'illegal' mock-Tudor castle he tried to hide behind 40ft hay bales

agrinnall

For those who don't want to run the risk of being spotted reading a story on the Daily Mail website, here it is on the Beeb.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-33291572

I think the council should hire a Vogon Constructor Fleet, they'd soon have it down

csgohan4

Why does he think he is special and he can flout the rules.


Picasso didn't paint on residential property or Tube trains did he?

Errata

It's a crime against good taste and architecture and should be bulldozed.

matttye

AdrianC wrote: »

The secretary of state WAS the final appeal.



It doesn't work like that. You can't just take the UK government to some generalist European court, except in cases of breaches of the European Convention of Human Rights and maybe some very limited others.

The court of justice of the European Union will hear cases where member states have breached EU law. Not saying the UK has just saying it hears far more wide ranging issues than just those covered by the ECHR.

Landofwood

All the best to him I say. Stupid rules deserve to be broken.

DTDfanBoy

Landofwood wrote: »

All the best to him I say. Stupid rules deserve to be broken.

I guess the rest of us just have to be grateful that the likes of you and Mr Fidler will never have enough influence to destroy the UKs green belts

I'd hate to think what the country would look like if the do-as-you-likeys could built whatever they liked wherever they fancied :eek:

Innys1

Landofwood wrote: »

All the best to him I say. Stupid rules deserve to be broken.

I doubt you'd be saying that if you lived next door to him.

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays

DTDfanBoy wrote: »

I guess the rest of us just have to be grateful that the likes of you and Mr Fidler will never have enough influence to destroy the UKs green belts

I'd hate to think what the country would look like if the do-as-you-likeys could built whatever they liked wherever they fancied :eek:

It's peculiar, the nice cottages in old villages, or Victorian terraces in cities, that people all actually want to live in were built before we had these "rules".

Whilst all the uniform crap that gets thrown up these days has come during an era where planning departments rubber stamp everything in order to "protect the green belt".

eddddy

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays wrote: »

It's peculiar, the nice cottages in old villages, or Victorian terraces in cities, that people all actually want to live in were built before we had these "rules".

Yes - that's because it's only the desirable stuff that's been kept. All the poorly planned, poorly designed victorian slums have been knocked down.

I guess one goal of the planning laws is to stop new poorly planned, poorly designed 'victorian style' slums being built again. (Although that's not relevant to Fiddler's castle.)

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays wrote: »

Whilst all the uniform crap that gets thrown up these days has come during an era where planning departments rubber stamp everything in order to "protect the green belt".

If your complaint is about uniformity, most victorian terraces are as uniform as you can get. In many towns and cities there are many streets lined with identical victorian houses.

Nobbie1967

casperlarue wrote: »

Looks like Mr Fidler came up with another dastardly plan.... sell the house to someone else!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3140621/Man-told-demolish-1million-castle-secretly-built-hidden-hay-bales-says-t-claims-sold-it.html

It doesn't change anything, the council can still demolish the house whoever it is 'sold' to. In a genuine sale, the conveyancing process brings to light these sort of issues. If you build an unauthorised extension on your house and the council notice, selling the house doesn't stop the council taking enforcement action.