'hidden Castle' Builder Given Suspended Sentence

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34768763

We were discussing this on here some time ago. It seems that this chap has now reached the end of the line. As far as I am concerned, as soon as this monstrosity is pulled down the better....the farm buildings in the background have far more architectural merit than this awful house !

[fiction-factory]

agreed.
It annoys me when people try to get round planning permission and then hope that once it's built they'll get away with it, but usually it's on a much smaller scale than this

[DTCwordfan]

the chutzpah involved is jaw-dropping.....

[mikey4444]

To me, the building looks like some of approximation of Ye Olde Worlde England, that you might expect to see in Hollywood.

But, putting the ghastliness of the building to one side, did he really think he was going to get away with this ? Hiding this horror behind bales of hay during the building ?.....as DTC say, the chutzpah is almost unbelievable !

[sandyRoe]

There as a man in NI who had permission from the planners to build a new house on his land on condition he demolished the old one when it was completed. He dragged the planners through the course trying to get he condition overturned and keep them both. He failed and was landed with heavy legal costs.
Both him, and the hidden house man, have brass necks.

[Gromit]

Planning law in this country is stupid, and the people enforcing it are power mad. He runs a farm there, so why can't he build somewhere to live there?
It may not be to everyones taste, but he is using his own money to build an house he wants to live in. Who is anyone else to say, I don't like your taste so the house has to come down?

[mikey4444]

Gromit...he is guilty of ignoring Planning Laws, not for having no taste. Planning laws are there for a purpose. Its green belt. If we allowed this chap to get away with it, it would just be a signal to everybody else that it was OK
to ignore the law as well. He hasn't got a leg to stand on.

He clearly knew what he was doing otherwise why would he attempt to conceal his activities ?

[Gromit]

His wife, Linda, added: "There's a plan to build 2,000 houses over there [nearby land in Salfords] but we can't have a house to look after our cattle. //

[sandyRoe]

If he was allowed one why not another? He'd soon have a small village on his land.
I think I heard mention that he'd sold the house. Is this another way to try to get round the regulations?

[Gromit]

// Mr Fidler has been farming the green belt site off Axes Lane for over 40 years.
Two subsequent planning applications from Mr Fidler to convert other buildings on the farm into a home have also been refused.
His wife, Linda, added: "There's a plan to build 2,000 houses over there [nearby land in Salfords] but we can't have a house to look after our cattle. //

[mikey4444]

Sandy...why would anyone buy this house if they know that it was built without planning permission and faced demolition ?

[jackthehat]

Planning Laws, however pernickity they may seem, are there for a reason.
Whilst some may have sympathy for Mr Fidler, I suspect that sympathy would disappear should their own next-door-neighbours decide to construct an 'inappropriate monstosity'.....

[Gromit]

Snobbery and local authority fascism.

Ludicrous that a farmer is denied permission to have a house on a farm he has worked for 40 years, because it is in the green belt.

[Dogsbody2]

Mr Fidler was not a farmer at the start of this. He bought the herd of cattle part way through. Had he been a bona fide farmer he would probably been able to get consent for an appropriately designed and scaled dwelling, since this is one of the few acceptable reasons for a new dwelling in the countryside. But he could never achieve this retrospectively as one has to demonstrate a viable agricultural business that already exists.
The sooner it gets demolished, the better. It has happened before in similar circumstances without so much fuss.

[jackthehat]

If you set a precedent for 'nodding through' green-belt land development, you then have trouble preventing anyone who believes they have a 'right' to develop on the green-belt from doing so.

Dale Farm, anyone?

[-Talbot-]

mikey, you seem to be a tad fickle when it comes to green belt land

mikey4444
Gromit...he is guilty of ignoring Planning Laws, not for having no taste. Planning laws are there for a purpose. Its *green belt*
If we allowed this chap to get away with it, it would just be a signal to everybody else that it was OK

mikey4444
Question Author
It doesn't have to be Central London Balders....I may be accused of farting in chapel here, but the *green belt* doesn't have to be sacrosanct does it ?

[mushroom25]

mikey, a former deputy leader of your party put it nicely:-

"green belt is a wonderful policy, and we intend to build on it"
2-jags Prescott.

[Dogsbody2]

Here's one article to help demonstrate the deviousness of this individual, as well as assist Gromit off his high horse.
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/another-bid-save-hidden-farmhouse-6757750
He bought the herd of cattle in about 2010. Previously he merely owned the land on a site known as Honeycrock Farm. He was never a farmer.

[bednobs]

will he still have to knock it down too?

[Gromit]

Dogsbody,
Think you've sent the wrong link?

[jackthehat]

In recent months, Mr Fidler has claimed to have sold the property thus preventing him from demolishing it as he is no longer the owner.....and now it is, he claims, home to bats and newts (protected species) thereby preventing him demolishing it under Habitat Conservation Laws.

He took a gamble......lost and now he ought to shut up and pull the bloody thing down.

Incidentally, his continuous appeals and obfuscating will be costing the taxpayer money via the Planning Authority costs.