Chorley man gets five year ban from home

First published in News Chorley Citizen: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

A MAN has been banned from his family home for five years after more than 50 complaints were made about arguing, fighting and general nuisance at the address.

A judge at Burnley County Court agreed a court order which effectively bans Craig Clarke, 26, from the family home in Hallwood Road, Chorley.

The order was made after landlord Chorley Community Housing (CCH) took legal action against tenant Amanda Grindley, 29, after three neighbours made complaints about Clarke’s allegedly violent and aggressive behaviour at the home which Grindley shared with Clarke and their two children.

The court has ordered that Grindley, who is the tenant of CCH, must exclude Clarke from the house with effect from 4pm February 15 and must refuse him entry if he tries to return.

If she allows Clarke to return to the house during the next five years then she is a risk of losing her home. Legal action was initially taken by CCH to exclude Clarke from the house in August 2010 as the landlord felt that he was the cause of many of the problems at the house.

However, at the first return hearing Grindley supported Clarke’s return to the family home and he was allowed back on the proviso that he behaved himself.

Despite the court injunction and other action by the landlord the problems continued and CCH took further legal action against Clarke and issued possession proceedings in respect of Grindley.

Tenancy enforcement officer Anna Schickhoff-Brown said: “Neighbours have been suffering because of Clarke and Grindley's behaviour for more than two years.

“Applying for possession was a last resort.

“If Ms Grindley does not abide by the court’s order then we will seek her eviction and she risks making herself and her two young children homeless.”

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:30pm Mon 20 Feb 12

doleboytrotter says...

what about his human rights.
what about his human rights. doleboytrotter
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Mon 20 Feb 12

Your ferret stinks says...

doleboytrotter wrote:
what about his human rights.
Here we go again with the P.C. nutters coming out with stupid statements.
You try living next door to morons who cant understand that the nieghbours have rights to which is that everyone should be allowed to live in their own home without having to suffer this abuse wether it's direct or indirect.
These people have been warned often enough now it's time to take action and i'm sure the nieghbours may take just a small ammount of comfort from this action at least for a while until the moron returns which he inevitably will and it all kicks off again.
What about a peadophile living next door to you or drug dealer as they have human rights as well, would you still say the same?
This tool has no respect for his girlfriend, his kids, himself or anyone else for that matter.
Well done CCH.
[quote][p][bold]doleboytrotter[/bold] wrote: what about his human rights.[/p][/quote]Here we go again with the P.C. nutters coming out with stupid statements. You try living next door to morons who cant understand that the nieghbours have rights to which is that everyone should be allowed to live in their own home without having to suffer this abuse wether it's direct or indirect. These people have been warned often enough now it's time to take action and i'm sure the nieghbours may take just a small ammount of comfort from this action at least for a while until the moron returns which he inevitably will and it all kicks off again. What about a peadophile living next door to you or drug dealer as they have human rights as well, would you still say the same? This tool has no respect for his girlfriend, his kids, himself or anyone else for that matter. Well done CCH. Your ferret stinks
  • Score: 0

6:23pm Mon 20 Feb 12

Ex_Darwen_Tech says...

I would suspect that the comment by doleboytrotter was a tongue in cheek comment. We have all read about folks that are not allowed to be deported because their "human rights" of a family life would be violated. Even after they have killed someone! So, what about Mr. Clarkes right to a family life? Is being banned (deported) from his home and family not as bad as being deported from the country?
I would suspect that the comment by doleboytrotter was a tongue in cheek comment. We have all read about folks that are not allowed to be deported because their "human rights" of a family life would be violated. Even after they have killed someone! So, what about Mr. Clarkes right to a family life? Is being banned (deported) from his home and family not as bad as being deported from the country? Ex_Darwen_Tech
  • Score: 0

7:03pm Mon 20 Feb 12

everywhere is sh1t says...

Ex_Darwen_Tech wrote:
I would suspect that the comment by doleboytrotter was a tongue in cheek comment. We have all read about folks that are not allowed to be deported because their "human rights" of a family life would be violated. Even after they have killed someone! So, what about Mr. Clarkes right to a family life? Is being banned (deported) from his home and family not as bad as being deported from the country?
i must agree
[quote][p][bold]Ex_Darwen_Tech[/bold] wrote: I would suspect that the comment by doleboytrotter was a tongue in cheek comment. We have all read about folks that are not allowed to be deported because their "human rights" of a family life would be violated. Even after they have killed someone! So, what about Mr. Clarkes right to a family life? Is being banned (deported) from his home and family not as bad as being deported from the country?[/p][/quote]i must agree everywhere is sh1t
  • Score: 0

7:11pm Mon 20 Feb 12

Between_the_lions says...

everywhere is sh1t wrote:
Ex_Darwen_Tech wrote:
I would suspect that the comment by doleboytrotter was a tongue in cheek comment. We have all read about folks that are not allowed to be deported because their "human rights" of a family life would be violated. Even after they have killed someone! So, what about Mr. Clarkes right to a family life? Is being banned (deported) from his home and family not as bad as being deported from the country?
i must agree
Based on other posts I agree on the tongue in cheek nature of the post.
[quote][p][bold]everywhere is sh1t[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex_Darwen_Tech[/bold] wrote: I would suspect that the comment by doleboytrotter was a tongue in cheek comment. We have all read about folks that are not allowed to be deported because their "human rights" of a family life would be violated. Even after they have killed someone! So, what about Mr. Clarkes right to a family life? Is being banned (deported) from his home and family not as bad as being deported from the country?[/p][/quote]i must agree[/p][/quote]Based on other posts I agree on the tongue in cheek nature of the post. Between_the_lions
  • Score: 0

8:45pm Mon 20 Feb 12

Your ferret stinks says...

OK maybe i've gone off at the deep end but it just grinds me down when the L.E.T. wont allow us to post on certain topics because some people will always be offended no matter what other people's points of view are.
Yes there will always be the morons who are racists, d1ckheads or just plain rude but surely these are the posts that the LET should remove not just place a blanket ban on the topic just in case one slips through.
At the top of this page it invites everyone who has an opinion on something to join in quote "JOIN THE DEBATE BY ADDING YOUR COMMENTS ON THESE STORIES" then immediately revokes the right to be able to do so.

OK rant over i'm going to open a beer as it's not been a good day.

Don't have nightmares folks.
OK maybe i've gone off at the deep end but it just grinds me down when the L.E.T. wont allow us to post on certain topics because some people will always be offended no matter what other people's points of view are. Yes there will always be the morons who are racists, d1ckheads or just plain rude but surely these are the posts that the LET should remove not just place a blanket ban on the topic just in case one slips through. At the top of this page it invites everyone who has an opinion on something to join in quote "JOIN THE DEBATE BY ADDING YOUR COMMENTS ON THESE STORIES" then immediately revokes the right to be able to do so. OK rant over i'm going to open a beer as it's not been a good day. Don't have nightmares folks. Your ferret stinks
  • Score: 0

9:22pm Mon 20 Feb 12

White Eagle says...

It takes to tango, what about his Fancy woman Grindley? if children are involved the authorities should put them in care making them safe and the two Misfits from he*l put in Jail. Simple.
It takes to tango, what about his Fancy woman Grindley? if children are involved the authorities should put them in care making them safe and the two Misfits from he*l put in Jail. Simple. White Eagle
  • Score: 0

10:45pm Mon 20 Feb 12

whirlingdervish says...

tyrer coach, will give him a month trial,you locals are priceless....
tyrer coach, will give him a month trial,you locals are priceless.... whirlingdervish
  • Score: 0

1:18pm Wed 29 Feb 12

metz1969 says...

I wonder why CCH has taken action in this instance and yet is 'powerless' to do similar to one of their tenants in the cul-de-sac where a relative of mine lives. The woman and her family have lived there for over a decade and have caused havoc in this previously-quiet family area. The police are frequent visitors to the house where drunken revelry is commonplace and narcotics have allegedly been found on the premises. My relative has been threatened on a number of occasions and faces abuse from the woman and her children. And yet CCH, despite dozens of examples of unsociable behaviour are unwilling to tackle the issue head on. Let such people live on a street/an estate all together. If they want to behave in such an unsavoury manner, they will not be upsetting decent, law abiding families and elderly folk.
I wonder why CCH has taken action in this instance and yet is 'powerless' to do similar to one of their tenants in the cul-de-sac where a relative of mine lives. The woman and her family have lived there for over a decade and have caused havoc in this previously-quiet family area. The police are frequent visitors to the house where drunken revelry is commonplace and narcotics have allegedly been found on the premises. My relative has been threatened on a number of occasions and faces abuse from the woman and her children. And yet CCH, despite dozens of examples of unsociable behaviour are unwilling to tackle the issue head on. Let such people live on a street/an estate all together. If they want to behave in such an unsavoury manner, they will not be upsetting decent, law abiding families and elderly folk. metz1969
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree