national trust £1 farmer in court

[roscoe erf]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...on-1m-farm-1-tells-nightmare-three-years.html

 

[Formatted]

The whole reason the trust offered this for £1 (don't forget they are taking the subsidy & environmental payments) is that it isn't a profitable farm and they didn't want to have to pay two rangers to look after the place.

Feel the bloke, been suckered in by an offer that was too good to be true.

 

[7610 super q]

Well, it probably is a profitable farm, but not with your hands tied behind your back. Wildflower meadows and profit don't go together. Tin hat on.

 

[unlacedgecko]

Well, it probably is a profitable farm, but not with your hands tied behind your back. Wildflower meadows and profit don't go together. Tin hat on.

Standard National Trust tactics...

As an aside, "traditional shepherding" generally means living with the sheep. As in while shepherds watch their flocks by night and all that.

How could 500 ewes ever pay enough to warrant that sort of labour?

 

[fgc325j]

Well, it probably is a profitable farm, but not with your hands tied behind your back. Wildflower meadows and profit don't go together. Tin hat on.[/QUOT
I wonder if the farm would pay if he received all the subsidies due - did not have to run the farm under the
restrictions placed by the NT - but had to put a tender in for the tenancy, and pay a going rate.
A small positive is this shows that the subsidy needs to be paid to the actual farmer and NOT
the landowner. Will the civil servants/ special advisors take any notice of this, perhaps someone
in the NFU/FUW should point out that subs need to be paid to the person getting their hands dirty.

 

[SilliamWhale]

I dont see anything as the fault of the National Trust here

 

[Goweresque]

I dont see anything as the fault of the National Trust here

What, pocketing all the subsidy and expecting the work that those subsidies are paying for be done by someone else entirely at their own risk? As others have said, it was an exercise in saving money for the NT, getting some poor sap who didn't realise what he was letting himself into do all the hard work while they pick up the cheques, and save having to pay full time employees to do the work instead.

I hope all the locals close ranks now and force the NT to pay through the nose to get the place stocked and managed, which one assume they have to under the terms of their environmental agreements.

 

[unlacedgecko]

What, pocketing all the subsidy and expecting the work that those subsidies are paying for be done by someone else entirely at their own risk? As others have said, it was an exercise in saving money for the NT, getting some poor sap who didn't realise what he was letting himself into do all the hard work while they pick up the cheques, and save having to pay full time employees to do the work instead.

I hope all the locals close ranks now and force the NT to pay through the nose to get the place stocked and managed, which one assume they have to under the terms of their environmental agreements.

Don't forget they were charging £15 a time to have the particulars sent out.

I think there were 10,000 applicants initially. That's a cool £150k before they started.

I hope you're right, but I suspect there will be another poor sucker so desperate to "live the dream" that they'll sign up for poverty and stress to do so.


Reminds me somewhat of the courier companies whose business model is based on recruiting self employed van owner drivers and busting them within 6 months.

 

[Doc]

I have first hand experience of over zealous TS officials making life a misery for a couple of local farmers for unclear reasons. Neither were particularly poor in record keeping or husbandry but they seemed to be ‘targeted’ for relentless attention whilst their farming neighbours weren’t. It did cause significant mistrust and stress.
Clipboard warriors...

 

[Cowcalf]

its going some to be regularly doing 25 miles a day on a relatively small area of land, a dead sheep to tend to stand out on a hill side

 

[SilliamWhale]

What, pocketing all the subsidy and expecting the work that those subsidies are paying for be done by someone else entirely at their own risk? As others have said, it was an exercise in saving money for the NT, getting some poor sap who didn't realise what he was letting himself into do all the hard work while they pick up the cheques, and save having to pay full time employees to do the work instead.

I hope all the locals close ranks now and force the NT to pay through the nose to get the place stocked and managed, which one assume they have to under the terms of their environmental agreements.

So you think its the national trusts fault that this guy didn't have his movement licences and paperwork in order? How could they possibly know?

Court seems heavy handed to me for all this and you may have a point about NT strategy but I can't see how they are responsible for it any more than any other landlord. Does Prince Charles take responsibility if someone got run over on a Duchy farm?

 

[Bury the Trash]

Was / is there not even a boundary fence to the whole area ?

 

[Dry Rot]

You can see what it has done to the poor bloke by comparing the two photos.

Not really surprising when so many bureaucrats will be involved!

 

[slackjawedyokel]

Don't forget they were charging £15 a time to have the particulars sent out.

I think there were 10,000 applicants initially. That's a cool £150k before they started.

I hope you're right, but I suspect there will be another poor sucker so desperate to "live the dream" that they'll sign up for poverty and stress to do so.


Reminds me somewhat of the courier companies whose business model is based on recruiting self employed van owner drivers and busting them within 6 months.

Yep, that’s exactly what I was thinking re. all the cash NT made by selling the particulars of the farm to thousands of punters, while also getting an absolute shedload of free positive publicity over it, which I’m sure would play well to their core demographic (I remember them on the PM program, as I swore loudly at the radio).
I almost feel sorry for the guy and his family. Only almost, because he should have known exactly what he was getting himself into. Signing up 100% to the NT manifesto was always going to be like trying to stay afloat with both arms and a leg tied behind your back.

 

[unlacedgecko]

Yep, that’s exactly what I was thinking re. all the cash NT made by selling the particulars of the farm to thousands of punters, while also getting an absolute shedload of free positive publicity over it, which I’m sure would play well to their core demographic (I remember them on the PM program, as I swore loudly at the radio).
I almost feel sorry for the guy and his family. Only almost, because he should have known exactly what he was getting himself into. Signing up 100% to the NT manifesto was always going to be like trying to stay afloat with both arms and a leg tied behind your back.

I'm sure the land is in the most restrictive HLS scheme. And I note the Trust provided a flock of native rare breed sheep, which I'm sure has nothing to do with the additional rare breeds payment

 

[unlacedgecko]

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/great-orme-search-for-a-farmer

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...-with-stunning-views-long-hours-required/amp/

 

[SilliamWhale]

Are you guys certain the NT pocketed all the HLS income and expected the tenant to pay for the fencing out his own pocket via sheep sales?

 

[Henarar]

What, pocketing all the subsidy and expecting the work that those subsidies are paying for be done by someone else entirely at their own risk?

I didn't think you could claim the subs unless you had some risk ?

 

[Derrick Hughes]

Who claims the sub on all that land

 

[unlacedgecko]

I didn't think you could claim the subs unless you had some risk ?

National Trust own the sheep. I'm sure their agents will have written a share/contract farming agreement in such a way that they will qualify for the payments.