Council's 'victory' over farmer is a sham, claims solicitor

Bucklebury man has fought 15-year battle with officials over land

WEST Berkshire Council has been accused wasting tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money by pursuing a “bizarre,” 15-year case against a farmer.

After hiring a barrister to represent it in court, the council succeeded only in forcing Robert Wells to move a few vehicles from one corner of his land to another and to cover up a generator and a lorry.

In addition to its own legal expenses, the council was ordered to pay Mr Wells, of Chapel Row Dairy, Bucklebury, more than £8,000 in costs.

Later, it issued a press statement claiming it had “succeeded” in forcing Mr Wells to clean up his land.

But Mr Wells' solcitor David Corsellis said: “After all that, they were forced to withdraw one enforcement notice and modify another such that Mr Wells only has to move some vehicles a few feet and cover a couple of items. Nothing has to be removed.

“The judge refused to award them costs but ordered them to pay my client £8,647. If that's a victory, I'd hate to see them on a bad day. They will have to pick up the costs of their barrister for the four-day hearing and from an aborted hearing in June, plus all the lost man hours in court.”

In 2003 Mr Wells won the first round of what was then already a seven year battle to keep vehicles on his land as part of his repair business after magistrates ruled West Berkshire Council had unlawfully sought to enforce its 1998 notice four years after the expiry date.

Mr Wells, who is also a beef farmer, was awarded costs from central funds, paid for by the taxpayer.

In the latest round, 59-year-old Mr Wells appealed against two orders demanding that he remove vehicles and other items from his land.

Barrister Gavin Collett, representing Mr Wells at West Berkshire Magistrates Court last week, said: “What the council is seeking to do flies in the face of planning legislation. It's unlawful.

“They have known about the state of this site since 1998 and have done nothing about enforcement since then.”

As a result, he said, planning law meant that his client now has de-facto permission to keep the items on the land.

In its statement following the case, the council said: “West Berkshire Council has succeeded in ensuring that a notice served to ensure a local landowner cleaned up his land has been upheld upon appeal. The (two) notices were issued under Section 215 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and required Mr Wells to clean up the land as the condition of the land was adversely affecting the area.

“Mr Wells appealed to the Magistrates Court against the two notices and the council agreed to withdraw one of them, however the second was upheld with amendments.”

Mr Crosellis said: “The council first served these notices in 1998 and it took them until 2003 to bring a prosecution for non-compliance, which failed because it should have been brought within six months.

“For some bizarre reason they then waited nine years to serve another two.”

West Berkshire Council did not respond to queries about how much the case had cost or why it took so long to serve the notices.