I don't actually disagree with part of Gingernuts comment - people do have the right to protest and exercise what rights they have however what seems to have happened here was an engineered action initiated and stirred up by people who aren't necessarily affected by the business for dubious reasons of their own. This case must have cost thousands to set up and pursue. Pursued with a vengeance obviously.

I originally said in an earlier post that I would be worried if a business of this nature was proposed next door to me. That remains true but I would hope I would look into the facts of the matter before opposing it however I do think that a childcare business by its very nature isnt a 'toxic' neighbour by any accounts. I would much prefer this to a doctors surgery or even a solicitors office. There is more traffic generated by those two uses than would ever be generated by a small nursery. Unlike a lot of people it would seem, I don't find the presence of small children objectionable.

Most historical covenants were there to protect neighbourhoods but time moves on and many of these become obselete or ridiculous. There are still many covenants in existence which require households to contribute to the upkeep of their local church - I have come across this- its considered 'exotic' in legal terms but if someone chose to enforce it it would cause problems for many communities. All in all, its expected that people act reasonably and in good faith, not however pursue vexatious litigation as seems to be the case here.

I don't have any involvement with the TLRA but would imagine that as a resident run organisation, decisions should be openly and democratically made, but that doesnt seem to be the case here.