• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

getting a bill from a local church for $100k+ for repairs..

waggy

waggy

No Lifer
how would you like to get a bill from a church near where you live? to help pay for rapairs. for one you don't go to and is only open for weddings and such?

the law in Euruope says that local home owners have to pay for it..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/9441645/Your-church-needs-you.html

People like Andrew and Gail Wallbank. In the early Nineties, they inherited Glebe Farm in Aston Cantlow in Warwickshire. They vaguely knew about the ancient covenant on the property, but thought that at most it meant putting a tenner in the vicar’s collecting bucket when he came round for a sherry before Christmas. Then, in 1994, they received a bill for £100,000 for their share of repairs to the nearby Saint John the Baptist church. They appealed, all the way up to the House of Lords, but lost in December 2008. The law may be an old one, but the obligation remained.


that is just fucking nuts.. IF the church can't afford the repairs to bad close it down.
 
I'm not a fan of religion, or the law, but I imagine the obligation was clearly stated on the deed. I don't think I have a problem with it.
 
lxskllr said:
I'm not a fan of religion, or the law, but I imagine the obligation was clearly stated on the deed. I don't think I have a problem with it.
Click to expand...

a few articles mention it is not. in fact the law has not been used for 100+ years. only reason is with the economy not as many are giving to the church, the church used to get funding from the government. so they want to repair these old churches and using a 500+ yr old law to do it.
 
waggy said:
a few articles mention it is not. in fact the law has not been used for 100+ years. only reason is with the economy not as many are giving to the church, the church used to get funding from the government. so they want to repair these old churches and using a 500+ yr old law to do it.
Click to expand...

If that's the case, then I can't support that. I like old buildings, and I'd be willing to /volunteer/ time, or money, but mandating that is nonsense. Encumbrances to the property should be clearly stated on the deed. If the building wasn't so old, I'd make it disappear over night.
 
I'd tell them to piss off and take me to court. Even if it's buried somewhere deep in a contract, there's no way a modern court would uphold it.
 
waggy said:
how would you like to get a bill from a church near where you live? to help pay for rapairs. for one you don't go to and is only open for weddings and such?

the law in Euruope says that local home owners have to pay for it..
Click to expand...

Britain != europe...
 
waggy said:
lol oops. yeah.



wrong. it went to court and held up. the family was forced to sell the property to pay for the bill.
Click to expand...

meh, give it a couple of years and if the douchecopters in the EU has their way then you'll be right

*sigh*

us present day danes are a disgrace, back in the day we would get in a boat, rob them blind and sex up their women, now we let them tell us how curved our cucumbers are allowed to be... 🙁
 
Instead of worrying about the religious bullshit, maybe they should consider selling it to someone who can work it. Make a B&B, pub, restaurant, add restrictions for maintaining historical integrity, and call it a day. It's a cool building, but it doesn't have to be a church. The day's coming when they'll all sit unused and irrelevant. It's time to start thinking of a transition.
 
That's shameful of the church to 'rob' people like that. There's no fairness in it at all.

Looks like this is the result of British peoples love for all things old. If they as a society want to keep and preserve their old buildings, fine, get the government involved. But don't rob the few neighbors nearby. That's disgraceful.

And where the h3ll is the Crown in all this? They've got billions.

Fern
 
They may be obligated due to an old law, but I'd certainly fight it on other grounds; perhaps some non-fraud law.... because how in the hell does a country church spend $161,000 for repairs, and it certainly looks like they waited to do repairs until someone got title to the farm.

It really makes me sick when you see the treasures of the Vatican; literally stolen through selling absolutions and generations of greedy church workers who weren't above using their power to take as much as they possibly could.

I would have burned down the farm, salted the fields, and moved to Brazil.
 
waggy said:
wrong. it went to court and held up. the family was forced to sell the property to pay for the bill.
Click to expand...
It didn't just go to court. It went all the way to the House of Lords (effectively the Supreme Court), and the family lost.

The law is now being changed. From 2013, all these ancient claims must be registered on the deeds. The Church has until then to register formally the claim and order the deeds to any affected homes amended so that they clearly show the claim.

If claims are not registered by the deadline, that claim becomes nullified.
 
That seems just wrong. Thou shalt not steal. It's essentially what the church is doing. Who cares if it was in fine print somewhere, that just makes it legal, but does not mean it's ok.

Normally people who actually go to the church donate money for this stuff. At least that's how my church works. Often they manage to get volunteers too. Lot of the guys are handy so it's rare they need to get a contractor in for something. So they only pay for materials that way.
 
Red Squirrel said:
That seems just wrong. Thou shalt not steal. It's essentially what the church is doing. Who cares if it was in fine print somewhere, that just makes it legal, but does not mean it's ok.
Click to expand...
The Church has always been about taking money. It was common practice in the 16th-18th centuries for the Church to require a tax (called a tithe) from each person in the parish.

Typically, the govt and the Church would each take about 30% of a person's income.

Hence the English nursery rhyme, "Baa baa black sheep", where 1 bag of wool goes to the master (the government), 1 to the dame (the Church) and 1 to the little boy (who actually earned it).

These days, it's the same - it's just that they try to be a bit more subtle about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top