| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Invite for Councillors to respond | |
| Posted by: | Paul Brownlee | |
| Date/Time: | 03/05/19 19:15:00 |
| I think you've missed my point. Suppose my/your mother was placed in a care-home, and her property was left vacant for a year or more? Perhaps her only son/daughter was overseas or not physically able to maintain it. Perhaps there was no family? It's not unusual. Then some busybody concludes that her property was vacant, comes on a forum like this, and identifies it as unoccupied. Do you really think this is justified? Such action may be encouraged in Authoritarian regimes, but the last time I looked this is not one. The original poster states that the Worple Avenue property has been left empty since last August - that's only eight months - and hardly a great length of time - there could be many factors involved regarding this property and the property of the deceased, so what right does anyone assume that just because the previous occupant has died then it is being neglected or readily available for new occupancy? I am quite furious that some nosey parker would be sticking his nose into affairs which do not concern him (or her) and broadcasting a situation that he or she has really no right to interfere in. I have no connection with this property, and if the OP doesn't either then he really should refrain from stirring up discontent and stop being an interfering busybody! I also believe that the moderator on this forum should be more vigilant to prevent such sweeping and potentially damaging comments. |