[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Tower lawsuit

Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower lawsuit
From: Randy <>
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 17:07:10 -0500
List-post: <">>
Things vary widely by area, and who it is that's making the decisions.
I had a bit of a LARGE issue back in the early 90's...somebody that had 
a badge and
a patrol car was a bit of non-friendly...still haven't met the guy, I 
eventually moved.
I was told that he took a petition with 318 signatures downtown, and 
*shook* it at
them. But, OTOH, he would NOT give it to them. I have to wonder *why*.
I'm not going to say any more,  because that would be conjecture, and 
the SOB might
sue me...
I WON, it was a "test case".....and he couldn't even see my house from his.

ex N4MBL

(I probably couldn't really afford a lawyer right now, but I was making 
almost nothing at the
time... and I STILL prevailed...sometimes good things happen...PRB-1 was 
in effect at the time, too,
and people thought maybe some people downtown should have gone to bat 
for me... not so...t'was
just MY problem...)

On 2/4/2012 9:17 AM, Jim Thomson wrote:
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:51:53 -0600
> From: Jon<>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower lawsuit
> To:
> Message-ID:
> <>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Is it at the back of the lot ?
> Put a satellite dish or two on it...say it's to get a better signal.
> ##  and provide your neighbor with free satellite  for life too.
> ## VE6SH used to be the legal rep for RAC  here in Canada.   He had  great 
> success in some cases, where
> the amateur  in question had bought a home in a new development...which had a 
> ton of restrictions on it.
> Now contrary to what our friend Eddy  may think, if you buy a home with 
> restrictions on it, here in
> Canada, you have screwed yourself big time.  Some near me will have all sorts 
> of restrictions on them,
> like all driveways must be exposed aggregate, no clotheslines, no this, no 
> that, no bird feeder's, no
> satellite dish's, no tv ants, no ham radio period. [as a sideline, some woman 
> north of me wanted to
> save the environment, and put up a clothesline]. City hall said "no".  A huge 
> legal battle ensued. I
> think city hall won.]
> The ham won....simply cause he could  prove that his neighbors' had 
> themselves violated many
>   of the rules that were in place, and had done so for years.
> The judge agreed, and allowed the install of the tower.
> The rules on setbacks  upsets me.  To have a tower  fall full length and 
> still remain on  your
> own property is pretty tough if a ham lived on a typ city 50' x 
> 120'  or  similar.
> Freestanding towers, like Trylons  are designed to break at the 40' 
> level..and not at the base.
> They will not  fall full length.   A UST  crank up is the same deal, they 
> break 3 x sections up.
> Now if a 100' tall tree on my own property, falls  down on my neighbors' 
> house, the neighbors'
> own house insurance covers the damage.   If the neighbor does not have 
> insurance, he is outa
> luck. My insurance does NOT cover my neighbors' home.  Same deal with my 
> tower.
> later... Jim   VE7RF
> _______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG -
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4784 - Release Date: 02/03/12


TowerTalk mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>