Dartmouth Square

BrianD

Is this back in public hands?

I noticed that it's hot a bit of a spring clean with the hedges and grass being cut. There was people walking in it today.

Was a deal done that I missed or has the current landlord become more community spirited?

lightening

Yeah, from what I saw on the Late Late show he is opening it up for community use. How he got his hands on it in the first place is amazing. He feels he should be free to build what he likes on it!

Knifey_Spoony

The owner was on one of the chat shows last weekend, or maybe the weekend before.
He has given a local ginger guy one year to do what he likes with the place. If it isnt successful, he is going to take it back and do as he wants with it.
He actually put it more like this "after a year, when his ideas fail, I will take back ownership"....so he doesnt have much faith in this ginger guy.

The young guy wants to do community activities in it.

That was the gyst of the interview/chat.

lightening

Knifey_Spoony wrote: »

he is going to take it back and do as he wants with it.

Yeah, that's bang on Knifey... He seems to be determined to do what he wants with it! I heard him telling us that men and women died for our freedom to do what we want with our land. I don't think they died for his greed though!

I am pie

In fairness to the guy, he is not in it for the money. I was of the opinion that he was a chancer in it for a few quid until i saw him on the TV with Pat Kenny at the weekend.

He asked for a fortune from the City Council in full knowledge they wouldn't pay to make a point about farcical land values in the area.

If he was in it for the money he could easily have made a profit selling it on to any interested party.

His point was that we had earned our property and land rights only to sacrifice large parts of it to a version of British property law, adopted wholesale and implemented badly. Too much control is placed in local government which he (and I!) strongly believe is suscpetible to abuse, bad practice and corruption. Who here thinks that Irish planning laws haven't been overtaken by brown paper bag cronyism ? ...re-zoning etc. It's a sham ran by a network of chancers out to line their own pockets

I don't believe his intention was to operate a car park on the site, he admitted he did this to be contentious in highlighting how we have surrendered our land and property right to petty bureuacrats.

He allowed a homeless guy to live their in a tent, the council had him removed. Hardly the actions of someone out to gain a few quid.

lightening

I can see where you are coming from, I just really think he is in it for the money. He's a business man, no matter what spin he puts on it, I reckon he wants lots of cash for it.

AnonoBoy

Didn't see the interview but did he mention his Yorkshire Ripper book at all?

Heard him on The Last Word a while back and he started talking about Dartmouth Square and went off on a mad tangent about how he knew who the real Yorkshire Ripper was and the guy in prison is just a copycat. He has a book about it and everything. Highly entertaining but probably extremely crazy theory.

I am pie

He's definitely a bit off the wall alright ! Actually that's why i think he's not in it for the money. Wouldn't make sense to let a homeless guy occupy it (shame on whoever forced him off the land) and then give it up for free 'community events' - as he pointed out it's already cost him a small fortune in legal fees. A smart business man would have accepted the 200k from the council. Someone with a more political bent would hang on the square to make a point.

There's no real development potential for the square, no private developer would take it off his hands...what else can it be but a park ! Can't remember his name...what was it ?

lightening

What could be more horrifying to the posh people of Darmouth square, carparks and homeless shelters. I reckon he is using these tactics to force someone, or DCC to buy it off him to save it from turning in to something that they would really hate on their doorstep.

His hair is fairly cool though. O'Gara is the dudes name I think.

donaghs

I am pie wrote: »

In fairness to the guy, he is not in it for the money. I was of the opinion that he was a chancer in it for a few quid until i saw him on the TV with Pat Kenny at the weekend.

He asked for a fortune from the City Council in full knowledge they wouldn't pay to make a point about farcical land values in the area.

If he was in it for the money he could easily have made a profit selling it on to any interested party.

His point was that we had earned our property and land rights only to sacrifice large parts of it to a version of British property law, adopted wholesale and implemented badly. Too much control is placed in local government which he (and I!) strongly believe is suscpetible to abuse, bad practice and corruption. Who here thinks that Irish planning laws haven't been overtaken by brown paper bag cronyism ? ...re-zoning etc. It's a sham ran by a network of chancers out to line their own pockets

I don't believe his intention was to operate a car park on the site, he admitted he did this to be contentious in highlighting how we have surrendered our land and property right to petty bureuacrats.

He allowed a homeless guy to live their in a tent, the council had him removed. Hardly the actions of someone out to gain a few quid.

I wouldn't entirely dismiss him as not being in it for the money. I'd say its one of his main motivations. I believe the odd nature of his behaviour is because he's slightly crazy.

We may have earned our property rights, but one exception which should have been dealt with long ago are sneaky ground rents - mostly owned by the descendents of English landlords, but now being bought up by "patriots" like O'Gara - a new master?
Ground-rents effectively mean you can never own the land you live on (unless he lets you buy it). They should have been abolished long ago . Thankfully most properties for sale nowadays don't have ground rent (they are freehold).

Without wanting to get boards.ie into legal difficulties, all my reading suggests that O'Gara is a ground rent speculator - he buys them up and then demands payment from the individual homeowner or organisation, and suggests they avail of the opportunity to purchase back the ground rent.
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=81958
I'm not convinced by his "man of the people" talk.

Letting homeless people live in the park and various other schemes can be seen as testing the will of the council, forcing them to come to an agreement with him. Its unfortunate that the homeless guy was moved on, but the council say its supposed to be a public park, and similarly you can't decide to pitch a tent in Le Fanu Park, Ballyfermot or Fairview Park.

dubtom

My brother in law owns several old houses and would meet up yearly with the land owner of one of them. The rent stood at what it was when the house was built, 150 years ago,about €3, he eventually bought the rights for about €60. I can't imagine dartmouth square being much more expensive rent wise,hence the 200K offer from the council was probably very generous.

Cool Mo D

Noel O'Gara, the man who claims ownership of the ground rent of Dartmouth Square, is a complete chancer, and I have no doubt he is only in it for the money.

His performance on Pat Kenny was a cynical attempt to wrap himself in the flag to disguise his attempts to extort money form the council.

I am pie

Nah, i don't buy that, he could have taken 200k and scarpered. O'Gara knows for sure the council won't and wouldn't have paid the ransom he demanded. He has no one to sell to privately and won't engage with the one party (the council) who could offer him a profit.

Hardly the work of a shrewd businessman. That said, he does seem crazy. I think he'd happily make a few quid if he could without loosing face but i do believe he has an axe to grind regarding planning laws and perceived socialism in the public sector which he's happy to get a bit of publicity for via the cheap acquisition of Dartmouth Sq. Fair enough...no love here for planning laws in Ireland / Dublin

I pass it most morning and notice it's had a tidy up recently, will be interested to see what community events are planned. Good luck to whoever that guy is !

Cool Mo D

He's no shrewd businessman, but he's still a chancer looking to make a few quid.

And the planning laws have their flaws, but I would say it's more the seemingly random nature of the decisions that are made sometimes that are the real problem. Noel O'Gara originally wanted to concrete over the square, and turn it into a car park, and when he (obviously) didn't get planning, he started letting the square fall into ruin, and fill with crap.

I am pie

Cool Mo D wrote: »

He's no shrewd businessman, but he's still a chancer looking to make a few quid.

And the planning laws have their flaws, but I would say it's more the seemingly random nature of the decisions that are made sometimes that are the real problem. Noel O'Gara originally wanted to concrete over the square, and turn it into a car park, and when he (obviously) didn't get planning, he started letting the square fall into ruin, and fill with crap.

Square is in good nick now, passed it this morning. Will be used for public events apparently. Hope that goes well. It was never filled with crap as far as i could see?

He was going to allow cars in to park, no concreting. Regardless, it was a none runner and was a further attempt to wind up the council. He admitted as much. Anyway, i've no interest in defending the man other than to say i felt he a chancer, saw him on tv and thought he'd made a bit of sense.

Victor

donaghs wrote: »

Ground-rents effectively mean you can never own the land you live on (unless he lets you buy it). They should have been abolished long ago . Thankfully most properties for sale nowadays don't have ground rent (they are freehold).

Wrong. All residential ground rents can be bought out for relatively modest sums.

Materially, they only affect commercial property.

donaghs

Victor wrote: »

Wrong. All residential ground rents can be bought out for relatively modest sums.
Materially, they only affect commercial property.

Sorry you're right on that point. But if I'm not mistaken the right to buy your ground rent was only enacted in 1978, after decades of lobbying and campaigning for this. This legislation also prevented the creating of new ground rent leases.

But ground rent speculation still goes on today.