Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Take down your 'castle', twat told

It's a shame in a way his house is going to be knocked down but it's a good thing there are planning regulations and they have to be applied across the board, not exceptions.

If they weren't then people would start building extensions left right and centre to rent them out - that's how slums develop.
 
I don't think the guy is a 'twat' and nor do I think the property is an eyesore particularly. Pretty dumb thinking you can take on the council and win though. Scores are settled in a different manner in the North East though.

Albert Dryden, now 63, shot Derwentside District Council's chief planning officer Harry Collinson 1991 and also wounded a BBC TV reporter and a police officer. <snip>

The shooting took place outside Dryden's front gate in Butsfield, near Consett, on a patch of land on which he had illegally built a bungalow for his mother.

He had been in a protracted dispute with the Derwentside planning authority, and an enforcement order was about to be served.

A digger was on standby to demolish the house when Dryden opened fire with his revolver and shot Mr Collinson dead.

He then fired indiscriminately, seriously injuring TV reporter Tony Belmont, and police officer Stephen Campbell.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/3313001.stm
 
Wolveryeti said:
Well, no - I disagree. I've been in countries with much less stringent zoning laws (e.g. most of Eastern europe) and the bedlam that our lawmakers claim would be the logical result of permitting this kind of building is yet to materialise.
Click to expand...

Do they have the same population density as the UK?
 
old bump alert..

he's lost his latest appeal to keep his house

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2...ejected?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

A FARMER who has battled with planners to get retrospective permission for a house he kept hidden has lost another fight.
Robert Fidler built Honeycrock Farmhouse, in Salfords near Redhill, without planning consent and kept it concealed behind a wall of straw bales and tarpaulin for five years.
But after revealing it to the world in 2006 - thinking it would be immune to planning laws - he was ordered to tear it down.
Last week, Reigate & Banstead Borough Council's planning committee threw out another application to retain the four-bedroom house, patio, garden and pond, which was said to cost £50,000 to build.
Click to expand...
 
The stupidest thing about it is there was a tv programme made about him doing it, in which he clearly stated his plan to dupe the council, which was broadcast yonks ago. Everyone knew what he was up to when he was building it.

There was no way the council around here were ever going to let him keep it up, if they had though with property prices as they are down this way that place would be worth a mint.
 
They should have let him keep it up solely as his main dwelling, on the condition if he sold it any profit would belong to the council.
 
The principal here is that if anybody was allowed to build what they like on their own land the whole country would look like shit. I always find it amazing that people are prepared to fuck up their whole lives & finances to do this sort of thing, its just a fuckin house, you just live in it, thats all you do, build in in the right place ffs, how hard is that? These sort of folk think they are such rebels & individualists but they are just as much of twats as somebody who fucks up a surburban semi by painting it pink & sticking a giant plastic shark in the front garden.
 
coley said:
Canny bit of building for £50,000
Click to expand...

He already owned the land so will be worth considerably more than that. Plus if he did the work himself it's £50,000 in materials only.
 
coley said:
They should have let him keep it up solely as his main dwelling, on the condition if he sold it any profit would belong to the council.
Click to expand...

I think they would have done, but iirc (i might be wrong), smallfield is largely greenbelt and this wasnt a brownfield site i dont think.
 
sim667 said:
I think they would have done, but iirc (i might be wrong), smallfield is largely greenbelt and this wasnt a brownfield site i dont think.
Click to expand...

seems a shame to knock it down and though what he has done is pretty arrogant,taking the profit would have been sufficient punishment, silly bugger should have just joined the masons and greased a few palms, simples
 
Dan U said:
It is slightly ironic that reigate and banstead are trying to 'degreenbelt' a big swathe of rural land round woodhatch and south reigate yet are still kicking off about this guy.
Click to expand...

I think they want to develop all along that road that goes from woodhatch all the way down to hookwood.

Its all leading up to trying to get a third runway at gatwick though, which they wanted to do at hookwood.
 
sim667 said:
I think they want to develop all along that road that goes from woodhatch all the way down to hookwood.

Its all leading up to trying to get a third runway at gatwick though, which they wanted to do at hookwood.
Click to expand...

Also out the back towards Flanchford. Surrey Council are now saying they'll try and block it.

Tory vs tory!
 
The heath too?

That would be disgraceful to build along that way....... I would have though that the sandy ground would make building quite difficult.

They're always going to want to build around reigate, its good commuter area, already commands decent property prices and the town centre is quite desirable. Its only really a matter of time before it does get developed, although I'd much prefer it to be up toward the reigate hill side rather than the priory side. Bring all those stuck up mansion fuckers down a peg or too.....

I've been starting to think where I want to move to around that area next..... I dont really know. I much prefer reigate to redhill, but I actually want a bit of land around me next gaff, so realistically I'd have to look toward smallfield/horley, but its all very 'nothingy' around there.
 
Nope not as far over as the heath luckily.

That whole chunk of land south of the a25 and between the a217 and the a24 down to Gatwick and horsham is very rural. Chuff all transport and stuff though.
 
Citizen66 said:
I don't think the guy is a 'twat' and nor do I think the property is an eyesore particularly. Pretty dumb thinking you can take on the council and win though. Scores are settled in a different manner in the North East though.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/3313001.stm
Click to expand...
I can't wait for Fidler to bring his trebuchet our when the diggers move in :D


Archers....hold your fire, hold your firrrrrrrre, Fire :D
 
Are we talking over towards dorking? Brockham etc? Or around buckland area?

Im confused :(
 
Citizen66 said:
I don't think the guy is a 'twat' and nor do I think the property is an eyesore particularly. Pretty dumb thinking you can take on the council and win though. Scores are settled in a different manner in the North East though.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/3313001.stm
Click to expand...

Fucking hell, he's a land owning petit bourgeois. Of course I think he's a twat. What was I on in 2010? :D
 
sim667 said:
Are we talking over towards dorking? Brockham etc? Or around buckland area?

Im confused :(
Click to expand...

Get an old fashioned map and have a look.

Brockham Betchworth newdigate Charlwood and further south all v rural. Loads of space given the general area.
 
He built it on farmland in the green belt. Whether you like the look of this ersatz executive Hobbit-style "castle" or not the green belt needs protecting. And if the house were allowed to stand the value of the plot would jump by squillions because you'd be allowed to have a dwelling there, smack in the green belt, in perpetuity. That can't be allowed, because I don't have squillions and I won't have some crafty ne'er do well with a dodgy barnet getting rich. And he's called Fidler, which I'm quite sure is a pikey name. The whole scheme reeks of pikey. :mad: I bet he's got three Range Rovers and two Mercs. And goes dogging. And doesn't wash afterwards.
 
Frumious B. said:
He built it on farmland in the green belt. Whether you like the look of this ersatz executive Hobbit-style "castle" or not the green belt needs protecting. And if the house were allowed to stand the value of the plot would jump by squillions because you'd be allowed to have a dwelling there, smack in the green belt, in perpetuity. That can't be allowed, because I don't have squillions and I won't have some crafty ne'er do well with a dodgy barnet getting rich. And he's called Fidler, which I'm quite sure is a pikey name. The whole scheme reeks of pikey. :mad: I bet he's got three Range Rovers and two Mercs. And goes dogging. And doesn't wash afterwards.
Click to expand...
'pikey'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hash tag
Sainsbury's are going down the pan
2 3
Replies
60
Views
3K
cesare
cesare
_Russ_
This little shit.....
Replies
19
Views
906
stavros
S
nogojones
Mark Drakeford standing down
Replies
28
Views
1K
weltweit
weltweit
StoneRoad
  • Poll
Are YOU happy with the overall result & your [new] constituency MP ?
2 3 4
Replies
114
Views
3K
Boo Radley75
Boo Radley75
N
Times you thought real change was coming... only to be sadly disappointed
2 3 4
Replies
109
Views
4K
gosub
gosub
Back
Top Bottom