A "Hideous" Fence and a Neighborly Feud
Alison and Ian Lawrence, residents of New Milton, Hampshire, find themselves embroiled in a bitter dispute with their neighbor, Deborah Olthof, over a newly erected 10-foot fence. The Lawrences, who recently invested £20,000 in landscaping their garden, describe the fence as "hideous" and liken their property to the infamous Colditz Castle, a World War II prisoner-of-war camp. They claim the imposing structure, complete with plastic spikes, overshadows their garden, obstructs their view, and diminishes the value of their home. The fence, constructed just two months after Ms. Olthof moved into her £640,000 property, was built without prior planning permission. Although Ms. Olthof subsequently obtained retrospective approval from the New Forest District Council, the Lawrences are furious, arguing that the council disregarded their objections and prioritized the path of least resistance.
The Council’s Controversial Decision and the Lawrences’ Frustration
The Lawrences accuse the council of failing to consider the detrimental impact of the fence on their property. They maintain that the council officer’s comparison of their garden to Colditz highlights the severity of the situation. The couple had hoped to reach a compromise with Ms. Olthof but feel their concerns have been completely ignored. They criticize the council’s approval of the fence, despite the local New Milton authority’s objection, citing its "unsightly, unneighbourly and over dominant" nature. The Lawrences believe the council’s decision demonstrates a lack of regard for their well-being and a disregard for established planning policies.
The Impact on the Lawrences’ Property and Privacy
The fence, according to the Lawrences, has created numerous practical problems. Its height prevents them from accessing their guttering for maintenance, and the narrow gap between the fence and their roof makes ladder placement impossible. Beyond the practical issues, the fence impacts their privacy. Ms. Olthof’s elevated decking area allows her to look directly into their garden, negating the intended privacy benefits of the fence for her while simultaneously compromising the Lawrences’ own privacy. The couple argue that the fence, far from creating a peaceful environment, has created a constant source of stress and anxiety.
Escalating the Dispute: Seeking Redress and Resolution
Determined to fight what they perceive as an injustice, the Lawrences are prepared to escalate the matter. They plan to file a complaint with the Government ombudsman, seeking an independent review of the council’s decision. They are frustrated by the lack of recourse available to them and feel their voices have gone unheard. The couple believe a compromise is possible but feel Ms. Olthof and the council have been unwilling to engage in constructive dialogue.
The Neighbor’s Perspective and the Council’s Justification
Ms. Olthof maintains that she obtained the necessary planning permission for the fence and that the council is satisfied with its height and design. She points out that her property sits on a higher plot, a factor she claims the council considered in its decision. The New Forest District Council defends its approval, stating that the fence’s design and impact were thoroughly assessed. The council acknowledges some impact on the Lawrences’ property but argues that these impacts do not warrant refusal. They advise that complaints will be handled through their established procedures and that there is no right of appeal against the planning decision. They offer the Local Government Ombudsman as a recourse for the Lawrences if they remain dissatisfied after the council’s internal complaint process.
Awaiting Resolution: The Uncertain Future of the Neighborly Dispute
The fence dispute continues, with both parties entrenched in their positions. The Lawrences feel trapped and overlooked by their neighbor’s imposing structure, while Ms. Olthof asserts her right to privacy and the legality of her fence. As the Lawrences pursue their complaint with the ombudsman, the future of this neighborly feud remains uncertain, highlighting the complexities and sensitivities surrounding property boundaries, privacy, and the role of local authorities in resolving such disputes.
