“Simple solution is to issue a permit, levy a late fee (fine), review his building plans, allow the man his home and stop being petty. The only reason the permit has become important is for re-sale to an unsuspecting buyer. Let them live as they wish. It's on a farm for the love of god not in the middle of downtown!”

“The world is watching how Britain is dealing with Mr. Fidler. And while I have not driven by his castle and have only seen the pictures I believe it to be beautiful. If the law gives a four year period it should be honoured, period. If you don't like this limitation, change the law. The "castle" should stand. God bless you sir, I hope that you can continue your struggle and are not forced to destroy your home and work of art. I can only imagine the people on council you are up against and I must say that my view of England has taken a blow today.”

“I quite like the look of this building but still think it should be demolished. Allowing it to stand opens the door to every crank (or property developer!) to build any monstrosity behind haybales or other screen and hiding it for four years.

This could create a precedent resulting in hideous buildings, in inappropriate locations, being built all over the country. Even worse it could result in councils having to employ even more planning officers to go around trying to spy out these illegal buildings.”

“The Background to this should have been publicised by the media, Mr Fidler applied for planning permission to turn a victorian barn next door into a farm dwelling for his family to live in, 8 years ago and DESPITE his requests, this application has never been determined, hence not giving him any right to any appeal and taking it out of the hands of the local council. Surely the local council have only themselves to blame.......their actions have made this happen, will they learn, bet they dont. Good luck !”

“good luck mr and mrs fidler I have driven past your home many time's and it is beautiful. I can only guess what it is like inside. keep going”

“To be honest, I would rather see this monstrosity levelled. It really is an eyesore and the combination of UPVC windows and battlements really do offend my aesthetic sensibilities.

I think that the go-kart track and all the other hard standings should be left as is though.

May Jesus forgive Mt Fidler for his bizarre transgression of local planning regulsations.”

“To my previous comments;

Of course this should be knocked down, as Mr Fidler intentionally did wrong.

Concealing a building behind straw bales for four years to get around the planning laws is not right. Otherwise we will all do it and that's what will happen if Mr Fidler wins this case.

Mr Fidler is sticking two fingers up at the planning laws and it shouldn't be tolerated. If it is, then the council will have a very big problem on their hands.

When the straw bales were removed, is when the planning laws came into force - as before the council thought it was just straw bales - which can be removed.

What a 'Carry On' Mr Fidler - where's Babs?”

“Why is this right?

Lets all build monstrosities behind straw bales!

Mr Fidler did wrong - he knows he did!

So lets all do the same and build monstrosities behind straw bales!

It sounds like a 'Carry on' film - Mr Fidler!”

“I had never met or knew anything about Mr or Mrs Fidlers planning problems before someone phoned me and asked if I was going to the planning inquiry, this person knew I had for several years had a long standing battle with Reigate Planning Department and thought it would give me further insight to what goes on behind closed doors.

I along with several others who had had similar problems with this planning department tended the whole ten days of this enquiry and thought along with others Mr & Mrs Fidler should have won his case at this enquiry.

If it is planning law that if a building is up for four years and land is used for ten years and you have not been told to stop using for the purpouse that you have been using it for then it can stay.

Mr & Mrs Fidler proved beyond any doubt his castle had been built and lived in longer than this time so if it is the law then they should be allowed to keep their castle. Numerous witnesses gave evidence on oath to this fact and I am sure they would not perjure themselves.

So many things were disclosed at this enquiry and you needed to be there to understand the legality of this enquiry, also let us not foget in a previous High Court ruling Reigate & Bansted Borough Council had to pay Mr & Mrs Fidler many thousands of pounds in connection with this case.

What ever each of us think the merits of this case and I must admit before I went to this enquiry I was one of the doubters the law as it stands Mr & Mrs Fidler should keep his castle.

Good luck to both of them.

R Shaul”

“Simon, if you 'wake up to a carbuncle next door and can't do anything about it' that would mean you'd been asleep for 4 years.

Four years is quite a long time for no one to notice or object, though I appreciate the bales of hay muddy the waters in this case.

I don't like unaccountable judge-made-law, it would be better if our elected politicians made intelligent law in the first place.”