Diversions, etc.

More strange goings-on in West Oxfordshire; a diversion order in Churchill has been issued with a misprint which sends the diversion into Cuxham (186/4 instead of 168/4); and another at Witney on the proposed Richmond Homes site has been issued with a map showing the effect of the diversion on a blank map, so that it is impossible to tell why it is needed.

The path at Uffington which was been closed by Network Rail has now reopened, as the County Council refused to prolong the traffic regulation order indefinitely. The Chippinghurst case, which we thought had been dealt with by written representations, is to go to public inquiry. Two adjacent paths in Tetsworth, both heavily obstructed, are the subject of applications for diversion.

Other Matters

The legislation relating to claims for rights of way that are not yet on the Definitive Map is set to change, with the requirement to notify owners and occupiers removed; also we will no longer need to provide copies of documents in the county record office of the authority to whom the claim is made.

On the other hand, the standard of proof is raised from “reasonably alleged to subsist” to “subsists”; that is, a legal document is required or sufficient evidence from documents of lower standard to show that a public right exists.

I have a number of candidates which need further examination, including one passing close to Campsfield detention centre, and one in Wardington to the county boundary near Chacombe. All paths which were in existence prior to 1949 need to be claimed, including those in council estates built before that date.

David Godfrey