8 Peter Richards describes the complex goings on which led to the prosecution of Teresa Gorman MP for listed building offences OLD HALLFARMHOUSE, POUND LANE, ORSETT,ESSEX INTRODUCTION The events over the past three years concerning this house have received a great deal of publicity, in both the broadsheets and tabloids as well as on television, which, for a small Grade II listed building, is most unusual. The reasons for the high public profile were due solelyto the notoriety of the owner. If the house had been owned by other than a well-known MP the events are described here would be run-of-themill for many Conservation Officers; however, the publicity was very onesided and much of the information was distorted. As is normally the case, the facts set out by the local authority were rather dull and unexciting whilst the 'planning bashing' approach of the owner was much more newsworthy. Putting the record straight is therefore necessary but, in addition, it is worthwhile to set out those parts of the process where, with hindsight, an even more successful outcome could have been achieved and from which lessons forotherConservation Officers could be learned. THE BUILDING & THE B-A-R BACKGROUND Old Hall was first listed Grade II in 1960 and consists of a c1500 timber framed range, probably a remnant crosswing of a hall now lost, with an inline late 17th century timber framed lobby entrance range cased in brick c1800. Behind these two ranges are 19th century brick ranges, part single and part two storey. The house adjoins a Scheduled Ancient Monument site of a 'castle' owned by a Bishop of London. The house was recorded by the RCHMEfor Essex CC and access during this case revealed several items of interest not set out in the list description, including a first floor external doorway to the west and a lost first floor chamber on the south side. The site is on the edge of the village in a back lane, set well back from the road. During the 1980s the house had an elderly occupier who latterly apparently only used one or two rooms - not an uncommon situation. For some years, Thurrock Borough Council (TBC) has produced its own Buildings-at-Risk Register, in parallel with the Essex CC Register. In 1988 the TBC Conservation Officer noted that the house was occupied and in good condition. By 1991 the house was noted to be unoccupied and the agents were contacted regarding the owner's intentions. In May of that year the house was included on the BAR Register following which annual inspections were made. In the mid 1980s an application was made by the agents for an Essex CC grant for reroofing, but an offer was never taken up; however, the work was carried out before 1988when Thurrock started its BARmonitoring. In January 1993 Mr and MrsGorman became the building's owners. FIRSTCONTACTS At some time early in their ownership, the Gormans met with the TBC Chief Planning Officer. There is no detail of this meeting in the TBC files. As a result of this meeting the Conservation Cfficer was asked to investigate (i) dismantling the building and rebuilding it at 90° to its existing siting; (ii) demolishing the 19th century extensions; and (iii) increasing the fenestration in the west wall. The Chief Planning Officer was advised that all these were unacceptable changes, and this was noted in the file. In August 1993 the Conservation Officer received a call from the owners (recorded on file) indicating that work was to start "soon" as "a lot of work was needed to make the house habitable". In response to a query about grants, the owners were put in touch with the County Council. In June 1994 a Planning Officer visited as part of the annual surveys of BAR. Seeing that works were in progress, he alerted the Conservation Officer who immediately paid a visit. Those working on the site were advised that works requiring LBCwere being carried out, at which Mrs Gorman was advised to stop. She subsequently met with the Chief Planning Officer and was given forms for LBC.A few days later the Conservation Officer and the County adviser visited the site, took photographs and scheduled the extensive works which had already been carried out. As neither of them had previously been inside the building, it was not easy to assess the full extent of the internal changes. Shortly after this, an item referring to these events appeared in the 'Piloti' column of Private Eye. INITIALACTIONS Despite being informed of the illegal works, the owners continued with changes and no listed building application was made. Further visits were made to record alterations and inJanuary 1994 a report to Thurrock Planning Committee set out 34 items of work which could not be classified as repairs and which would require LBC. It is interesting to note that during these inspections no significant items of repair work were recorded. The timber frame needed no major repairs, the roof was sound, there was no evidence of settlement or of treatment for infestation. It was later suggested that removed sash windows were rotten beyond repair but they had been removed from site (or burned) before any inspection could be made. Similarly, brick and stone paved flooring were taken up with no prior inspection. CONTEXT 53
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=