You can move around with your keyboard
Drop pin on the map to start a new report
Press space again to adjust the location
Start new
report here
report here
Back to all reports

Feral children whose parents allow to run amok with no consequences

Reported anonymously at 06:28, Wed 16 May 2018

Sent to Leeds City Council 1 minute later. FixMyStreet ref: 1313354.

The children in this neighbourhood are obnoxious & feral. Their parents allow then to run wild. They vandalise cars, smash windows & shout abusive remarks at passers-by. Financed by spunk-bucket benefit the lazy scumbag mothers do nothing as they do not have jobs. When you complain to their mothers they are stoned on cannabis or drunk on alcohol financed by their generous welfare giro payments. If this benefit was scrapped and the lazy cunts were forced to get jobs ... they would at last become responsible for their feral kids.

RSS feed of updates to this problem Receive email when updates are left on this problem.


  • The authorities seem powerless or un-concerned as to how to deal with this situation.

    Posted anonymously at 07:45, Wed 13 June 2018
    Still open, via questionnaire

  • They are being led by a rather strange gentleman in his mid-60's (his surname is Townend). He is the current tenant of #21 Arthington Terrace. Said property belongs to Leeds Federated Housing. He is a retired lorry-driver who now co-ordinates said 'anti-social' activity. He acts with impunity. He receives a welfare 'giro'. He is also a retired disk-jockey. He sits in his garden on the Terrace of an evening imbibing in cannabis.

    He is their (sic) 'commanding-officer'. West Yorkshire Police are aware of this unsavoury chap's activities but they are too frightened to take this individual into custody and launch a prosecution. This is not a rational or logically tenable position for the authorities of Leeds West Yorkshire. It is time for the authorities to … "get a grip". It is time to 'rectify the anomalies'.

    Thanks for your support in this time of crisis.

    Posted anonymously at 09:35, Fri 3 July 2020

  • I am deeply concerned at the lack of action with regard to a Mr. Townend of # 21 Arthington Terrace (LS10 2NF) … He seems to enjoy being "treated with Kid-Gloves". This particular gentleman is the "leading-light" … he co-ordinates the activities of the feral brats in this neighbourhood. He seems to arrogantly enjoy the feeling of power that this furnishes him with.

    Posted anonymously at 09:51, Fri 3 July 2020

  • It is quite alarming that Leeds Fed Housing & Leeds City Council act with such total disregard for the welfare of decent law-abiding residents of the Arthington's in Hunslet. The feral children have no respect for the older people on this estate. Windows are smashed; the cars get vandalised and there is mayhem. Instead of tackling the wide-spread drug misuse … the authorities seem more interested in box-ticking and being seen to follow the silly Loony-Leftie agenda.

    Posted anonymously at 21:37, Fri 3 July 2020

  • The Loony-Leftie Agenda of Leeds City Council & Leeds Federated Housing Association … … is actually … … a MAJOR OBSTACLE to progress w.r.t. cleaning up the menace of feral children … … and anti-social behaviour.

    Leeds Fed is run by a bunch of smarmy 'Guardian-reading' middle-class Leftists.

    Leftists (and their allies) want the working classes to be docile and easily controlled. Hunslet is an impoverished, (sic) "sink-estate". Consequently they (the contemptuous Leftists) … sneeringly look down their noses with disdain and do NOTHING …!!!

    Posted anonymously at 21:48, Fri 3 July 2020

  • It is of particular concern that this estate (the Arthington's) is labelled … a (sic) "sink-estate". This provides a concrete example of why Leftists; Socialists and other Middle-class "do-gooders" are treated with contempt. Leeds is a magnet for boring numpty Lefty-politicos whose only objective is to get elected then retain power for the sake of POWER. They show ABSOLUTELY no interest in improving the area because they foolishly think that the ordinary working folks are daft … & consequently will always vote Labour …!! Loony-Lefty Leeds City Council should sack all these deadwood Socialist idiots IMMEDIATELY. It is no w time for a total Rout-out … … resign Mr. Sneering Socialist … … go away Ms. Lefty-Feminist … … you are no longer welcome … you & your extremist policies are a total FAILURE.

    Posted anonymously at 22:00, Fri 3 July 2020

  • The Arthington's houses a variety of folks. Some work hard & pay taxes .. … whilst others (a vocal minority) … … take drugs: Cocaine; Cannabis; and amphetamines. This problem & their long-term unemployability … … merely adds to the feral anti-social incidents.

    Posted anonymously at 22:23, Fri 3 July 2020

  • Although this strategy hailed from Leftists in the good ole USA … it is just as applicable here in Blighty.

    Viz: Cloward and Piven's article is focused on forcing the Democratic Party, which in 1966 controlled the presidency and both houses of the United States Congress, to take federal action to help the poor. They stated that full enrollment of those eligible for welfare "would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments" that would: "...deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be constrained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas."[2] They further wrote: The ultimate objective of this strategy—to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income—will be questioned by some. Because the ideal of individual social and economic mobility has deep roots, even activists seem reluctant to call for national programs to eliminate poverty by the outright redistribution of income.[2]

    Posted anonymously at 00:29, Sun 5 July 2020

  • As regards the widespread problem of lazy b****rds on the Dole … … it can be seen that this is a well trodden path of the Loonie-Lefty:


    Posted anonymously at 00:32, Sun 5 July 2020

  • In the interests of balance … one needs to seek out a different perspective. Unfortunately the Left tend to dominate the debate in Europe … and especially so here in the United Kingdom. Even the once conservative publication … the Telegraph has fallen prey to the Loonie-Left.

    See this extract for a balanced point of view: Liberal_denial

    Posted anonymously at 00:40, Sun 5 July 2020

  • Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog:

    In the mid-sixties at the height of the “social revolution” the line between democratic benevolence and outright communism became rather blurry. The Democratic Party, which controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress, was used as the springboard by social engineers to introduce a new era of welfare initiatives enacted in the name of “defending the poor”, also known as the “Great Society Programs”. These initiatives, however, were driven by far more subversive and extreme motivations, and have been expanded on by every presidency since, Republican and Democrat alike. At Columbia University, sociologist professors Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven introduced a political strategy in 1966 in an article entitled 'The Weight Of The Poor: A Strategy To End Poverty'. This article outlined a plan that they believed would eventually lead to the total transmutation of America into a full-fledged centralized welfare state (in other words, a collectivist enclave). The spearpoint of the Cloward-Piven strategy involved nothing less than economic sabotage against the U.S. Theoretically, according to the doctrine, a condition of overwhelming tension and strain could be engineered through the overloading of American welfare rolls, thereby smothering the entitlement program structure at the state and local level. The implosion of welfare benefits would facilitate a massive spike in poverty and desperation, creating a financial crisis that would lead to an even greater cycle of demand for a fully socialized system. This desperation would then “force” the federal government to concentrate all welfare programs under one roof, nationalize and enforce a socialist ideology, and ultimately, compact an immense level of power into the hands of a select few.

    Cloward and Piven claimed that this could be accomplished at a grassroots level through community activism, and, that it would facilitate a more compassionate federal authority, however, there are numerous problems with these assertions. The Cloward-Piven Strategy has nothing to do with grassroots activism, and accomplishes nothing tangible for the downtrodden poverty class. In fact, I would dare to say that Cloward and Piven as well as most social engineers are well aware that the concept ultimately only serves to give even more dominance to the establishment and pilfer even more freedom from the masses.

    Posted anonymously at 00:42, Sun 5 July 2020

  • Https://

    Posted anonymously at 00:43, Sun 5 July 2020

  • Homeschooling consists of the practice of students receiving education from a parent or guardian:

    Instructors acting under the direction of a parent or guardian, rather than from teachers in a formal school setting like a public school. Virtually every area of the United States has local support groups for homeschooling, which often meet in church facilities. Nearly 7% of college-educated parents homeschool their children.[1] In the United States, an estimated one to two million students are homeschooled, or nearly one out of every 30 students.[2] Homeschooling grew by almost 75% in the eight years before 2011,[3] and it has continued to grow at a strong pace despite attacks from teachers' unions and government bureaucrats.[4] In a recent survey, "the average homeschooled student scored at the 88th percentile" in the core subjects of reading, language and math.[5] The most successful mathematician in contests in history, Reid Barton, was homeschooled.[6] The greatest gymnast ever, 2016 Olympic champion Simone Biles, was homeschooled. One of the greatest college football players—the first to win the Heisman Trophy as a sophomore -- Tim Tebow, was homeschooled until college.[7] A Wimbledon tennis star, Melanie Oudin, chose homeschooling beginning in 7th grade: "With how much I improved in the first year at home, I knew it was the right choice."[8] Homeschooled students make up many of the top college and graduate students in mathematics today.[9] Homeschooling parents have many available options to supplement education at home: attending a weekly course provided in many areas by the homeschooling community - a Conservapedian has taught such courses since 2002 using a correspondence school (or the modern video- or computer-based equivalent) taking classes at local museums or nature centers joining with other families to share teaching responsibilities in a co-op encouraging the student to self-instruct using library books, traditional textbooks or workbooks, knowledgeable mentor's and/or hands-on experiences hiring a tutor for certain difficult topics, like physics attending a brick and mortar institution for certain classes and taking other classes at home

    Posted anonymously at 00:46, Sun 5 July 2020

  • The following text is cut and pasted from Conservapedia (once again to escape the Left-wing propaganda of Wikipedia):


    Religion In 1533 AD King Henry VIII formed the Church of England (CoE) after the pope refused to annul the marriage between the king and Catherine of Aragon; while originally the CoE followed a policy of Catholic without the pope, his successors Edward VI and Elizabeth I moved the church in a far more Protestant direction. Henry established himself as the head of the church and made it the state religion of England. This situation continues to this day, although in much modified form. The queen is still the nominal head of the church, although purely as a figurehead. Decisions technically taken by the queen are in fact done only on the advice of her ministers, who in matters of the church invariably act on the advice of the church leaders. Until recently certain bishops of the Church of England were automatically given seats in the House of Lords. The Church of England is closely involved with the ceremonies associated with England, for example at coronations or royal weddings and funerals. Since the Reformation the country has remained primarily Anglican with the notable exception of the Catholic reigns of Mary I and James II. More recently, the number of Roman Catholics is poised to overtake the number of Anglicans in the country, a trend that is likely to continue with an influx of migrants from Catholic countries such as Ireland and recent EU accession countries such as Poland[1]. As with the UK as a whole, the significant minority religions include Hinduism, Judaism and Islam. A 2001 census gave the following figures for religious affiliation: Christianity: 71.6%, Islam: 3.1%, Hindu: 1.1%, Sikh: 0.7%, Jewish: 0.5%, and Buddhist: 0.3%, No Faith: 22.3%. Approximately 7% of responders did not answer the question.[1] Schools Unlike American schools, state run Comprehensive schools in England have a daily act of Christian worship, although there have been efforts in recent times to remove this, to reflect the multifaith make-up of England.[2] There is support for some "faith schools", such as Peter Vardy's Emmanuel Schools Foundation through the Academies program.[3]

    Posted anonymously at 00:51, Sun 5 July 2020

  • Once again I would refer folks to Conservapedia …!!

    Addiction is a compulsive, harmful activity.

    Addiction often starts out as a seemingly innocent pleasure … ... often seduced/initiated into by liberals …

    ... only to consume the person pursuing it.

    Some displacement of the bad with some good is often helpful in conquering addiction.

    Conservative/Christian values are an excellent way to combat addiction … (see Conservapedia articles on: Atheism and alcoholism and Atheism and drug addiction).

    Virtually everyone faces challenges from some type of addiction. Conservative principles are highly effective in overcoming addiction. Religion can also help. Other ideologies, such as atheism, libertarianism, or Leftism, are unlikely to help conquer addiction. Romans 1:29 says about the rebellious, "Being filled with all adikia,"[1] translated "unrighteousness;" God has given up rebellious idolaters who worship and serve the creature more than Creator and reject Him to all manner of addictions.

    Most addictions are based on some kind of deceit.

    Recognizing the deceit—and even mocking it—can help overcome it.

    Good habits and healthy activities (e.g., religious services, mental and physical exercise, community or political activism) can be helpful in driving out harmful ones.

    Posted anonymously at 00:58, Sun 5 July 2020

  • Great Britain is a European island consisting of England, Scotland, and Wales …

    ... all of which send representatives to the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

    The "United Kingdom" consists of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

    "Great Britain" also has a purely geographic meaning, as the largest island of the British Isles.

    The term was first used during the Middle Ages to differentiate between the island of Britain and Brittany (Little Britain - Britannia Minor) in what is now France, which was a haven for Celtic peoples (Britons) fleeing the Germanic incursions beginning in the 5th and 6th centuries.

    Posted anonymously at 01:01, Sun 5 July 2020

  • It is interesting that the ritual (sic) "Clap-a-thon" on a Thursday evening at 20:00hrs is running out of steam. National Health Service (extract from Conservapedia)

    The National Health Service (NHS) is the United Kingdom's nationalized health care system.

    It was established in 1948 as part of Clement Attlee's post-World War II Labour government's socialist program, and has been supported (at least publicly) by politicians of every party since then.

    The wealthy in Britain typically use private health insurance, for which there are tax breaks,[1] while the general public and some politicians use the NHS system.[2]

    As pharmaceutical companies began rationing drugs since 2008 …

    ... the British healthcare system faces drug stortages in 2012.

    Officials within their health care system warned about a severe shortage of pharmaceuticals, putting patients' lives at risk.[3]

    The NHS is nominally funded out of "National Insurance contributions", a form of personal taxation comparable to the US Social Security system, albeit capped below average earnings.

    The NHS revenue stream is, in theory, entirely separate in operation from income tax.[4]

    In practice, the NHS is funded from general taxation, and is accepted by the British electorate as being funded in this way.

    All prescription medicines (however not over-the-counter ones) are available for a low standard fee in England. Prescriptions are entirely free of charge in Wales.[5] NHS treatment is available to all residents of the UK.

    Most services, including complex and expensive surgical procedures and drugs, are free at the point of use, and those that are not (such as the provision of glasses and dental care) are free to people on low incomes.

    This ensures that everyone is able to be treated, no matter what their individual wealth or means may be.[6] "Private" (i.e. non-NHS) doctors and hospitals do exist in Britain, but fewer than 10% of Britons choose to buy private health insurance in preference to using the NHS. (The big exception to this is in the area of dental care: NHS dentists are relatively difficult to find in many areas, and many people are forced to "go private", even if uninsured.)

    The NHS is Britain's largest direct and indirect employer with 1.3 million workers. It is not, despite maverick MEP Daniel Hannan's assertion, the second largest employer in the world.[7]

    This cradle-to-grave entitlement costs Britain $158 billion (USD) per year. Britain’s Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron is looking to reform the state-run health-care system, which he called "second-rate" due to the program’s massive cost and lackluster performance.[8]

    Posted anonymously at 01:05, Sun 5 July 2020

  • Regarding Mr. Townend of LS10 2NF … #21.

    Further Details … … this gentleman born in May of 1954 … ... is the (sic) "Boss" of the street.

    His modus operandi is quite peculiar. He believes that it is … … "his Manor" so to speak.

    Posted anonymously at 09:01, Sun 5 July 2020

Provide an update

Please note that updates are not sent to the council. Your information will only be used in accordance with our privacy policy

Next: Tell us about you

Your update

Tell us about you

Do you have a FixMyStreet password?