Although I have sympathy for Mr Woods, I fail to believe for one minute that this is his only way of communicating with the outside world.

Hasn't he heard of a telephone or the internet ?

It is easy to make telephone calls via a traditional telephone , or via the internet. (Internet calls won;t even cost anything).

Being "blind" is no excuse , there is speech recognition software available.

If Mr Woods can operate the complex Radio Equipment , then he certainly can operate a telephone number pad , or speak into a computer mic.

I am one of the neighbours who have had to put up with these aerials for the past 7 years. They cause interference with electronic equipment , and they look an absolute mess. I pity the people living directly next door to Mr Woods , as these aerials over-hang into their property.

The recent publicity has failed to show the true extent of these aerials , in particular the way in which he has managed to trail cables across 2 public footpaths into neighbouring trees.

Also there is constant alteration of these aerials , with frequent additions to the aerial arrays.

Instead of complaining that the Council are 'picking on a blind pensioner' , try looking at it from the point of view of the neighbours who are having problems selling their homes due to the unslightly mass of aerials towering above their home.

The Council are prosecuting Mr Woods for breaching his Tenancy agreement by failing to apply for planning permission for the additions to the aerials , and crossing a public right of way with the aerials.
At the end of the day , the law is the law , and it makes no difference if you are blind or not.

To Mr.darren2000

I can agree with you that High Frequency beams are not very appealing but I am a ham radio operator. If you are expirencing Radio Frequency interference you must tell that certain radio operator. Unless you tell them they will never know! Also this particular blind operator loves his radios. You say the internet will indulge him, BS That is all I can say because a blind man would not be able to enjoy the internet when microsoft sam has to read the whole webpage. I know many hams that are blind and this is the only hobby they can enjoy. They can't go out they cannot do a single **** thing they are blinded and if the only thing they can do is talk on a radio so be it. These particular hams have over come an extreme handicap by learning the material to pass the test by learning math formulas.

If you are selling a house once again you must talk to that particular person or you will not be able to sell!

To conclude you are a person that is just confused and you should get some more information by actually reading!

Go to this website
http://www.antennazo
ning.com/main/page_a
mateur_radio_antenna
_zoning_book.html

Or contact your communications government!

@darren2000

Amateur Radio is a hobby that is enjoyed by many, and is more enjoyable for them than internet chatting and talking on the telephone for countless reasons. I'm sure you have a hobby or two as well.

Should your allegations of constant alterations to the antennas and antennas infringing on neighbors' properties be true, then I agree that something should be done. I've seen many cases, however, where neighbors complain about a simple tower with an omni-directional antenna. I can't say what the case here is, however, as I haven't seen pictures of this gentleman's installation.

I've also seen cases where people complain of interference simply because they don't want to see the antenna(s). It happens ALL THE TIME.

I have a couple of friends who were complained about to the FCC. One of my friends cut the feedlines to his tower, took a picture, and sent it to the FCC the very next time he received a complaint. The cut feedlines were verified and the neighbor notified. There were no further complaints, even after he repaired his feedlines.

You'd be surprised at how willing most amateur radio operators will be if you just approach them and let them know what's going on. Heck, in many cases it isn't even the radio operator interfering. A lot of interference is generated from common household electronics that you might not even suspect.

I use my radios on a regular basis and don't have any problems with interference. I used to, but I put up a better antenna and all of my interference problems have gone away. My antenna is nothing more than a 140 foot loop of wire 30 feet above the ground with window line hanging straight down and entering my house. None of my neighbors complain and life is good. It's fairly difficult to spot my antenna with all the trees around, but the window line hanging down is perfectly visible. I'd really be interested in seeing pictures of his property.

Oh, you say you've had to tolerate his antennas for seven years? You didn't seem to have a problem purchasing your house with the antennas visible. I gather from your statements that you're one of those people who moves in next to an airport and complains about noise.

Message for kc9mav, Chicago Il

My hobby does not involve errecting large nujmbers of aerials and interfeering with other peoples homes.

This is not a simple tower that he has. His proprety is mid-terrace and totally dominates the whole area. The aerials are 35 feet tall , and go into neighbouring gardens and across public footpaths.

The guy can make internet phone calls without having MS Sam reading the whole web page.

If he is unable to see , then how come he is seen (and photographed) making alterations to the aerials in his back garden. How come he is able to adjust the many different controls he has in his room.

I am not saying that he shouldn't have a hobby , I am saying that he should respect the Law and obtain permission before errecting the aerials.

He has been approached many times regarding these aerials and has done nothing about it.

You say that there is no interferance from these aerials ,that is BS. How come I can hear him broadcasting then ?

When I purchased the house , I got a lower price because of these aerials ,and when a neighbour came to sell their house , they were advised to lower their price because of them.

I am not 'confused' by anyhting , nor are the neighbours who have also complained , and neither is the local authority who are bringing this actions against the guy.

@darren2000

Thank you for confirming a few things.

You purchased the home after he had his antennas in place. Alterations over the years or not, you purchased the home knowing full well he had antennas in sight. You even claim you got a cheaper price on the house because of it. I find that hard to believe, unless everybody involved in the transaction was some kind of idiot.

"How come he is able to adjust the many different controls he has in his room." Have you seen his radio equipment up close?

I never said he wasn't interfering with stuff in your home. I said that there have been many people who made claims of interference so they could force their neighbor to take down his antennas. I also don't think your attitude would be any different had he obtained permission to erect his antennas. You keep saying he should talk on the phone and internet instead of putting up antennas, then claim he should obtain permission before putting them up. Which is it?

Again, he should be following the rules. Shame on him if he isn't, but don't move in there after the fact and think you have the right to dictate what people (who lived there longer than you) should be allowed to do.

This is an unfortunate situation (for both parties involved) that plays out all over the globe... sometimes it is "the neighbor" who is being unreasonable, and sometimes it is "the operator," and sometimes it is neither. We as outsiders to this story have no way to know which is the case here.

To the neighbor: have you informed the operator of the specifics of the interference? By this, I mean that in order to take effective corrective action the operator MUST know exactly what you are hearing, exactly which of your devices is hearing it, and exactly when. Has the operator refused to make attempts to correct the issue, or have you not been forthcoming with this necessary information?

Most interference problems CAN BE SOLVED, but the two parties must cooperate in order for that to happen. You may even need to collaborate on doing some testing in which you go inside and listen while he transmits, so that the problem can be isolated. The gentleman in question may be hampered in his ability to take action due to his handicap (the level of which which I understand you contest). In this case, I am confident that other operators in your local area may be more than willing to step in and assist rather than see their buddy taken from the airwaves. Further, the re-routing of feedlines to avoid disturbance of footpaths is a relatively minor undertaking when one has help to do it.

In the US, our national organization the ARRL is also quite helpful in interference situations... I imagine that its couterpart the RSGB (Radio Society of Great Britain) might have similar programs.

Neither a neighbor's persistent demands to "take that down" nor an operator's shrill cries about "his rights" will resolve the conflict. Please work together as neighbors and come to a compromise.

Regarding the issue of the towers and antennas being unsightly, I am afraid I must agree with the previous comments which note that you were aware of the issue when you purchased the property and you claim in your own words that you got a reduced price. Your neighbor with the radio gear is not to blame for a poor housing market.

Regarding the suggestion to use the internet or the telephone, I imagine you would not suggest
that an auto racer take up horse racing as an alternative... the similarities are only superficial.

Best of luck!

i lived next door to mr woods for 10 years, it was 10 years of misery by this man- yes he is blind but does that mean that everyone has to compensate for this with constant interference, not only did it affect our t.v but also our v.c.r- computer, stereo, we could hear his voice through the t.v - telephone and also baby monitor-when ever we complained to him he was abusive to us and said there was nothing we could do, unfortunately he was right at that time because we were the only tennants to complain. our option was to move house! so my support goes to the neighbours around him- good luck with your fight cause he certainly made my life a misery!!

to all you people who have sympathy for this guy- all i can say try living next door to him- then you can speak from experience- doubt you would be so sympathetic!!

Darren2000 and others.
I just read the story and the comments of Darren2000. How long have you been living near him? Hes been living there for 17 years, with his antennas erected,did you just look up and discovery them? Do you understand this man is blind? You're telling him to use the phone or internet calls, is about as crazy as telling a stamp collector to begin collecting email stamps. Obviously someone with sight installed his antennas, have you or anyone else tried to work with him on this?
No, you would rather criticize. Glad you are not my neighbor..

dear hazelhastings,its amazing we used to talk often on a very good friendly basis, yes you did come to us and we did supply you with a filter for your tv,but you also moved in knowing aerials were there,we had ofcom come check robs radios and they cleared them,it is so annoying when people complain and you know your not responsible for their interferance,rob also suffers a great deal from the interferance generated by neighbours and he has to live with it because he knows it would be no point in complaining because thats due to cheap equipment or bad instalation,my husband is norm a very nice person and would help any one,but people are agressive when they come to the door blaming him when it is not him at all,and it is human nature when one is totally blind to be on the defensive,yes TOTALLY BLIND i should know i have been with him for over 18yrs,sorry hazle if we made your life a misery that was not robs intention he woud go out of his way not to upset anybody but loves his radios hes been in his hobby for 50yrs.and we thought after you had that filter all was ok because you seemed so friendly and said no more,from robs wife june

to hazelhastings
Good for you getting out of the house. I don't blame you at all.


to billybob2015
The fact that Mr Wood is blind makes no difference at all! . Anyone who breaks the law by letting their transmissions interfere with other electronic equipment should be prosecuted. Anyone who breaks their teanancy agreement with the council should be prosecuted. Anyone who breaks planning regulations should be prosecuted. It's called the Law.

Redditch Council have approached Mr Wood numerous time regarding the aerials but to no avail.

Why the heck shouldn't he be able to use the phone. In all the recent tv appearances he says that "Radio is his only means of communicating with the outside world" - what complete rubbish. My suggestion of using a telephone is a valid one as it will enable communication with the outside world.
It is true that I was aware of these aerials , but I did not expect constant changes to be made to these aerials , including increased interferance caused by the new additions. It is these new additions that I am complaining against.

to bagpuss59

Shame on you for using a disability to flout the law.

As for experiencing interferance from other neighbour's equipment - well I don't see anyone else with large radio masts in their back garden - overhanging neighbouring properties , and public footpaths - so what is the problem here?

If you just lowered the aerial height to below the apex to make them a bit less obvious , then I'm sure a resolution to this problem can be found

darren all you have to do is put ham radio into your search engine,find out what ham radio is all about and remember you wouldnt have all your mobile phones and a lot of your technology if it wasnt for hams experimenting,even invasion of the falklands was reported by hams long before it was repoted by anyone else,in a catastrophy hams can set up communications quicker than anyone else,so do some studying and learn before you make comments,good luck in your research,

bagpuss59, - what has this to do with tenancy agreement breaches , or planning violations?

The aerials you have got in your back garden cause interference , and breach you tenancy agreement and planning law ! This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Falklands war or mobile phones. I know all about TACS and GSM from the 1980's - so Why would I be interested in these things. It has been proved that radio interference is being caused by your aerials , see Hazel's comments above.

At the end of the day you are in breech of your tenancy agreement , and that is that. Hence the action being taken against you by the Council. I ook forward to the day when I can use my own equipment without having to hear your husband's chatter.

darren,we have planning permission by default,you are not in possesion of all of the facts,and as for breaching a tenancy agreement,that is up to the court to decide,because you are not qualified to make that assumption

You need planning permission to add aerials to the existing ones and make alterations. You have made alterations recently and this is in breech of planning regs.

Anti-social people like you should be stopped

to bagpuss 59, yes we used to talk but i would'nt say we were friends, yes you gave us a filter, which we had checked out and it was useless and contained nothing, if you remember we didnt speak for atleast five years before we moved, and i can remember christmas day one year when your friends were on my roof as your one of your aerials was entanged on my t.v antenna,and i can remember the hot summer nights when we had to keep our windows closed because we could hear the motor winding round all night long from your aerials, can u remember when your husband told us to f**k off when i knocked your door and asked if he would turn it down so we could watch the world cup- well i can- but he did'nt want to cause upset did he!!!p.s for information you only had 1 aerial erected when we moved in, but how many did you have when we left?