WALLED IN
Our neighbour’s extension is robbing us of sunlight – we just want to sit in our garden again and have our lives back
The couple weren't the only ones left in the dark when it came to planning permission
NEIGHBOURS claim they have had the sunlight stolen from their garden after an extension was built next door.
Allyson Halls, 63, and William East have not made light of the situation as their Kent bungalow has since been likened to a prison.
5
5
5
5
The extension, built for Katie Beadle in West Kingsdown, ended up being built 70cm taller than originally planned, according to Halls.
She told : “We have a small courtyard garden, only 4.5m deep and the extension was raised over 70cm higher on the boundary than planned. All our sunlight has been taken from us.”
“We’ve got this prison wall next to us - I just want to have our life back, I just want to be able to sit in my garden.”
As summer draws to a close, the couple are in disbelief that the limited sunlight they have has been reduced even further.
They have demanded that the plans are reverted to what was originally granted.
Halls and East claim they had no problem with the extension until the started to block their sunlight, leading them to flag the issue with the council.
Miss Beadle’s builders assembled the wall on top of the roof because at this height they avoided drainage issues.
They immediately halted construction once they realised their work was not complicit with the planning permission, according to Kent Online.
Most read in Money
Despite ceasing construction and leaving Miss Beadle with half an extension, the towering grey wall still plunged the neighbouring garden in the shade.
Miss Beadle's house has been described as 'partially inhabitable' by the planning application and pleads for a solution to be resolved.
Left furious about their neighbour's fence was dislodged in a storm
It says: "They cannot continue to remain in the property in its unfinished state, and this ongoing situation is not in their best interests, or indeed, those of neighbouring properties having to contend with a construction site on their boundary."
With both sets of residents unhappy with the result, Miss Beadle submitted three new plans to Sevenoaks Council attempting to fix the problem between her and her neighbours.
Two of them have already been rejected.
The latest application details a plan to reduce the height of parapet wall by constructing a larger roof.
Sevenoaks Council refused all the changes suggested by Miss Beadle and is still looking into the planning breach carried out by her builders.
What are your legal rights?
Estate agent Petty Son & Prestwich have previously shared their tips on what your rights are if a neighbour is complaining about you blocking their sunlight.
According to their guide, your neighbour might be able to get your tree cut back if it is blocking light from passing through a window or glass door in your property.
Under the Rights of Light Act, if a property has received daylight for the last 20 years, it may be entitled to continue to receive that light.
However, Chun Wong, head of the dispute resolution team at Hodge Jones and Allen solicitors, points out that the right is to "daylight" and not "sunlight".
"This is usually restricted to one foot of candlelight. There is also no right to a ‘view’," she explained.
"If you do have a right to light which is being adversely affected by large trees, then you may be able to apply to the court to restore your right or get an injunction to prevent interference with your right.
A spokesperson from Sevenoaks Council said: “Our planning enforcement team is investigating an extension that was not built according to the approved planning permission.
“The homeowner has since submitted a new planning application that proposes a reduction in height of the already built parapet wall and other changes. We are currently considering the application and a decision will be made in due course.”
READ MORE SUN STORIES
The planning application to lower the parapet wall was submitted to Sevenoaks Planning Portal on March 25 with the status marked as 'awaiting decision.'
The plans have received four public comments objecting the application.
5
Topics