How it all started

I planned to start a new life with my wife and two children when in 1984 we purchased a property called ‘The Bungalow’ in Warren Lane, Nr Lydden, Dover. Soon after moving in we changed its name to 'The Oaks' because of the fine mature English Oaks situated in the garden.

The timber-framed bungalow, which had two bedrooms, lounge, kitchen and bathroom was an existing dwelling in lawful residential use. It had been neglected for some years and was in need of some TLC so upon moving in on the 15th June I began renovating it and making cosmetic changes. The existing timber frame was retained, the walls re-clad, new windows fitted and it was re-roofed. No extensions were added thus the size of the original footprint remained the same.  

Within a few weeks of purchasing the bungalow Dover District Council falsely stated that I had 'erected a new dwelling' and ordered me to demolish it.  An enforcement notice was wrongfully issued and we lived under the threat of demolition for five years, until 1989 when the Council came along one morning with a mechanical digger and smashed the bungalow to pieces whilst we were still living there with our two children. Following this the Council stated that they were not obliged to provide accommodation for us because we had 'made ourselves homeless'. This was pre Human Rights days of course.

The council served the wrong notice because the breach they allege I committed did not occur. The Town & Country Planning Act states that an enforcement notice shall specify that steps be taken to restore the land to its condition before the breach took place. In other words, put the bungalow back to as it was before I carried out the cosmetic changes.

The unlawful demolition of my bungalow took place because the planning department presented inaccurate and misleading advice to the Planning Committee including the claim that the residential use had been abandoned. In  R. v Canterbury City Council ex parte Springimage JPL 1993 it was Held that a decision is void if it is based on information put before a committee that is not correct or is incomplete.

The original decision to demolish my home was wrong and therefore it follows that every action that the council has taken against me since, must be wrong. A public authority owes as great, if not a greater obligation, to comply with the law as any individual and I have sufficient evidence to show the Council acted unlawfully not only in demolishing my home in the first instance but also in all acts of enforcement action that have followed. There is case law to support this assertion, as does the Town & Country Planning Act, which is very clear and precise on this matter.

Every person is entitled to procedural fairness, but that will always depend on the integrity of the authority responsible for such procedures. 

There is clear evidence that Dover Council have deprived me of my right to procedural fairness throughout the duration of this dispute but particularly so when they took the decision to demolish my home.

I did not establish a home without planning permission because that already lawfully existed and had done so  for 56 years. Prior to the demolition I placed a mobile home adjacent to the bungalow so continuing, uninterrupted, the lawful residential use of the land. 

Soon after Dover Council had demolished my home they took action to remove the mobile home that was legally sited. Subsequently they wrongfully issued an enforcement notice on the 27 February 1990, ordering its removal.

Due to the years of stress and extreme disruption to my family’s life leading up to the demolition of our home and the ongoing harassment and threat of litigation from the Council after the demolition, my family broke up. After my wife left I gave up the fight and moved away from the site in October 1992. Up until that time I had neither the knowledge nor financial ability to fight the unlawful action that had been taken against me and it is apparent the Council preyed on that fact.

In my absence the site of my former home became a local rubbish tip and scrap vehicles accumulated on the land. It became an eyesore, an annoyance to local residents and the subject of further enforcement action, which required me as owner of the site to clear it even though this situation was a direct result of the council demolishing my home.  

My property had been in continuous residential use for over 60 years when the Council demolished it and reduced my land to a rubbish tip. Tim Flisher from the Council's planning department has since confirmed that residential use is the only lawful use ever ascribed to my property.

On 15^th July 2002 I moved back to the site and began clearing all the scrap vehicles and the tons of rubbish that had accumulated, before restoring it to an attractive garden once more. I have continued to live there in a mobile home ever since with the full support of my neighbours but not the Council who are again wrongfully taking enforcement action against me.  

On 28 February 2005 I submitted a planning application following advice from Tim Flisher the Council's Development Control Manager but the dirty tricks..........more

I became highly suspicious about the way in which the Council were dealing with my planning application so withdrew it on the 22 July 2005, before it was determined.

Soon after this I obtained a copy of the report that the case officer, Nikki Coles, had prepared for the Planning Committee. I was astounded when I read it as the officer’s report contained incorrect statements, misleading information and was written in a biased way designed to ensure a refusal. At this point I decided to submit a complaint to the Professional.......more

In 2006 I wrote to Gwyn Prosser, New Labour MP for Dover, asking for his support but soon discovered that...........more

HOME