Listed Buildings Prosecutions Database Commentary

49 Officers had given pre-application advice to the owner’s surveyor against tanking the cellar and against lowering the cellar floor. Not only was there concern about excavating the floor because foundation depth are minimal on buildings of this period (confirmed by trial holes dug in the cellar) but officers advised that the old brick floor and the spatial qualities and levels should be left intact as part of the original character of the listed building. Later was discovered at the end of July 1997 that the authorized works had not been carried out and that the old brick floor had been taken up and disposed of, the floor had been excavated to foundation levels, a reinforced concrete floor-slab had been installed together with a concrete plinth around the cellar walls. At Guildford Magistrates Court in May and June 1998. The owner and builder pleaded guilty. The surveyor pleaded not guilty until after hearing the prosecution case on the day of the trial, when he changed his plea to guilty. The court would have found it advantageous if all the defendants could have been dealt with by the same Bench but this was not possible. The owner faced a Newton Hearing (i.e. a guilty plea but with the defense disputing the prosecution’s version of events). At the end of the Newton Hearing, the Bench accepted the defendant’s version, i.e. that the Council had not proven beyond reasonable doubt that the owner did intend the unauthorised work to be executed or that he knew what was happening was wrong. In the case of the surveyor, his solicitor accepted after hearing the prosecution’s case that a causal link to his client had been established, i.e. that when the builders dug up the cellar floor, they were purporting to implement a Specification which the surveyor surveyor had prepared in March1997. This Specification (which the Council did not see until August1997 – after the event) included the authorized work but also specified the removal of the cellar floor, setting aside the bricks for re-use, excavating to the underside of the existing wall, and relaying the bricks onto a 50mmsand/cement bed. The surveyor’s solicitor continued to maintain that the works as executed bore no resemblance to the specification but as the surveyor’s change of plea relieved him from having to give evidence under oath, it was not possible for the prosecution to test his case. The owner and surveyor were given conditional discharges for two years and one year respectively and the two builders were fined a total of £500. All the defendants were ordered to pay the Council’s prosecution costs of over £5,000. (Source: LPA) Westminster City Council [10-1989] 67 Dean Street, Soho, London, Grade 2*. Damaging unauthorised internal alterations were carried out to a Georgian building of c.1731 without consent by a developer Francis Fowler and Season Builders Ltd.Westminster City Council described the interiors as “exceptionally complete and very rare” but had