Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Friend or foe of the neighbourhood? MPMoran blocks most of the pavement on West Green Road
A new business, a big and established seller of construction materials, employing some local people, has just opened on West Green Road. Good signs, welcome to the neighbourhood!
However...
Notwithstanding their overwhelmingly enlarged logos on display in the big shop windows (Tesco and Sainsbury do it with pictures -- really offputting but that's another issue), M.P. Moran & Sons Limited, using portable barriers that display more of their logos, have decided to block the wider portion of the pavement during their business hours (6:30am-5pm).
On the corner of Langham and West Green Roads, their portable barriers block two-thirds (actually, even more) of the pavement, making it difficult for a person in a wheelchair (or mobility scooter) or with a pram or pushchair (especially if double width) to navigate a corner with a lamp post (Photo 1). On the other side, adjacent to another business, they eventually halved the barriers (Not shown in Photo 2), but still kept the one that actually hinders pedestrians' passage. By the way, the other side of the road is much narrower, has a bus stop, and more businesses.
The manager claims the portion of the sidewalk is their property. If I understand correctly, Haringey Council does not say so. The business may have paid for a license but even in that case, they would have to give reasonable access to pedestrians. https://www.haringey.gov.uk/business/licensing/licences-permits-reg...
It is very unlikely that they would be allowed to store their material in the whole area they claim to own because that would be huge. Besides, they have access for trucks in the back of the building.
So, why can they do this?
I looked at their other sites and they have not done this at locations with sidewalks (Kilburn and Kennington), i.e. that are not on an industrial estate.
West Hampstead: 020 7644 9022
Kennington: 020 7735 9291
Kilburn: 020 7328 5566
Watford: 0192 322 9700
Willesden: 020 8459 9000
Tottenham: 020 7644 9080
Therefore, why can they do this in Haringey?
Talking to the manager has not helped; sending an email has not helped since in both instances they claim ownership of the sidewalk?! Pleas for empathy have not worked. Possibly, some of the trade people might have said something that made them reason (as in, it looks bad for business), to adjust the side adjacent to a business in their trade, but not the one that is an obstruction to the general public.
Any recommendations how to proceed? Thanks!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Easter
-
There's a similar problem with the mini supermarkets all along Green Lanes. They extend their wares onto the footpath restricting the space available for people, especially those with mobility problems, to get by.
Buy nothing ever happens. Nothing is enforced.
-
Permalink Reply by Ivana Ćurčić
-
Thank you for your comment. Indeed, there is at least one business that seems to have stretched out and make it difficult to navigate the pavement around Harringay’s Green Lanes I must say that I am not opposed to seating and merchandise on the sidewalks, it is problematic when it takes over the pedestrian passage and obstructs it, especially for people with mobility issues.
-
-
I think it may actually be their property, when the hoardings were up for the building work they came out that far and there were complaints and I have a vague memory that the council looked into it and that area actually belonged to the building rather than being part of the pavement (I could be mistaken though).
What are they using the space for?
I'd suggest the first step would be the local Councillors. Seema is one of the councillors for West Green Ward and is very proactive
https://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=11297
EDIT: Yes, this was Seema's response to the discussion when the hoarding went up
-
-
Thank you for this. I don’t remember the hoardings extending this much onto the pavement. The corner between their barrier and the lamp post is literally too narrow (and slanted) for a wheelchair or pushcart. There’s an omission and a bit of lack of common sense that is difficult to understand. Does property trump lack of safety for pedestrians?
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson
-
The ‘gutter’ line running along the footpath would seem to indicate a change from public to private land.
-
-
That is indeed what the manager kept pointing out but at the corner, that property (with the barrier up) pushes pedestrians, especially ones with mobility issues, to navigate a narrow and slanted space. It does not seem that Health and Safety looked at it.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh
-
This will be a matter for the Council to resolve with reference to their land maps. The Ordnance Survey map of 1955 suggests that whilst the properties to the east had a significant curtilage, none is shown for the terrace of shops in question. However, I suspect that the OS maps are not the record of recourse on this.
The paving that was/is visible in front of the old Victorian shops is confusing. Half of the terrace had the putative curtilage paved with paving stones and apparently maintained by the Council. The western half including the shop in question was surfaced with concrete slabs, suggesting it wasn't council owned. However, since it looks like the terrace was built by a single builder, you'd think that the curtilage ownership rights were common across the whole terrace. It os of course possible that the builder ought to two plots for the terrace with different curtilage sizes.
All of this shows that its a complex issue that needs a lawyer and the appropriate records to ascertain the legal situation.
Alan Stanton rang me about this post and told me that he'd just spoken about it with Cllr Zena Brabazon who happened to be in a meeting with Cllr. Seema Chandawani, one of the ward councillors for West Green. The ward councillors should be your next port of call - and insist that they obtain and show you a copy of the land record showing the limits of council ownership. It is a matter of public record.
In the meantime, as Alan suggests, you could contact the owners point to the discomfort. It's causing local residence and the potential danger to elderly and disabled residence and suggest that this is providing very bad publicity for them. Is that what they want?
-
-
Hugh, thank you very much for your detailed reply and thanks to Alan, too. Indeed, we have contacted by email Customer Service, who offered to meet, and have spoken to the manager (did not get his name), who insisted that they own the land and was their right to do what they wanted - as I’ve written in my post. Hopefully, this lack of space and safety on the public pavement can be resolved simply by them reducing the length of the barriers, in the very same way they’ve adjusted the one adjacent to the fried chicken shop (very good, by the way). It does baffle me that they are stubborn about ownership trumping pedestrian safety.
I will contact Seema and the other two councillors, Nicola Bartlett and Sarah Williams, about this issue.
-
-
Well done for contacting the shop! Make sure to ask the councillors to get a copy of the relevant part of the map for you. That way you can be 100% sure that the appropriate checks have been done. Whilst it would be nice to assume that we can always trust the answers were given by the council, my experience has shown that sadly that’s often not the case.
-
-
Thank you! I am also not convinced that property ownership allows one to make public access trecherous.
-
-
I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect if they own it they are allowed to screen it off. Whether, taking into account community goodwill and all that, it's a wise commercial decision is quite another matter! I would have thought that some sort of compromise would be the best solution.
-
-
I have written to the Councillors and asked their support in determining the status of ownership and, whatever the status is, making the corner easier to navigate. I would have also thought that a compromise was in the interest of the business; more so since they’ve already adjusted one side — although the one that doesn’t have an impact on passing pedestrians.
© 2025 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
