nothing more than a great chunk of land that no one wants. Among many other things, they own an iconic mountain in one of the most desirable parts of the country. If tax hasn't been paid on all their family assets in the past, then it's quite right that the current heirs should have to pay it now. I'm sure a charitable trust could make better use of the land, and make sure it remains open to all. Not everything in life has to return a profit; it's OK to just give things away for the greater good.
No, I don't think that ab oatman's comments sum up the situation at all, hogheaven. S/he is deliberately avoiding the issue of inequality in the area. In Britain, as an island, land = wealth, and only a few people own nearly all of the land, often inherited. It isn't only what wealthy people own on paper and in hard cash that sums up their value, but the privileges to which that title and land gives them access. Haven't you ever watched those films and documentaries where someone has to make a million within X amount of time? They make it by not having to spend anything, as just presenting themselves as millionaires or titled people living in a manor opens doors that are closed to others and generates lots of freebies, goodwill and trust. The reason people with inheritances have to pay tax now is because, for so long, people were avoiding declaring all of their assets and receiving tax free money and property and keeping it within their own families. Tax was paid when it was first 'earned' (could be generations ago) but then subsequent generations just received a tax-free hand-me-down. It isn't the case, as described by ab oatman, that the Lowthers are poor people who have nothing more than a great chunk of land that no one wants. Among many other things, they own an iconic mountain in one of the most desirable parts of the country. If tax hasn't been paid on all their family assets in the past, then it's quite right that the current heirs should have to pay it now. I'm sure a charitable trust could make better use of the land, and make sure it remains open to all. Not everything in life has to return a profit; it's OK to just give things away for the greater good. jazzactivist
  • Score: -12

7:35am Fri 9 May 14

hogheaven says...

jazzactivist wrote:
No, I don't think that ab oatman's comments sum up the situation at all, hogheaven. S/he is deliberately avoiding the issue of inequality in the area. In Britain, as an island, land = wealth, and only a few people own nearly all of the land, often inherited. It isn't only what wealthy people own on paper and in hard cash that sums up their value, but the privileges to which that title and land gives them access. Haven't you ever watched those films and documentaries where someone has to make a million within X amount of time? They make it by not having to spend anything, as just presenting themselves as millionaires or titled people living in a manor opens doors that are closed to others and generates lots of freebies, goodwill and trust.

The reason people with inheritances have to pay tax now is because, for so long, people were avoiding declaring all of their assets and receiving tax free money and property and keeping it within their own families. Tax was paid when it was first 'earned' (could be generations ago) but then subsequent generations just received a tax-free hand-me-down. It isn't the case, as described by ab oatman, that the Lowthers are poor people who have nothing more than a great chunk of land that no one wants. Among many other things, they own an iconic mountain in one of the most desirable parts of the country. If tax hasn't been paid on all their family assets in the past, then it's quite right that the current heirs should have to pay it now. I'm sure a charitable trust could make better use of the land, and make sure it remains open to all. Not everything in life has to return a profit; it's OK to just give things away for the greater good.
Sorry Jazz I still prefer ab oatman's explanation of the situation, i know you have a big downer on anyone with wealth, thats something you have to live with. like it or not there will always be someone wealthier than you and I.In this case the man as been landed with an obscene tax demand to pay for something that on paper as no value, his only crime is that he was gifted it by family inheritance, and not through choice. That is why in past decades many fine old homes fell into disrepair because their owners were crippled by tax bills.All I ask is that the Tax system should be Fair nothing more.
[quote][p][bold]jazzactivist[/bold] wrote: No, I don't think that ab oatman's comments sum up the situation at all, hogheaven. S/he is deliberately avoiding the issue of inequality in the area. In Britain, as an island, land = wealth, and only a few people own nearly all of the land, often inherited. It isn't only what wealthy people own on paper and in hard cash that sums up their value, but the privileges to which that title and land gives them access. Haven't you ever watched those films and documentaries where someone has to make a million within X amount of time? They make it by not having to spend anything, as just presenting themselves as millionaires or titled people living in a manor opens doors that are closed to others and generates lots of freebies, goodwill and trust. The reason people with inheritances have to pay tax now is because, for so long, people were avoiding declaring all of their assets and receiving tax free money and property and keeping it within their own families. Tax was paid when it was first 'earned' (could be generations ago) but then subsequent generations just received a tax-free hand-me-down. It isn't the case, as described by ab oatman, that the Lowthers are poor people who have nothing more than a great chunk of land that no one wants. Among many other things, they own an iconic mountain in one of the most desirable parts of the country. If tax hasn't been paid on all their family assets in the past, then it's quite right that the current heirs should have to pay it now. I'm sure a charitable trust could make better use of the land, and make sure it remains open to all. Not everything in life has to return a profit; it's OK to just give things away for the greater good.[/p][/quote]Sorry Jazz I still prefer ab oatman's explanation of the situation, i know you have a big downer on anyone with wealth, thats something you have to live with. like it or not there will always be someone wealthier than you and I.In this case the man as been landed with an obscene tax demand to pay for something that on paper as no value, his only crime is that he was gifted it by family inheritance, and not through choice. That is why in past decades many fine old homes fell into disrepair because their owners were crippled by tax bills.All I ask is that the Tax system should be Fair nothing more. hogheaven
  • Score: 10

12:48pm Fri 9 May 14

Boxbag says...

Inheritance tax is abhorrent and should be he fact that this man comes from a relatively rich family is irrelevant. How they got all that land etc in the first place is another matter. Just scrap inheritance tax!
Inheritance tax is abhorrent and should be he fact that this man comes from a relatively rich family is irrelevant. How they got all that land etc in the first place is another matter. Just scrap inheritance tax! Boxbag
  • Score: 1

2:23pm Fri 9 May 14

Kendal Jock says...

ab oatman wrote:
You are all missing a very pertinent point, if you inherit a lump sum then paying tax on that is all well and good.
But this is an inheritance that only has a financial value on paper, in practical terms it is a vast swathe of land that is actually worthless. He is not making any sort of profit or financial gain from it,
all he has is a piece of paper that says "congratulation
s, you own a big chunk of mountain that you cannot build on or charge for the use of. By the way, now you own it, here is a bill for 9 million pounds"!

There is a myth that these type of people are fabulously wealthy just because they have ownership of houses and land that cost huge amounts of money to maintain but give little or no financial reward in return.
The fact that none of you even knew he owns it speaks volumes, yet now he needs to sell it to pay off a huge tax bill you are all up in arms!

Put yourself in the same position, you inhereit some huge part of the heritage of the country for which you will be flayed alive if you try to make any sort of financial gain from, then think of how you will pay the bills which come rolling in because you are the owner.
Well said sir!
[quote][p][bold]ab oatman[/bold] wrote: You are all missing a very pertinent point, if you inherit a lump sum then paying tax on that is all well and good. But this is an inheritance that only has a financial value on paper, in practical terms it is a vast swathe of land that is actually worthless. He is not making any sort of profit or financial gain from it, all he has is a piece of paper that says "congratulation s, you own a big chunk of mountain that you cannot build on or charge for the use of. By the way, now you own it, here is a bill for 9 million pounds"! There is a myth that these type of people are fabulously wealthy just because they have ownership of houses and land that cost huge amounts of money to maintain but give little or no financial reward in return. The fact that none of you even knew he owns it speaks volumes, yet now he needs to sell it to pay off a huge tax bill you are all up in arms! Put yourself in the same position, you inhereit some huge part of the heritage of the country for which you will be flayed alive if you try to make any sort of financial gain from, then think of how you will pay the bills which come rolling in because you are the owner.[/p][/quote]Well said sir! Kendal Jock
  • Score: 7

2:31pm Fri 9 May 14

Kendal Jock says...

hogheaven wrote:
jazzactivist wrote:
No, I don't think that ab oatman's comments sum up the situation at all, hogheaven. S/he is deliberately avoiding the issue of inequality in the area. In Britain, as an island, land = wealth, and only a few people own nearly all of the land, often inherited. It isn't only what wealthy people own on paper and in hard cash that sums up their value, but the privileges to which that title and land gives them access. Haven't you ever watched those films and documentaries where someone has to make a million within X amount of time? They make it by not having to spend anything, as just presenting themselves as millionaires or titled people living in a manor opens doors that are closed to others and generates lots of freebies, goodwill and trust.

The reason people with inheritances have to pay tax now is because, for so long, people were avoiding declaring all of their assets and receiving tax free money and property and keeping it within their own families. Tax was paid when it was first 'earned' (could be generations ago) but then subsequent generations just received a tax-free hand-me-down. It isn't the case, as described by ab oatman, that the Lowthers are poor people who have nothing more than a great chunk of land that no one wants. Among many other things, they own an iconic mountain in one of the most desirable parts of the country. If tax hasn't been paid on all their family assets in the past, then it's quite right that the current heirs should have to pay it now. I'm sure a charitable trust could make better use of the land, and make sure it remains open to all. Not everything in life has to return a profit; it's OK to just give things away for the greater good.
Sorry Jazz I still prefer ab oatman's explanation of the situation, i know you have a big downer on anyone with wealth, thats something you have to live with. like it or not there will always be someone wealthier than you and I.In this case the man as been landed with an obscene tax demand to pay for something that on paper as no value, his only crime is that he was gifted it by family inheritance, and not through choice. That is why in past decades many fine old homes fell into disrepair because their owners were crippled by tax bills.All I ask is that the Tax system should be Fair nothing more.
Lady Jazz is a well left of centre activist remember, speaking for the poor.
Doesn't she know that 7% of so-called rich people pay 85% of the tax?
[quote][p][bold]hogheaven[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jazzactivist[/bold] wrote: No, I don't think that ab oatman's comments sum up the situation at all, hogheaven. S/he is deliberately avoiding the issue of inequality in the area. In Britain, as an island, land = wealth, and only a few people own nearly all of the land, often inherited. It isn't only what wealthy people own on paper and in hard cash that sums up their value, but the privileges to which that title and land gives them access. Haven't you ever watched those films and documentaries where someone has to make a million within X amount of time? They make it by not having to spend anything, as just presenting themselves as millionaires or titled people living in a manor opens doors that are closed to others and generates lots of freebies, goodwill and trust. The reason people with inheritances have to pay tax now is because, for so long, people were avoiding declaring all of their assets and receiving tax free money and property and keeping it within their own families. Tax was paid when it was first 'earned' (could be generations ago) but then subsequent generations just received a tax-free hand-me-down. It isn't the case, as described by ab oatman, that the Lowthers are poor people who have nothing more than a great chunk of land that no one wants. Among many other things, they own an iconic mountain in one of the most desirable parts of the country. If tax hasn't been paid on all their family assets in the past, then it's quite right that the current heirs should have to pay it now. I'm sure a charitable trust could make better use of the land, and make sure it remains open to all. Not everything in life has to return a profit; it's OK to just give things away for the greater good.[/p][/quote]Sorry Jazz I still prefer ab oatman's explanation of the situation, i know you have a big downer on anyone with wealth, thats something you have to live with. like it or not there will always be someone wealthier than you and I.In this case the man as been landed with an obscene tax demand to pay for something that on paper as no value, his only crime is that he was gifted it by family inheritance, and not through choice. That is why in past decades many fine old homes fell into disrepair because their owners were crippled by tax bills.All I ask is that the Tax system should be Fair nothing more.[/p][/quote]Lady Jazz is a well left of centre activist remember, speaking for the poor. Doesn't she know that 7% of so-called rich people pay 85% of the tax? Kendal Jock
  • Score: 1

5:57pm Fri 9 May 14

jazzactivist says...

I'm not well off by the stretch of anyone's imagination, Kendal Jock, but I am well-educated and have worked hard all my adult life too. I just think it is dreadfully immoral for people to inherit money and property and hoard it, and be protected for doing so. The Lowthers own land and buildings all over the country, not just here, and mostly don't do a lot with it. It seems particularly unfair for people like them, and their pals at Sizergh Castle and Levens Hall etc, to own so much in an area where it is constantly being reported that there are lots of young working people here who can't afford a home to live in or a patch of land to build one on. Large portions of those stately homes could be converted into affordable housing and large tracts of land given over to public ownership, and they would get the kudos of helping out and still have more than enough to live on.

I don't give a hoot if 7% of the population do pay 85% of the tax in the UK, but I doubt that they do as all the tax evaders have shown, and if they do then it's because they are considered to be able to afford it. It's right that people who hoard money and property in their families pay for the privilege of doing so. If they don't like it they can always give most of it away and live like the majority of the population. What's with all the 'wealth apologists' on this thread, I'm sure you're not all rolling in gold dust!
I'm not well off by the stretch of anyone's imagination, Kendal Jock, but I am well-educated and have worked hard all my adult life too. I just think it is dreadfully immoral for people to inherit money and property and hoard it, and be protected for doing so. The Lowthers own land and buildings all over the country, not just here, and mostly don't do a lot with it. It seems particularly unfair for people like them, and their pals at Sizergh Castle and Levens Hall etc, to own so much in an area where it is constantly being reported that there are lots of young working people here who can't afford a home to live in or a patch of land to build one on. Large portions of those stately homes could be converted into affordable housing and large tracts of land given over to public ownership, and they would get the kudos of helping out and still have more than enough to live on. I don't give a hoot if 7% of the population do pay 85% of the tax in the UK, but I doubt that they do as all the tax evaders have shown, and if they do then it's because they are considered to be able to afford it. It's right that people who hoard money and property in their families pay for the privilege of doing so. If they don't like it they can always give most of it away and live like the majority of the population. What's with all the 'wealth apologists' on this thread, I'm sure you're not all rolling in gold dust! jazzactivist
  • Score: -17

6:56pm Fri 9 May 14

hogheaven says...

jazzactivist wrote:
I'm not well off by the stretch of anyone's imagination, Kendal Jock, but I am well-educated and have worked hard all my adult life too. I just think it is dreadfully immoral for people to inherit money and property and hoard it, and be protected for doing so. The Lowthers own land and buildings all over the country, not just here, and mostly don't do a lot with it. It seems particularly unfair for people like them, and their pals at Sizergh Castle and Levens Hall etc, to own so much in an area where it is constantly being reported that there are lots of young working people here who can't afford a home to live in or a patch of land to build one on. Large portions of those stately homes could be converted into affordable housing and large tracts of land given over to public ownership, and they would get the kudos of helping out and still have more than enough to live on.

I don't give a hoot if 7% of the population do pay 85% of the tax in the UK, but I doubt that they do as all the tax evaders have shown, and if they do then it's because they are considered to be able to afford it. It's right that people who hoard money and property in their families pay for the privilege of doing so. If they don't like it they can always give most of it away and live like the majority of the population. What's with all the 'wealth apologists' on this thread, I'm sure you're not all rolling in gold dust!
Jazz I think you have lost the plot,life is nothing like what you advocate,it just would not work.There will always be wealthy people and companies if you take their wealth off them who is going to make up the shortfall, if 7% of the population pay 85%of the taxes who will make up the shortfall .They would have to increase taxes for the lower paid workers to do it .As for building affordable housing at levens and Sizergh ,!!!!!! Jazz I think you are need of some serious therapy, you have NO right to demand people give up their land /money its not immoral to have posessions but your suggestions are.
[quote][p][bold]jazzactivist[/bold] wrote: I'm not well off by the stretch of anyone's imagination, Kendal Jock, but I am well-educated and have worked hard all my adult life too. I just think it is dreadfully immoral for people to inherit money and property and hoard it, and be protected for doing so. The Lowthers own land and buildings all over the country, not just here, and mostly don't do a lot with it. It seems particularly unfair for people like them, and their pals at Sizergh Castle and Levens Hall etc, to own so much in an area where it is constantly being reported that there are lots of young working people here who can't afford a home to live in or a patch of land to build one on. Large portions of those stately homes could be converted into affordable housing and large tracts of land given over to public ownership, and they would get the kudos of helping out and still have more than enough to live on. I don't give a hoot if 7% of the population do pay 85% of the tax in the UK, but I doubt that they do as all the tax evaders have shown, and if they do then it's because they are considered to be able to afford it. It's right that people who hoard money and property in their families pay for the privilege of doing so. If they don't like it they can always give most of it away and live like the majority of the population. What's with all the 'wealth apologists' on this thread, I'm sure you're not all rolling in gold dust![/p][/quote]Jazz I think you have lost the plot,life is nothing like what you advocate,it just would not work.There will always be wealthy people and companies if you take their wealth off them who is going to make up the shortfall, if 7% of the population pay 85%of the taxes who will make up the shortfall .They would have to increase taxes for the lower paid workers to do it .As for building affordable housing at levens and Sizergh ,!!!!!! Jazz I think you are need of some serious therapy, you have NO right to demand people give up their land /money its not immoral to have posessions but your suggestions are. hogheaven
  • Score: 13

8:04pm Fri 9 May 14

searcher21c says...

As I understand it, farmers don't pay inheritance tax no matter how many properties or how much land they own. Where would this leave everyone if correct?
As I understand it, farmers don't pay inheritance tax no matter how many properties or how much land they own. Where would this leave everyone if correct? searcher21c
  • Score: 0

11:28pm Fri 9 May 14

Sick of moaners says...

God that jazzactivist is so full of it. So what if people on here have 2nd homes, that's there risk in buying one for there future and they kids or for old age.
Her stupid views on everything are a joke. Everything she says is total bu+++++. Weather that's turn the street lights off or people who have done alright from themselves in life. If you don't like it do everyone a big favour and go back to Scotland. U talk nothing but sh@@ anyone agree???
God that jazzactivist is so full of it. So what if people on here have 2nd homes, that's there risk in buying one for there future and they kids or for old age. Her stupid views on everything are a joke. Everything she says is total bu+++++. Weather that's turn the street lights off or people who have done alright from themselves in life. If you don't like it do everyone a big favour and go back to Scotland. U talk nothing but sh@@ anyone agree??? Sick of moaners
  • Score: 21

12:53pm Sat 10 May 14

ImFromAmbleside says...

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, Sick of moaners.

Your assertion that there is any risk attached to buying a second home in the Lake District is ridiculous.

If you can afford a second home in the Lake District there is only one direction the price will go, and the great thing is that the more second homes people buy in the Lakes the faster and higher the price will rise!

This is a good news too because it will remove any aspirations of actually owning their own home from the locals who actually LIVE and WORK here and pretty soon there will be no community left at all.

The resulting rent increases will eventually force out the few who try to hang in there, and pretty soon you will be able to enjoy your 'bolt hole' in the Lakes without any distractions. just you, your second home, and all the other second home owners. Idyllic.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, Sick of moaners. Your assertion that there is any risk attached to buying a second home in the Lake District is ridiculous. If you can afford a second home in the Lake District there is only one direction the price will go, and the great thing is that the more second homes people buy in the Lakes the faster and higher the price will rise! This is a good news too because it will remove any aspirations of actually owning their own home from the locals who actually LIVE and WORK here and pretty soon there will be no community left at all. The resulting rent increases will eventually force out the few who try to hang in there, and pretty soon you will be able to enjoy your 'bolt hole' in the Lakes without any distractions. just you, your second home, and all the other second home owners. Idyllic. ImFromAmbleside
  • Score: 11

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree