We’re being forced to tear down £100k extension despite having planning permission – officials gave us no warning

A COUPLE claim they may be forced to tear down a £100,000 extension despite having planning permission.

Wayne and Natalie Noke said they were given no warning before being ordered to demolish part of their £2.1m eight acre home in New Forest, Hampshire.

3

3

3

Forestry England (FE) knocked on the Nokes’ door just as they were nearing completion of the extension built for Natalie’s elderly parents.

The pair, who bought the five bedroom home and accompanying cottage in August 2021, were told the land they were building on did not belong to them and was “Crown Land”.

Threatened with legal action, works have now been halted over fears they could have to bulldoze the oak frame and slated roof structure.

Wayne and Natalie had bought the home and grounds along with Natalie’s parents – Michael and Catherine Drummond – in what they described as a “dream” scenario because they could live close by.

Natalie’s 80-year-old dad, Michael, was then diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease and needed the extension so he could live on the ground floor of the cottage.

It is claimed that the Nokes had no clue the land was not theirs, and neither did their solicitor.

I know ignorance isn’t an excuse – but there wasn’t anything we were told about that made us aware of it

Natalie Nokes

But last September officials paid a visit to the Nokes telling them the cottage has a strip around it on three sides that does not belong them.

Natalie, 53, said: “It’s a house we’ve known for many, many years and we were fortunate enough to be able to buy it and have my parents in the cottage.”

A licence for use has been in force since 1983 preventing other people using it – but it does not permit the Nokes to build on it.

However, the proposal was granted permission by New Forest National Park and work commenced in summer last year.

Natalie went on to say the license was not included on the title deeds.

Natalie added: “I know ignorance isn’t an excuse – but there wasn’t anything we were told about that made us aware of it.

“We have made an error in innocence, it’s a genuine mistake.

“At the end of the day, our thing is if there are possible options, however lengthy, who is gaining from hauling it down?

“The fence is still there, people won’t be able to use the land.

“What are they gaining by insisting we take it down?

“If we had done it on purpose, then I’d get it.

“I just feel we are in such a different position to that – can we find a way around it with humility.

“We are the innocent party that has fallen foul of a procedure.”

In January, Wayne, 52, appealed to the New Forest’s Verderers’ Court.

The mechanic told the open court: “I applied for planning permission on the belief that I had ownership of the land having had no indication otherwise.

“I would not have applied for planning permission if l thought that the land did not belong to me.

“We are therefore left in a situation whereby there is a small area of forestry land – which we previously believed to be ours – which is inaccessible to Commoner or the public.

“[FE] have written to us to demand that we take down the extension failing which legal proceedings will be taken against us.

“We regard ourselves as innocent parties in all of this and want to try and resolve the matter amicably for the benefit of all parties and without the need for legal proceedings.”

The couple suggested they would be willing to do a land swap with FE which “would require the consent of the court”.

In response, the court said: “It was agreed that it is not for the Court to decide the way forward to resolve this dispute.

“A land swap will be considered should Forestry England bring forward a proposal that is supported by all landowners concerned.

“However, it will have to be on a value basis not area for area.

“The Court has generally only agreed land swaps in exceptional circumstance and where such a swap is in the public, rather than merely a private interest.”

A decision is yet to be made on the future of the extension.

A spokesperson for Forestry England said: “We have been in discussion on this matter with Mr Noke directly and via legal representation since the very early stages of the building work.

“The issues focus on building carried out on Forestry England land designated and protected as part of the New Forest.

“Whilst these discussions are ongoing we can’t provide further comment.”

This post first appeared on thesun.co.uk