Not-So-Jolly Roger

Father who flew Jolly Roger for daughter's birthday prosecuted by councilBy OLINKA KOSTER - More by this author » Last updated at 23:43pm on 6th May 2008
Comments (60) One particular pirate prop was a must for David Waterman as he organised a themed party for his daughter's birthday.
With cutlass-wielding youngsters running around in eye patches, he thought, a Jolly Roger flag would add the perfect finishing touch - and he duly hung the Skull and Crossbones from the side of the family home.
Unfortunately the local council didn't see the jolly side and Mr Waterman has been threatened with prosecution unless he removes the 5ft by 3ft banner.
Scroll down for more

All aboard: Firefighter David Waterman with children Ewan and Madeleine
Last night, the fireman and former soldier hit out at the "disgraceful" waste of taxpayers' money.
While his daughter Madeleine's eighth birthday party went off successfully, he is so angry at the council's pettiness that he has decided to leave the flag in place on a point of principle and pay the £95 administration fee to apply for 'advertising consent' which would enable him to continue flying it outside his home in Ashtead, Surrey.
A senior council officer has warned him it is unlikely to be granted.
Father-of-four Mr Waterman, who works at Battersea fire station in South London, said: "I find it ridiculous that the council are fighting me over this.
"It's a £5 flag, not hurting anyone, and they're probably spending hundreds of pounds of our cash getting me to take it down. That could be spent on improving the local area."
The problems started when the council received a complaint about the flag from a neighbour on April 16.
Scroll down for more

Causing a flap: Mr Waterman is paying £95 to apply for advertising consent for the flag after a neighbour complained
Mr Waterman, 41, was sent a letter on April 21 informing him he had seven days to remove it.
He was told that the flying of flags was controlled by the Town and Country (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992.
These stipulate that only 'a national flag of any country, the flag of the European Union, the Commonwealth, the United Nations, English County flags and saints' flags associated with a particular county' can be flown.
The regulations also set out commercial flags that are normally allowed, such as those used by housebuilders and car showrooms. But they state that specific permission has to be granted to fly any other type of flag - such as a Jolly Roger.
Mr Waterman, a former trooper with the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment, said he believed the complaints made about the flag were linked to a dispute about his children-playing outside. "My kids are well-behaved but there's one set of neighbours who would rather they sat inside playing computer games than run around on the lawn," he said.
"They don't like my kids being outside but they can't complain to anyone about it so they've picked on the flag.
"I can't believe the council is backing them. This is a point of principle and I'm standing firm."
A spokesman for Mole Valley District Council said it had not yet launched legal proceedings against Mr Waterman and would consider his application.
"We received a complaint about the flag flying outside Mr Waterman's house and are duty-bound to investigate complaints and enforce Government regulations," he added.
The term Jolly Roger is used to describe various flags flown to identify a ship's crew as pirates. The Skull and Crossbones is the most famous.