Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney
Ladies and Gentlemen
In our 90 acres we have a natural pond, well mini lake then over 1 inch in depth, uninvited are taking clothes off and 'skinny dipping' I have erected (wait for it......SIGNS) stating the usual blah blah, my general legal question is if I supply the rubber rings that sit on a post am I by default accepting that folks will swim here or may wander in and potentially drown or should one not include them and settle on the prohibited signs???
I know what I think but this is a serious 'ask the audience' question and AM really interested in your response.
To answer the couple that you will have; Private Property and
I know all about responsibility to invited, uninvited etc, A public footpath is within 100 metres, you need to push through trees and a fence to gain access, and its about 8' in depth (never was good at metric!) the grass is green, water inviting, females in numerous offices clapping and cheering at 'skinny dippers, thought I saw a couple of chaps clapping, oh ignore that one, yep, think that’s it. So rings or not? That is the question.
Many thanks
Charles
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Steve Buxton
I am not qualified to answer the question but will give my humble opinion.
The provision of life saving equipment is not an invitation to swim, and may in fact be an indication to the unwary that the lake is dangerous and backs up the signs telling people not to swim.
Once you have provided them, then I think it would be incumbent upon you to maintain them properley and ensure that you replace them if nicked, because otherwise you are indicating that you know the risk, have taken precautions, but not botehred to maintain them.
Don't know if that helps ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney
Some good points Steve. thank you for taking the time to respond.
Much appreciated
Charles
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David P. Johnson
Putting up 'rubber rings' just acknowledges that you accept that people may experience difficulties in the water - falling in for example: it isn't an open invitation to swim.
If anything the better strategy might be to actually promote the use of the area around the lake by the general public - people will be immensely less likely to go skinny dipping if they know there's a chance that the local elderly copule will come up to the lake for their daily walk.
That way, it serves as an active deterrent from swimming, and will earn lots of good karma for the company in the local community and press.
Just a thought!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Anthony Slinger
Charles,
Are you aware of Tomlinson V Congleton Borough Council? Search brings up plenty of information.
A site that gives a good explanation is :-
http://www.river-swimming.co.uk/judgement.htm
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
Can you give me the adress of your pond ? As a (theoreticaly) OAP,The use of words such as a "skinny dipping", "elderly copule" and "karma" in the same thread has excited my interest.
Apart from that, how's the new job going ?
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney
Merv
Not so bad, thanks for asking. Have had DDA and QA dumped on me as well, and well anything else that is connected.
As for the pond I was thinking of putting some portable beach huts in, but then again if its to be a skinny dippers paradise there seems little point!
The invaders by the way are some passing 'diddycoys' perhaps taking a bath and nothing more sinister.
Take care, and don't forget to call in for lunch, we can always take a swim!
Charley
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Charley remember its not the able bodied tresspassing swimmers that are the problem, what about kids and non swimmers, we had big problems with this back in the days of when I in the MOD, drowning etc etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney
Dave
What exactly did you do to resolve the problem?
Cheers
Charley
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By J Knight
Charles,
Anthony's post hits the nail on the head; you have nothing to worry about, read Tomlinson v Congleton BC; it has since been used (as precedent) in cases involving children; it puts the whole thing back on to a footing of personal (and parental) responsibility. It is absolutely directly applicable to your circumstances since it involved people swimming, with the knowledge of the landowner, in a place where they weren't supposed to,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
We basically put a barrier around these (Fence) or filled them in!
Not ideal etc but was costly and the problem went away
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.