Chingford
The latest news from the East London and West Essex Guardian
| TOP STORIES |  | | | | | | | FEATURES | | | | | | MAYOR NEWS | | | | BIZARRE LONDON | | | TRAVEL | | | | COMPETITIONS | | |
|
|
|
CHINGFORD: "Neighbour from hell" strikes again
A FRUSTRATED residents' association is writing to the council about a "neighbour from hell" who has flouted council and High Court rulings over planning permission.
The Dale View Residents' Association (DVRA), in Chingford, has sent a letter to the council claiming that businessman Brian Gage is turning a garage off Dale View Avenue into homes without proper permission.
A DVRA member said: "The council should put a stop building notice on this development. I could see he was moving building materials onto his land but we couldn't initially see what he was using them for.
"Then we discovered he was turning the garage into living accommodation and was also building chalet bungalows. This man has made residents' lives a misery and should be jailed.
"The council shouldn't grant him permission and refer to the High Court rulings which he has flagrantly ignored."
This is not the first time Mr Gage has been involved in controversy.
He disregarded numerous planning laws and three High Court judgements since the 1980s, building bungalows, a swimming pool, a garage, grazing horses, and has ran his airport bus company from land behind the crescent.
Chingford MP Iain Duncan Smith said: "This case keeps coming back. It is very important that the council enforces proper planning decisions something that they have failed to do in the past. I am interested that the authority is beefing up the enforcement side of the planning department.
"I will be waiting with interest to see the council's reaction."
The council has pledged to get tough on rogue developers who have not sought planning permission.
It can order building work to be halted and if it continues the offending developer can be fined £20,000.
If it is taken to court the developer can be fined an unlimited amount.
An associate of Mr Gage said: "He no longer runs his business and is retired. The High Court ruling refers to his house and he has complied with it fully.
"Planning law recently changed allowing retrospective planning to take place."
The Guardian asked the council to comment but it failed to respond before we went to press.
9:23am Wednesday 7th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: mr khalid, walthamstows on 10:51am Wed 7 May 08
meybe this parson nededed the hose for he famly. anyways what is fine 20 tousand when if he bilded the hose it worthing the 300 tousands? who this idots?
meybe this parson nededed the hose for he famly. anyways what is fine 20 tousand when if he bilded the hose it worthing the 300 tousands? who this idots?
Posted by: joe schmoo, elsewhere on 11:52am Wed 7 May 08
[quote][bold]mr khalid[/bold] wrote:
meybe this parson nededed the hose for he famly. anyways what is fine 20 tousand when if he bilded the hose it worthing the 300 tousands? who this idots?[/quote] obviously you
mr khalid wrote:
meybe this parson nededed the hose for he famly. anyways what is fine 20 tousand when if he bilded the hose it worthing the 300 tousands? who this idots?
obviously you
Posted by: Personal Feud, Chingford on 1:45pm Wed 7 May 08
The so called Dale View residents Association, which is not properly legally constituted, is nothing more than a one man anti Brian gage society. It is a shame that the Guardian, and Iain Duncan Smith, appear to be taking seriously what is really just a never ending personal vendetta against one man by another.
The so called Dale View residents Association, which is not properly legally constituted, is nothing more than a one man anti Brian gage society. It is a shame that the Guardian, and Iain Duncan Smith, appear to be taking seriously what is really just a never ending personal vendetta against one man by another.
Posted by: harry, Not in Enflied on 5:50am Thu 8 May 08
Just because its become 'personal' does not mean a person or group of people with a complaint is not entitled to ask his MP and the local authority to look into the issue and uphold their rights. The alternatives, in these kind of disputes, can be very nasty.
If Mr Gage is being a public nuisance and breaking the law, the law and the public interest should prevail and not Mr Gage. Its clear from the history outlined in the article that Mr Gage is not an ignorant person who has fallen foul of the regulations by inadvertance: he must know full well of the necessity to conduct his affairs in a civilised and lawful manner, but seems to holding two fingers up at everyone around him.
Just because its become 'personal' does not mean a person or group of people with a complaint is not entitled to ask his MP and the local authority to look into the issue and uphold their rights. The alternatives, in these kind of disputes, can be very nasty.
If Mr Gage is being a public nuisance and breaking the law, the law and the public interest should prevail and not Mr Gage. Its clear from the history outlined in the article that Mr Gage is not an ignorant person who has fallen foul of the regulations by inadvertance: he must know full well of the necessity to conduct his affairs in a civilised and lawful manner, but seems to holding two fingers up at everyone around him.
Posted by: CG, Chingford on 10:50am Thu 8 May 08
I dont know all the background to this case, however, if Mr Gage has had court rulings against him in the past and yet he is still carrying on in his merry way, knowing full well what he is doing does not have the required permissions, he should have the book thron at him.
People cannot be allowed to manipulate planning laws and force the local authority into granting retrospective permission just because that is the simplest way to deal with the issue.
If this has been going on for a long time I can well imagine that matters have become personal which is why it is even more important that the authorities step in quickly to nip this in the bud.
I dont know all the background to this case, however, if Mr Gage has had court rulings against him in the past and yet he is still carrying on in his merry way, knowing full well what he is doing does not have the required permissions, he should have the book thron at him.
People cannot be allowed to manipulate planning laws and force the local authority into granting retrospective permission just because that is the simplest way to deal with the issue.
If this has been going on for a long time I can well imagine that matters have become personal which is why it is even more important that the authorities step in quickly to nip this in the bud.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
