Farmer's High Court battle to save castle
A farmer, who secretly built a castle and lived in it for four years while it was disguised as a stack of straw, today launched a High Court fight to save it from being demolished.
Robert Fidler, 60, whose dream home boasts ramparts, cannon and took two years to build, was told to tear it down by a Government planning inspector in May 2008.
-
Battle: Robert Fidler and wife Linda
But now Mr Fidler, of Honeycrock Farm on Axes Lane in Salfords, is asking High Court judge Mr Justice Forbes to quash that decision and give him another chance at securing planning consent to keep the castle.
Mr Fidler says he moved his wife Linda, 40, and son Harry, 8, into the castle when it was complete in 2002, and for four years kept it hidden from Reigate & Banstead Borough Council planners behind a barricade of straw bales and tarpaulin.
By the time he revealed it to the world in May 2006, he felt it had become immune from planning control and there was nothing the Council could do about it.
However, the council issued an enforcement notice in March 2007 demanding its demolition.
The Government planning inspector then rejected Mr Fidler's appeal, finding the removal of the straw bale disguise constituted part of the building works.
As a result, the inspector found Mr Fidler could not rely on the four year immunity period which starts from "substantial completion".
Today, lawyers for Mr Fidler launched a High Court appeal that centres on the question of when exactly the castle was "complete" in the eyes of the law.
The case hinges on whether Mr Fidler's final unveiling of his castle by removal of the hay bales and tarpaulin was, in the eyes of the law, part of the on-going building operation.
That could govern whether the four year immunity period applied.
Summing the case up at the outset of the hearing, Mr Justice Forbes said : "The key point in your case is whether the inspector was right to conclude that the removal of the bales and the tarpaulin formed part of the building operation."
Opening his case, Mr Fidler's counsel, Stephen Hockman QC, said the issue before the inspector was whether the building operations on the site had been substantially completed for more than four years before the council issued the enforcement notice in March 2007.
He said: "The appellant's case is that the removal of the bales was not part of the building operation against which the enforcement notice was directed."
He said it was a separate operation that did not give rise to a breach of planning control.
He argued that, in this case, the building was substantially complete more than four years earlier, in 2002, and that "no other reasonable conclusion is possible".
"Construction was complete and it was in occupation" he added.
"The removal of the bales cannot even be classified as part of a building operation. The decision was wrong in law and should be quashed" he said.
The hearing is scheduled to last two days, after which the judge is likely to reserve his decision in order to give it in writing at a later date.
13 Comments
View all
by Thomas Bruce, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
Thursday, February 04 2010, 12:04AM
“As I understand it, the Fidlers had tried numerous times to obtain Borough Council Planning Council permission to build his ¿castle¿ but their requests were repeatedly shelved, with the Fidlers¿ being given neither approval nor rejection... evidently just sitting in bureaucratic limbo. My sister (a transplanted American, married to an Englishman and living in the UK for nearly thirty years) has a similar problem with her local Planning Council, and her request also just sits in bureaucratic limbo... going on two years now.
And just exactly when did the rights of property owners in the land of Magna Carta go on the ¿green¿ chopping block? This structure was built on land which is part of a family farm. Why is a farmer not allowed to build a farmhouse on his own farmland. I visit the UK frequently and have seen many Ost houses which have been remodeled into residential dwellings. Why then cannot Mr. Fidler similarly remodel a couple of his grain silos?
I¿m just very curious about this case. Perhaps some Englishman or Englishwoman could explain the applicable laws to me... not about whether or not one needs planning councils and respect for authority... I mean the laws about property rights please.
Thomas Bruce
Atlanta, Georgia
United States”
by geoff hill, Darlington
Wednesday, February 03 2010, 1:28PM
“perhaps he should have called it a folly, which after all is what it has turned out to be. I believe you do not need planning permission to erect a folly although you are not allowed to reside in them.”
by linda Fidler, salford
Sunday, January 24 2010, 1:07AM
“its ashame people make their minds up without knowing all the facts. We had a planning officer for approx 13 years whos soul purpose was not to give consent to any of the planning applcations we put in, either they were ignored or refused and they were applciations which would normally be permitted for example our old cow shed was aske to be changed into a dwelling three times and it has sat there for eight years empty because we were told it would be approved but it was intentionally shelved we have had to fight for everything we have on our farm and we have only tried to improve it and make it look better we built our house out of utter desperation not out of sticking our fingers up, its not unreasonable to have a farmhouse on your own farm, he has built it with secondhand materials,heated it with a ground source heat pump and log fire. if you knew the battles we have had with planning when it was never necessary you would know why we built this house and why would anyone go through living under the stress that at anytime the house could be pulled down unless it was the only way to get a decent property on your own land sometimes you do have to take action into your own hands if it means you can achieve things for the better you only live this life once , Rob is a very thoughtful character he does alot of work in africa building houses people and churches and roads,bridges. He also lets a charity use our farm which he makes no money but has helped build or make some of the facilities and courses maybe you should be thinking why the council have been so unhelpful sometimes it can be personal and our farm particular cases has been especially with this particular officer thank God she has now left thankyou Jesus.”
by Thomas, London
Tuesday, January 05 2010, 9:22PM
“I sincerely hope the High Court supports the Council's decision to require the demolition of this illegal property. The individual's have demonstrated a shocking disregard not only for the laws of this land but also democracy itself. Typical rich man (with no taste whatsoever judging from the ugly Disney style castle design) thinking he is above the law and can pay to get his own way - Sickening!”
by L.Lucan, Malvern
Saturday, December 12 2009, 6:43PM
“crack on Bob, fight the Beggers, Surrey council are just a bunch of snobs. I'm sure it looks nice, I lived next door to years ago, and all your 'projects looked fine' !!”