We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
'illegal' mock-Tudor castle he tried to hide behind 40ft hay bales
Comments
-
planning_officer wrote: »Besides, any money spent on this case is money well spent in my opinion - why should someone be allowed to ride roughshod over well established Green Belt policies and get away with it? The primary aim of Green Belts is to keep them open (i.e. free of buildings, other than those that are absolutely essential), therefore a whacking great monstrosity masquerading as a castle and devoid of any architectural merit whatsoever should definitely be rigorously enforced against until it is demolished. The blame for any Council expenditure rests firmly at Mr Fidler's door.
It's not well spend in my opinion. It's a complete waste of public money.
The thing is too - isn't there a pretty ugly looking industrial estate pretty near to where this is built? Hs castle looks positively stylish in comparison."One day I realised that when you are lying in your grave, it's no good saying, "I was too shy, too frightened."
Because by then you've blown your chances. That's it."0 -
Completely disagree I'm afraid. It's certainly not a public waste of money by any stretch of the imagination. What's the alternative - do away with planning completely and just let everyone and anyone concrete over the whole country - mmm great idea! The countryside is a finite resource and should be protected, otherwise future generations won't thank us for it.
Nearby industrial estate = not in Green Belt. Mr Fidler's monstosity = in Green Belt. That's the difference!0 -
planning_officer wrote: »Completely disagree I'm afraid. It's certainly not a public waste of money by any stretch of the imagination. What's the alternative - do away with planning completely and just let everyone and anyone concrete over the whole country - mmm great idea! The countryside is a finite resource and should be protected, otherwise future generations won't thank us for it.
Nearby industrial estate = not in Green Belt. Mr Fidler's monstosity = in Green Belt. That's the difference!
Who said anything about doing away with planning laws? The fact is that he built this on his own property and no one even noticed or cared for two years. He has built one house - on a plot of land that was in his back garden. He has not "concreted over the countryside".
A bit of common sense wouldn't have gone awry here. Sadly as is so often the case these days it's something which seems to be lacking."One day I realised that when you are lying in your grave, it's no good saying, "I was too shy, too frightened."
Because by then you've blown your chances. That's it."0 -
No one noticed it because he deceitfully kept it hidden behind huge walls of hay bales!!! As soon as it was exposed, it was perfectly visible to everyone!!!
Common sense is to enforce against this - to protect the Green Belt, otherwise, why enforce against anything that contravenes planning policies??? That's what I was referring to when I mentioned doing away with planning completely - it annoys me that some people can't seem to envisage what this country would look like without planning regulations. If Mr Fidler's house isn't enforced against, then no new house in the Green Belt would be. Green Belts only cover 12% of the country for heavens sake, so they're worth protecting, to stop urban sprawl.
Anyway, thankfully it is being rigorously enforced against and will be demolished at some point.0 -
planning_officer wrote: »Anyway, thankfully it is being rigorously enforced against and will be demolished at some point.
"At some point".......suitably vague enough."One day I realised that when you are lying in your grave, it's no good saying, "I was too shy, too frightened."
Because by then you've blown your chances. That's it."0 -
Yep, as that depends on how much of his own time and money Mr Fidler wants to waste - as I mentioned above, he can go to the European Court of Human Rights as a last resort, although in my opinion that's utterly pointless, as he already has a house on the land (a lawful house!) and the second unauthorised home is clearly not required in relation to any kind of human rights issue...0
-
He is not spending his own money. Latest news report claims he is using solicitors who have agreed to represent him on a no win no fee basis, so he will carry on with his appeals as long as he can.
Olias0 -
In that case, stupid solicitors, that's all I can say!! They won't be getting paid as he won't win!0
-
As i keep posting, will you let us know when the Bulldozers are moving in?planning_officer wrote: »Yep, as that depends on how much of his own time and money Mr Fidler wants to waste - as I mentioned above, he can go to the European Court of Human Rights as a last resort, although in my opinion that's utterly pointless, as he already has a house on the land (a lawful house!) and the second unauthorised home is clearly not required in relation to any kind of human rights issue...0 -
Here comes the compromise?
If he knocks down the existing dwelling, then he gets to pay top rate council tax on the new one?
Come to think of it relating to my local experience - presumably the local council is already trying to charge him council tax on both properties?
Did anyone else watch Thursday night's "Dream Farm" on Channel 4?
It featured a youngish woman who had bought 14 acres and thought she could set it up as a Lama breeding farm, completer wit some nice new wooden barn/sheds and a large "log cabin" as an instant farmhouse.
(I remember the goat boom of about 30 years ago, similar situation appears to have developed with lamas; where a prize winning baby lama is worth 15K.)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards