An elderly couple have been forced to tear down their 'dream home' after losing a decade-long planning row because they 'ignored' the council's advice.
Ken and Barbara Mead have now been forced to move into a canal boat paid for by their children after they spent the last of their £250,000 life savings on a dispute with the council over a warehouse development on a piece of land which they purchased in 2006.
This month the retired couple were forced to demolish the property after council chiefs said they had flouted regulations. They hired a private contractor, with the cost of the demolition setting the couple back £4,000.
Ken, 81, and 77-year-old Barbara were given permission to use the land they had purchased to build a warehouse for commercial use in 2012. However, they were unable to find a tenant and later moved into the property in Macclesfield and used it as a home – which Cheshire East Council said contravened the original agreement.
Despite the council having said they made the regulations 'very clear', the couple said it gave them incorrect information when they applied for their original planning permission, and had been inconsistent in its advice.
Barbara and Ken (pictured above) watch on as their home is demolished in Maccesfield, Cheshire. Barbara said it was their 'dream' and that she was 'devastated' at the outcome'
The couple (pictured above) show a photo of what the property looked like before it had to be torn down
What the property looked like before the demolition. The couple had built it as a warehouse but had been living in it since 2015
The council sent enforcement notices to the couple (left) stating that they would have to demolish the property as they had broken the rules (right pipes being pulled from the grounds of the property)
Following the dispute with the council the house was demolished and the couple were forced to move into a house boat
Images shows the house in Macclesfield being demolished as the roof is smashed through, the couple had to pay for the demolition to take place with their own funds
Following the dispute, the grandparents, who both suffer from high blood pressure and heart problems, had to sell their furniture and keepsakes to fund the battle.
They claim the ordeal has 'broken' them after they were left with criminal records for contravening planning law.
In January, Ken and Barbara pleaded guilty at Crewe Magistrates Court of their failure to comply with the requirements of the notices given by the council.
The council issued the pair with enforcement notices in 2016, instructing them to demolish the property.
One year later the order was upheld by a government inspector, who found that the building had been constructed 'from the outset as a dwelling'.
The report cited the building's plastered walls, 'domestic style' bathroom, doors and windows and 'luxury' under floor kitchen heating.
'It seems to me that the structure would be entirely unsuited to use as a warehouse,' it said.
Speaking to the
BBC Barbara added: 'It was our dream really. I'm devastated that it's come to this because we didn't have anywhere else to go'.
The elderly couple had been living on the ground floor of the property on a sofa bed and the council said it was clear that it had been intended to have been used as a home, rather than a commercial warehouse
'It was acknowledged by the owners' agents as early as June 2013, that the building under construction fell outside the scope of the permission for a warehouse and, as such, may be the subject of formal action by the council.
'The site lies within the green belt, which has strict rules limiting development that can take place. The owners had already been unsuccessful on two occasions, when they applied for planning permission to erect a dwelling on the site.
'The council's decision to issue the enforcement notices and the requirements of the notices were tested at appeal by an independent planning inspector, appointed by the secretary of state. The inspector found the council's enforcement notices to be sound and fully justified.
'The appeal was dismissed. The inspector's decision also made it very clear that evidence showed that the intention of the owners was always to use the building as a dwelling and not as a warehouse.
'On 15 January 2019, the owners pleaded guilty in court to their failure to comply with the requirements of the notices.
'Failure to comply with the requirements of an enforcement notice is a criminal offence.'
Barbara and Ken (pictured above) watch on as their home is demolished in Maccesfield, Cheshire. Barbara said it was their 'dream' and that she was 'devastated' at the outcome'
The couple (pictured above) show a photo of what the property looked like before it had to be torn down
What the property looked like before the demolition. The couple had built it as a warehouse but had been living in it since 2015
The council sent enforcement notices to the couple (left) stating that they would have to demolish the property as they had broken the rules (right pipes being pulled from the grounds of the property)
Following the dispute with the council the house was demolished and the couple were forced to move into a house boat
Images shows the house in Macclesfield being demolished as the roof is smashed through, the couple had to pay for the demolition to take place with their own fundsFollowing the dispute, the grandparents, who both suffer from high blood pressure and heart problems, had to sell their furniture and keepsakes to fund the battle.They claim the ordeal has 'broken' them after they were left with criminal records for contravening planning law.In January, Ken and Barbara pleaded guilty at Crewe Magistrates Court of their failure to comply with the requirements of the notices given by the council.The council issued the pair with enforcement notices in 2016, instructing them to demolish the property.One year later the order was upheld by a government inspector, who found that the building had been constructed 'from the outset as a dwelling'.The report cited the building's plastered walls, 'domestic style' bathroom, doors and windows and 'luxury' under floor kitchen heating.'It seems to me that the structure would be entirely unsuited to use as a warehouse,' it said.Speaking to the BBC Barbara added: 'It was our dream really. I'm devastated that it's come to this because we didn't have anywhere else to go'.
The elderly couple had been living on the ground floor of the property on a sofa bed and the council said it was clear that it had been intended to have been used as a home, rather than a commercial warehouse'It was acknowledged by the owners' agents as early as June 2013, that the building under construction fell outside the scope of the permission for a warehouse and, as such, may be the subject of formal action by the council.'The site lies within the green belt, which has strict rules limiting development that can take place. The owners had already been unsuccessful on two occasions, when they applied for planning permission to erect a dwelling on the site.'The council's decision to issue the enforcement notices and the requirements of the notices were tested at appeal by an independent planning inspector, appointed by the secretary of state. The inspector found the council's enforcement notices to be sound and fully justified.'The appeal was dismissed. The inspector's decision also made it very clear that evidence showed that the intention of the owners was always to use the building as a dwelling and not as a warehouse.'On 15 January 2019, the owners pleaded guilty in court to their failure to comply with the requirements of the notices.'Failure to comply with the requirements of an enforcement notice is a criminal offence.'
0 Comments