Mildenhall court case

[Steve Turner 0]

he measured the noise of banger racing

I thought the subject was stock cars ? If it's only bangers, I'd agree that they're not especially loud.

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

I thought the subject was stock cars ? If it's only bangers, I'd agree that they're not especially loud.

 

They usually have both in the same meetings.

[2ndbendpostie 28]

I thought the subject was stock cars ? If it's only bangers, I'd agree that they're not especially loud.

Hi Steve, just to get a bit technical, what Mildenhall get is the saloon stock cars and the F2 brisca formula, plus the bangers, I think up at brandon you are more used to the BRISCA F1's which I agree with you are the loudest of the loud in small oval racing.

If you read the court summary both sides had noise tests done proffesionally and in general no one motorsport was that much louder than the other, but as Halifax has said, speedway is a much shorter length of time so would cause less problems.

Also although I have'nt followed the debate that closely,how will this new silencer rule affect the DBL readings ? could it work in Mildenhall's favour if they come in.

I also understand a certain Mr Long was master of cerimonies last night, now if that man came back to do the job on matchdays !, how much would that improve things, no offence to the others that have done the job, but since Kevin packed it in, it just has not been the same.

[*JJ 526]

Also although I have'nt followed the debate that closely, how will this new silencer rule affect the DBL readings ? could it work in Mildenhall's favour if they come in.

They were used in a few meetings at Birmingham early last year, and the speedway racing was inaudible a quarter of a mile away. This is in an urban site, of course; but then again, the airport is a bit further away!

[Phil 303]

I stand to be criticised on this one (I will speak to Dave Coventry tonight) but :

 

1 The judge ruled against the stadium owners;

 

2/ Compensation totals about £20k;

 

3/ The judge has suggested that an arrangement be made between the parties over events at the stadium;

 

4/ The people who made the complaint have suggested 40 days a year and if it runs after 6pm 35 days a year;

 

5/ If no agreement is made, the judge may impose an injunction on noise levels that will not permit speedway (I stand very much to be corrected on this, but it appears to me that the noise levels he will allow are way below those made by speedway bikes).

 

One thing has definitely emerged from this: even with planning permission no speedway track is safe.

 

Sorry if already been mentioned ....

 

 

http://www.cambridge...nt-pay-bill.htm

 

 

 

£20k stadium noise payout won't pay bill

John Goode

A couple have been awarded more than £20,000 by a judge for disturbance from a nearby stadium and motor-cycle track.

 

But the damages payout to fireman Raymond Shields and Katherine Lawrence – who said the noise from Mildenhall Stadium and the nearby Motoland UK motocross track blighted their lives – will be dwarfed by the six-figure lawyers' bills run up during the 11-day High Court case.

 

Judge Richard Seymour QC said he was satisfied noise from the stadium, which hosts speedway events, banger and stock car racing, constitutes a nuisance and interferes with the couple's enjoyment of their home, Fenland, which is 500 metres away.

 

However, he dismissed claims that incidents of "harassment" the couple said they suffered due to the stand they took over the noise could be blamed on any of those involved in owning or operating the venue.

 

Judge Seymour ordered Dave Coventry, one of the stadium's owners, and operators Motoland, to pay 60 per cent of the couple's legal costs bills, estimated at £400,000. However, Mr Shields and Ms Lawrence must pay the legal bills of the other defendants.

 

For the noise nuisance, the judge awarded the couple total damages of £20,850.

 

Of that sum, £10,325 must be paid by Dave Coventry, £10,425 by Motoland UK Ltd, which operates the track, and £100 by James Waters, a district councillor who owned the stadium between 2005 and 2008.

 

The couple's damages claims against other defendants, including the freehold owners of the track, Terence Waters and Anthony Morley, were either earlier withdrawn or dismissed by the judge.

 

The judge imposed an injunction requiring strict noise monitoring, to start on January 1 next year or when the couple's home, damaged in a fire they said was linked to their complaint, is habitable again.

[Phil 303]

is that the end of the stadium, only just catching up on things. ?

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

is that the end of the stadium, only just catching up on things. ?

 

The court summary indicates that the injunctions were to be decided after consultation with counsel.

 

The newspaper report seems to suggest that they have been issued but the details aren't clear.

 

The costs are mind boggling, and one has to wonder whether it was all worth it -even the couple who took the action are looking at £250k.

Edited March 7, 2011 by Halifaxtiger

[Damon 49]

still doesnt seem very clear whats going to happen?

[rhidassa 73]

I'd be interested to know what the terms of the judgement are re payment? Legal firms don't tend to wait over long before wanting their bills settle, and judgements usually set out timings to make payment?

I agree its ridiculous.. too often those involved think with that narrow-minded self assurance that they are right, and, naturally, will win the case and have their fees paid... rarely works out that way, and usually all involved suffer from extortionate needless cost.

Edited March 7, 2011 by rhidassa

[semion 2,192]

I'd be interested to know what the terms of the judgement are re payment? Legal firms don't tend to wait over long before wanting their bills settle, and judgements usually set out timings to make payment?

I agree its ridiculous.. too often those involved think with that narrow-minded self assurance that they are right, and, naturally, will win the case and have their fees paid... rarely works out that way, and usually all involved suffer from extortionate needless cost.

Most legal firms will want paying as they go along. They will be invoicing whats on the clock on a monthly basis. They dont like leaving large bills running, then running the risk of not getting the money from the client. Makes it even harder when they lose. I think the Bill is a lot more than people are suggesting. If one side had a bill of 400k, then you can be sure the other sides bill will also be around that figure. Plus dont forget there were more than 2 parties involved in all of this.

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

I agree its ridiculous.. too often those involved think with that narrow-minded self assurance that they are right, and, naturally, will win the case and have their fees paid... rarely works out that way, and usually all involved suffer from extortionate needless cost.

 

Dead right

 

I am not certain what anyone has gained from this. Dave Coventry and the Moto X chap have huge legal bills and the possibility of their facilities closing for good and the complainant also has a huge legal bill, a gutted house and the possibility of long term harrassment.

 

Most legal firms will want paying as they go along. They will be invoicing whats on the clock on a monthly basis. They dont like leaving large bills running, then running the risk of not getting the money from the client. Makes it even harder when they lose. I think the Bill is a lot more than people are suggesting. If one side had a bill of 400k, then you can be sure the other sides bill will also be around that figure. Plus dont forget there were more than 2 parties involved in all of this.

 

According to the newspaper report, Dave Coventry & the Moto X chap have to meet 60% of the complainant's costs, while the complainant has to meet costs incurred by those who have had their cases dismissed.

 

The bill will probably be around £1m all told, with the complainant liable for around £250k nd Dave Coventry and the Moto X chap liable for the rest between them.

 

Truly astonishing.

[semion 2,192]

Dead right

 

I am not certain what anyone has gained from this. Dave Coventry and the Moto X chap have huge legal bills and the possibility of their facilities closing for good and the complainant also has a huge legal bill, a gutted house and the possibility of long term harrassment.

 

 

 

According to the newspaper report, Dave Coventry & the Moto X chap have to meet 60% of the complainant's costs, while the complainant has to meet costs incurred by those who have had their cases dismissed.

 

The bill will probably be around £1m all told, with the complainant liable for around £250k nd Dave Coventry and the Moto X chap liable for the rest between them.

 

Truly astonishing.

I thought Coventry and Moto X had to pay 60% 0f 400k = which is 240k ( plus their own costs) leaving the other side to pay 160k, less what thet were given as a settlement.

 

Like you say truly astonishing, but par for the course once it gets that far. Can you imagine what the bill will be if Cov and P'Boro take on the BSPA...wow

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

I thought Coventry and Moto X had to pay 60% 0f 400k = which is 240k ( plus their own costs) leaving the other side to pay 160k, less what thet were given as a settlement.

 

Like you say truly astonishing, but par for the course once it gets that far. Can you imagine what the bill will be if Cov and P'Boro take on the BSPA...wow

 

That's right.

 

The other side also have to pay the costs of two others (Terry Waters was one) so they are probably up to £250.

 

I bet the costs the BSPA & C& P have had are substantial and all for bugger all.

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

Taken from RDC website:

 

'Joint statement from Terry and James Waters, Cliff Bastick on behalf of Moto-land UK Ltd, and Dave Coventry trading as RDC Promotions.

 

The Judgement was handed down on Friday in the High Court regarding the alleged noise nuisance from Mildenhall Stadium and the adjacent Motocross track at West Row. Whilst we are naturally disappointed that the Judge found the activities at the Stadium and Track to be a noise nuisance, there is no immediate threat to the future of either the Stadium or Track as the terms of the injunction are still to be finalised, and in any case will not come into effect until the Claimant’s property is habitable, or the 1 January 2012, whichever happens sooner.

 

The Judge has totally dismissed all claims against all of the Defendants in relation to the alleged campaign of harassment and intimidation, including the most serious claims regarding the forklift attack and the fire at the property, and stated that the alleged circumstantial evidence amounted to little more than the coincidence of the attacks upon Fenland during the period in which this action was pending.

Damages were granted to Ms Lawrence and Mr Shields jointly in the sum of £10,425 against Moto-land UK Ltd, £10,325 against Dave Coventry, and £100 against James Waters. The Claimants’ insurers will however have to reimburse Terry Waters, Tony Morley and James Waters’ full costs as the case against them failed.

 

The Claimants’ legal advisors asked the Judge for the right to appeal against this decision, which he refused, as he believes there is no realistic chance of success. However, there is still the option open for them to approach the Court of Appeal, so we must wait for now to see what course of action they are going to take. Meanwhile, activities at the Stadium and Track will continue.

 

We would like to thank everyone for all of their support throughout this action, particularly those who wrote letters of support and appeared in court as witnesses on our behalf.'

[semion 2,192]

So it sounds like an ambulance chase claim