Farmer Robert Fidler claims he cannot knock down mock-Tudor castle built without permission because of bats
Robert Fidler has unsuccessfully appealed against orders to knock down his dream family home
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
A judge has dismissed a farmer's argument that he cannot demolish a mock-Tudor castle built without planning permission because bats live there.
Robert Fidler, 66, secretly built Honeycrock Farm in 2000 and hid it behind a huge stack of hay bales but has been threatened with jail if he does not knock it down.
In a hearing at the High Court on Monday, he said he had attempted to demolish the property but that conservation surveys revealing the presence of bats and newts made it impossible.
Mr Fidler has since sold the mock mansion to an Indian businessman and says the responsibility for it has transferred.
The judge dismissed the father’s argument about protected species as misconceived, saying it was not an absolute bar to demolition work, and added that the document relating to the purported sale of the property had no legal standing.
Mr Justice Dove told Mr Fidler that he would go to prison for three months as punishment for his “intentional defiance” unless the house is knocked down by 6 June next year.
Mr Fidler built the four-bedroom house on green belt land in Salfords, Surrey, and moved in with his family two years later as it was concealed behind stacks of straw.
Reigate and Banstead Borough Council first ordered it to be knocked down in 2007 and Mr Fidler's case was then rejected by a Government planning inspector, the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
The council began contempt of court proceedings after he failed to comply with the outstanding enforcement notices and demolition orders.
Representing himself in court accompanied by his wife, Linda, Mr Fidler claimed the local authority was out to “destroy” his life and that its case was based “on lies and deception”.
"I am entirely satisfied that Mr Fidler knew what was required by the court and the mistake he has made is confusing his disagreements with the council with the requirements of this court as to what must now be done in order to achieve a lawful outcome,” he added.
"Whatever may have been his difficulties with the council, the focus of his responsibility had to be to comply with the order he consented to and which was made by this court some time ago."
Describing Mr Fidler as an "intelligent and determined man", Mr Justice Dove said: "This process has gone on now for many years. It is time now for those breaches of planning control to be remedied and that is what will happen. Otherwise there will be serious consequences."
Mr Fidler previously admitted hiding his dream home, complete with battlements, cannons, carved pillars and a stained glass dome, behind hay stacks for four years in the belief that he would then be eligible for retrospective planning permission. But planning inspectors said the loophole did not apply if neighbours had not objected because they had not seen it.
Stephen Whale, representing the council, said Mr Fidler had deceived the authority for many years and treated the planning system and the court with contempt.
Mr Fidler was ordered to pay the costs of the hearing.
Additional reporting by PA