:00:11. > :00:20.Anything to say about that? Tonight - what happens when those
:00:20. > :00:25.responsible for your protection fail to act? Seek legal advice.
:00:25. > :00:30.started with a planning complaint which spiralled out of all control.
:00:30. > :00:33.I thought that other people could believe what these agencies were
:00:33. > :00:36.saying about me. The council has been heavily criticized in a
:00:36. > :00:39.damning report. By refusing to accept the evidence the council
:00:39. > :00:48.implied the complainants were dishonest. And there are questions
:00:48. > :00:58.about how the police handled the case. Get out! Get out! Get out!
:00:58. > :00:58.
:00:58. > :01:08.Get out! Had you concluded she is the aggressor? Has there been a
:01:08. > :01:24.
:01:24. > :01:31.It was a dream and when we saw the cottage, it did what look nice on
:01:31. > :01:35.the internet but when we came here it was so pretty and it was
:01:35. > :01:44.everything I wanted, the cottage was sweet. The garden was pretty.
:01:44. > :01:52.The land was perfect. We were delighted to find this place
:01:52. > :01:59.because it is ideal. Nine years ago, Trish and her partner Eddie moved
:01:59. > :02:03.to Carmarthenshire. We want to have a cattery. The cattery would have
:02:03. > :02:11.led to other things and we could have taken in some rescue animals,
:02:11. > :02:19.that's what we wanted. A good life, yes. I suppose, yes, you could call
:02:19. > :02:23.it that. We had every intention of staying. I would have stayed here
:02:23. > :02:33.until I had been carried out, probably. But Trisha and Eddie's
:02:33. > :02:34.
:02:34. > :02:42.dream of the Good Life was soon shattered. We became aware of the
:02:42. > :02:50.nuisance straightaway. We had noise, noise, noise. Digging around in the
:02:50. > :02:55.quarry area... To haulage activities, to maintenance on
:02:55. > :03:03.vehicles. All kinds of noises that should not really have been taking
:03:03. > :03:07.place on a so-called farm. And the numbers of lorries that were there
:03:07. > :03:10.were a clear indication of a haulage yard. When they bought the
:03:10. > :03:16.cottage the couple were only able to visit it in the middle of the
:03:16. > :03:19.day, when all was quiet. Before buying this, we have looked into
:03:19. > :03:24.whether Ron not there were any industrial activities around and
:03:25. > :03:28.about. -- whether or not. We were told by the council there were none.
:03:28. > :03:31.We thought it was a farmer but it wasn't a farm. The neighbours,
:03:31. > :03:35.Andrew Thomas and his partner Karen, who's since died, were running a
:03:35. > :03:41.haulage company without planning permission. Trisha and Eddie rang
:03:41. > :03:46.Carmarthenshire Council and complained to a planning officer.
:03:46. > :03:50.The response was, well, I don't think anything untoward is going on.
:03:50. > :03:55.It is a farm. When I tried to explain that there were things
:03:55. > :04:00.going on but are not conducive to being a farm, I was told we will
:04:00. > :04:06.investigate all monitor and keep an eye on it. Did she feel you're
:04:06. > :04:10.taken seriously? No, not at all. I felt he was fobbing me off. He did
:04:10. > :04:13.not want to deal with my complaints. The council suggested that the
:04:13. > :04:21.couple and Eddie gather evidence themselves. They filmed lorries
:04:21. > :04:26.leaving from 6am and work going on into the early hours. They gave the
:04:26. > :04:30.video to Carmarthenshire Council, hoping it would take action.
:04:30. > :04:33.Looking back to that period - it was 2004 - it's clear that if only
:04:33. > :04:41.the council had acted on Trish and Eddie's complaints then, the couple
:04:41. > :04:43.might have been spared the nightmare that was to come. Now the
:04:43. > :04:53.council has been strongly criticized in this stinging report
:04:53. > :04:56.
:04:56. > :05:00.just released by the office that monitors Welsh public services.
:05:00. > :05:06.difficulty is if you don't tackle them early, they have a tendency
:05:06. > :05:13.not to go away but to get worse. If enforcement had happened, the
:05:13. > :05:17.subject matter of much of the dispute would not have existed. And
:05:17. > :05:21.although it is only speculation, the likelihood is that the
:05:21. > :05:26.extremely the vitriolic nature of the neighbour dispute would not
:05:26. > :05:29.have been as it was. The couple couldn't understand why that
:05:29. > :05:35.Carmarthenshire council didn't stop the lorries. So they put in a
:05:35. > :05:38.freedom of information request to find out more about the case. They
:05:38. > :05:40.were shocked to discover they weren't the first to be bothered by
:05:40. > :05:46.the lorries. Council records revealed a catalogue of complaints
:05:46. > :05:49.going back two years before they moved in. In the files Mrs Breckman
:05:49. > :05:59.found several logs of lorry movements kept by a previous owner
:05:59. > :06:01.
:06:01. > :06:07.of their cottage and by a neighbour. 30th, 2002. Three haulage lorries,
:06:07. > :06:15.or 9pm, three haulage lorries, one in a lock-up, one with Crane,
:06:15. > :06:18.6:00pm, haulage lorry loaded with rocks. 4:00pm... Margaret Rees is
:06:18. > :06:25.one of several neighbours who wrote more than once to the council's
:06:25. > :06:29.planning department. There would be diggers and they were building
:06:29. > :06:35.sheds for the lorries so there was a lot of noise in that respect but
:06:35. > :06:40.also the noise of the lorries going back and forth, people shouting. I
:06:40. > :06:43.stopped walking with the dogs because they were so large, the
:06:43. > :06:47.lorries, and it is quite dangerous. She told the council there were
:06:47. > :06:52.five lorries on the site, but they refused to accept there were that
:06:52. > :07:02.many. Nothing happened, that carried on for quite a number of
:07:02. > :07:05.
:07:05. > :07:08.years. I would say they didn't have This view is echoed by Clive
:07:08. > :07:12.Cochrane. Two years ago he was brought in as a government
:07:12. > :07:17.inspector to look at a planning appeal to do with the site, some
:07:17. > :07:23.nine years after complaints began. I gather from the evidence that the
:07:23. > :07:27.haulage business had grown over a number of years. It had probably
:07:27. > :07:33.grown through a lack of attention from the local authority, to be
:07:33. > :07:37.honest. I got better impression. They turned a blind eye to two
:07:38. > :07:42.lorries so if someone saw a lorry coming in and out, but could be one
:07:42. > :07:44.of the lorries. By do know. They turned a blind eye. The lorries
:07:44. > :07:50.kept running and the couple kept complaining. They carried on
:07:50. > :07:53.gathering their evidence but the council refused to accept it.
:07:53. > :08:00.Apparently there were numerous site visits over the years but they did
:08:00. > :08:04.not find evidence of anything I was complaining about. The planners
:08:04. > :08:08.said Mr Thomas was entitled to bring a lorry home because his main
:08:08. > :08:12.haulage site was elsewhere. The farm, they insisted, was
:08:12. > :08:14.agricultural which is not what the council said. They' d applied for
:08:14. > :08:17.permission to build a shed for agricultural storage, but the
:08:17. > :08:27.council refused, saying there was insufficient evidence to show it
:08:27. > :08:28.
:08:28. > :08:34.qualified for agricultural use. The shed was built and another one but
:08:34. > :08:40.these were allowed on condition they reduced agriculture. -- they
:08:40. > :08:43.were used for agriculture. The Ombudsman says that this process
:08:43. > :08:46.was flawed because it didn't give Mrs Breckman and Mr Roberts a
:08:46. > :08:48.chance to oppose the sheds through the planning system. They had to
:08:48. > :08:51.live with the truck movements, the buildings going up without planning
:08:51. > :08:55.consent, and all of that had a major impact on them as individuals,
:08:55. > :09:03.their health and well-being. What started as an argument over a
:09:03. > :09:12.haulage business was taking a new and disturbing turn. Be warned
:09:12. > :09:18.about back camera. The couple's lifeline to the outside world is
:09:18. > :09:27.this lane through the Thomases land. The couple had a legal right of
:09:27. > :09:36.access, but it was about to become In May 2005 the Thomases narrowed
:09:36. > :09:43.the lane with motorway crash barriers and put in extra gates.
:09:43. > :09:50.property. It is my property. are harassing me, go away. You are
:09:50. > :09:56.intimidatingly. Go away. You! are videoing me. Go away, you
:09:56. > :10:01.stupid man. Go away. I have my rights. It is my gate and my
:10:01. > :10:06.property. Dates have not been on the land for 20 years. Having
:10:06. > :10:12.narrowed it and put the crash barriers up was very intimidating.
:10:12. > :10:18.And to put two gates which were boarded over, it felt as though
:10:18. > :10:26.they were dictating we would stay down here, when we came home we
:10:26. > :10:36.would enter our property on their terms, not ours. I am moving
:10:36. > :10:41.animals. I opened the gate to go out. It had a devastating affect
:10:41. > :10:45.psychologically. It was horrific. The Thomases also started building
:10:45. > :10:48.right next to the couple's cottage. Inside, the couple kept filming.
:10:48. > :10:55.They believed that their camcorder and a CCTV system which they had
:10:55. > :10:59.set up - the evidence of harassment would be all too clear. Right on
:10:59. > :11:02.the boundary line the Thomases also put up a wooden board to block the
:11:02. > :11:12.view from the couple's bedroom window, a cockerel and an old
:11:12. > :11:16.
:11:16. > :11:20.removal van. Not what to call friendly. It is harassment. It was
:11:20. > :11:30.put here to harass and annoy. there was worse to come - the lane
:11:30. > :11:37.
:11:37. > :11:47.has become the front line. You are obstructing my right of way.
:11:47. > :11:52.
:11:52. > :11:58.Anything to say about that? Mr Roberts... Seek some legal advice.
:11:58. > :12:06.How is that? A nice bit of violence, you hit me in the face. But his
:12:06. > :12:14.assault. Don't tell lies. You push that into my face. You are a liar.
:12:14. > :12:23.It is not a nice way to live. It is very unpleasant. Very. Some people
:12:23. > :12:26.would have packed up and left. cannot give in to police. --
:12:26. > :12:32.bullies. In desperation, Trish and Eddie went to ask their Assembly
:12:32. > :12:41.Member for help. He wrote to the council on their behalf. The way in
:12:41. > :12:51.which they decided to look at the case coloured influence and
:12:51. > :12:53.
:12:53. > :12:57.decisions they took. If I was you, I would be worried. If I was as low
:12:57. > :13:01.as you two, underwent you crawled out of England. The couple appealed
:13:01. > :13:08.to the police for help and protection but in vain. The police
:13:08. > :13:13.were not helpful. I expected them to at least say it we would talk to
:13:13. > :13:19.them or something, given there had been history. But they didn't. They
:13:19. > :13:29.were just very non-committal, were not at all helpful and certainly
:13:29. > :13:43.
:13:43. > :13:50.The couple kept calling the police. A meeting took place here at
:13:50. > :13:53.council headquarters between planners and Dyfed Powys Police.
:13:53. > :13:55.According to the Ombudsman's report, the meeting hear that all the
:13:55. > :13:58.planning complaints had been investigated and complaints to
:13:58. > :14:00.police had been mostly about civil, not criminal matters. Even worse
:14:00. > :14:03.for the couple, they were accused of making possibly malicious
:14:03. > :14:09.complaints. Rhodri Glyn Thomas feels that the way the council was
:14:09. > :14:14.handling this case could have influenced the views of others.
:14:14. > :14:19.you hear a senior officers saying be very careful with these people,
:14:19. > :14:26.they create problems, then that will naturally affect the way in
:14:26. > :14:29.which you look at allegations which they take part in. Anyone seeing
:14:29. > :14:34.that evidence and looking at it objectively would agree there was a
:14:34. > :14:37.strong case for action. By refusing to accept the evidence they implied
:14:37. > :14:47.the complainants were dishonest and they made that view known to other
:14:47. > :14:54.
:14:54. > :14:57.agencies. I felt dirty by a head, I felt soiled by a out. Mud sticks,
:14:57. > :15:03.and the thought that other people could believe what these agencies
:15:03. > :15:06.were saying about me was so deeply hurtful, I cannot even begin to put
:15:07. > :15:09.it into words. The confrontations continued and
:15:10. > :15:12.the couple kept sending their video evidence to the police. But to
:15:12. > :15:14.their astonishment they found that they were being accused of
:15:15. > :15:19.harassment. Trisha Breckman was arrested 6 times and given three
:15:19. > :15:23.police warning in two years. She was charged several times and was
:15:23. > :15:28.even convicted by local magistrates. But when she appealed all charges
:15:28. > :15:35.were dropped and the conviction was overturned. The most distressing
:15:35. > :15:44.incident occurred in May 2007. Andrew Thomas can be seen driving a
:15:44. > :15:48.horse down the lane through the gate and onto the couple's property.
:15:48. > :15:52.Mrs Breckman just manages to get out of the way. At the time she
:15:52. > :16:02.needed a hip replacement. She tries to send the horse back up the lane.
:16:02. > :16:12.But he drives it down again. Karen Thomas appears, armed with her own
:16:12. > :16:20.
:16:20. > :16:30.video camera. Get off of my property. A non I 99! 999, now
:16:30. > :16:30.
:16:30. > :16:35.please! Because she was going to walk into me, I put out to my left
:16:35. > :16:39.hand to say do not come any closer to me. Just stay at that distance
:16:39. > :16:49.because they knew where she came barging into me, I would have
:16:49. > :16:53.
:16:53. > :17:03.fallen over. I can hold you back. That is, are sold! To not to come
:17:03. > :17:04.
:17:04. > :17:14.into my space! That is, an assault! Police, please! I had been
:17:14. > :17:18.
:17:19. > :17:21.assaulted! You're in my space, get out! Get out! Get out! Get Howard!
:17:21. > :17:27.The police arrived, but after a tense discussion in the cottage,
:17:27. > :17:31.the result was not the one she anticipated. I said please wait
:17:31. > :17:41.until Eddie comes home. With that, he just handcuffed me and told me
:17:41. > :17:41.
:17:41. > :17:49.Trisha Breckman was brought here to Carmarthen police station to be
:17:49. > :17:53.questioned, where she was read a statement by Karen Thomas. They say
:17:53. > :17:56.that as a result of you opening the lower gates and causing the animal
:17:56. > :18:04.to startle by making a noise that the animal got free and entered
:18:04. > :18:08.your property is that correct? comment. We showed the footage to
:18:08. > :18:17.Mrs Breckman's AM. He was astonished that she was the one who
:18:17. > :18:21.had been arrested. I do not know how you could come to the
:18:21. > :18:28.conclusion that she is the aggressor on this kind of a
:18:28. > :18:33.situation. He is clearly sending this animal down, isn't he? This is
:18:33. > :18:39.the difficulty, to try and decide how people came to these decisions
:18:39. > :18:42.based on the evidence that was available. Trisha Breckman was kept
:18:42. > :18:46.on bail for eight weeks then the charge of assaulting Karen Thomas
:18:46. > :18:50.was dropped. Dyfed Powys Police declined our request for an
:18:50. > :18:53.interview but in a statement they said... Our previous reviews of
:18:53. > :18:57.police involvement have revealed that the actions of individual
:18:57. > :19:00.officers have been reasonable. Our conclusions are supported by review
:19:00. > :19:08.by ourselves and other agencies such as the Crown Prosecution
:19:08. > :19:17.Service and the Independent Police The couple's AM, says there is
:19:17. > :19:20.something wrong here and he wants senior officers to review the case.
:19:20. > :19:26.Have have asked the acting chief Constable to look at this again,
:19:26. > :19:30.the allegations, the incidents that took place, but they do not want to
:19:30. > :19:34.prejudge anything that she would decide about this. I think there is
:19:34. > :19:37.sufficient evidence to look again. Since moving to Carmarthenshire
:19:37. > :19:44.from Sussex, the couple's fight with the council took over their
:19:44. > :19:50.lives. These two pensioners never gave up their campaign. As bleak as
:19:50. > :19:53.this period was, 2008 did bring some good news. They brought a
:19:53. > :20:03.civil action against the Thomases and won significant concessions out
:20:03. > :20:06.
:20:06. > :20:11.of court. They had to remove the gates. They had to widen the lane,
:20:11. > :20:14.take off the middle gate, unboard the top gate and leave it open.
:20:14. > :20:20.They had to sign a declaration they would not her Rassau intimidate us
:20:20. > :20:25.in that area. It was wonderful to see brigades gone so we could drive
:20:25. > :20:27.in and out in peace. But their sense of relief was only short-
:20:27. > :20:36.lived. They made a disturbing discovery. Carmarthenshire Council
:20:36. > :20:41.had, without telling them, put the couple on an internal blacklist.
:20:41. > :20:48.You cannot just say, you worry come pleats consistent complainer, there
:20:48. > :20:53.has to be something to go with that. Asked four times in all and
:20:53. > :20:55.eventually I was sent their persistent complainant policy.
:20:55. > :21:03.way the couple were put on the council's persistent complainers
:21:03. > :21:08.list draws strong criticism from the Ombudsman. They Procedures sets
:21:08. > :21:12.out how to assess this and how you go to fire person that their
:21:12. > :21:16.complaint is persistent and not justified and the steps that are
:21:16. > :21:20.taking to show you will not engage with that person in the future.
:21:20. > :21:26.They just did not do what they were supposed to do, they did not follow
:21:26. > :21:29.the road policy. Essentially the outcome was wrong. The Ombudsman
:21:29. > :21:31.also criticised the fact that the council had meetings to review the
:21:31. > :21:33.couple's status as persistent complainers and didn't tell them
:21:33. > :21:40.the outcome. The council also blocked them from emailing all
:21:40. > :21:46.Carmarthenshire Councillors. Then a development changed everything and
:21:46. > :21:54.it came from an unexpected direction. Andrew Thomas had
:21:54. > :22:03.started another business on Blaenpant Farm. There were
:22:03. > :22:06.complaints the council took action. They served in enforcement notice
:22:06. > :22:10.to stop this. Andrew Thomas appealed but that turned out to be
:22:10. > :22:14.a mistake. His appeal triggered a public inquiry presided over by a
:22:14. > :22:20.Government Inspector. At issue was what Mr Thomas liked to call a
:22:20. > :22:22.storage area. But his neighbours said it was a scrap yard.
:22:22. > :22:31.Carmarthenshire's planners asked the inspector to confine his
:22:31. > :22:36.inquiry to just this part of the activities on Mr Thomas's farm. The
:22:36. > :22:40.inspector disagreed. I was unsure if it was an active discouragement
:22:40. > :22:45.or just a mistake on their part. Certainly, it wasn't in their
:22:45. > :22:51.interests for me to look at the whole farm. It was in their
:22:51. > :22:55.interest for me to just assess the storage area in isolation. By
:22:55. > :22:59.questioned the council's evidence heard they said there was no
:22:59. > :23:04.planning history to the site, simply because I thought that was
:23:04. > :23:10.planning history for the whole agricultural unit. The inspector
:23:10. > :23:16.insisted on looking at the whole site. It is about 60 hectors and
:23:16. > :23:20.most of that was in agricultural use. Certainly, the grazing of
:23:20. > :23:24.animals and the cropping of pay, that is agriculture road. But it
:23:24. > :23:30.was the farmyard itself that I found was not in agricultural use.
:23:30. > :23:36.Inside, in one of the modern sheds, there was a lorry after a lorry
:23:36. > :23:40.after a lorry. About 10 of them. There was another yard facing onto
:23:40. > :23:47.the property which had another array of vehicles, nothing to do
:23:47. > :23:52.with farming. I got the impression that neither the yard or the quarry
:23:52. > :23:58.area at or the sheds were what you might call in agricultural use. If
:23:58. > :24:02.anything, the haulage business had taken over and therefore, I can't
:24:02. > :24:07.confirm that everything that Patricia and her partner had been
:24:07. > :24:10.saying. The council says that they made numerous visits to the site
:24:10. > :24:13.and could only act within planning law on the basis of existing
:24:13. > :24:16.evidence. When the chief planning office visited the site in 2010,
:24:16. > :24:19.after viewing Mrs Breckman's video, he says he saw a lorry in one
:24:19. > :24:27.building and there wasn't anything that convinced him that there was a
:24:27. > :24:37.material change of use to a depot. But Mr Bowen had been there six
:24:37. > :24:38.
:24:38. > :24:43.months before? Fourth he came to a very different conclusion. It is
:24:43. > :24:46.surprising, but they do not know what he saw. I cannot answer that
:24:46. > :24:52.question about what was there at that time. He must have seen a
:24:52. > :24:57.lorry business going on. He must have seen a certain amount of scrap
:24:57. > :25:00.vehicles and lorries. There was all sorts going on there. For Mr
:25:00. > :25:03.Cochrane turned down Andrew Thomas' appeal. It was the most important
:25:03. > :25:06.moment for the couple, because they then took the findings of his
:25:06. > :25:10.inquiry to the Ombudsman and he agreed to investigate the whole
:25:10. > :25:20.case. His report said the council was guilty of maladministration and
:25:20. > :25:21.
:25:21. > :25:25.he found that the couple had suffered an injustice. There was a
:25:25. > :25:29.succession of opportunities to address these issues, and each of
:25:29. > :25:34.them was missed in turn. The council was taking views that are
:25:34. > :25:38.not supported by the facts and state to give you 1 the character
:25:38. > :25:43.of the complainants which was not justified in doing this. There are
:25:43. > :25:45.many things that should have been brought to a head and dealt with.
:25:45. > :25:48.The Ombudsman concluded that the council should make a fulsome
:25:48. > :25:51.apology to the couple, that it should address the enforcement
:25:51. > :25:53.issues arising from the haulage business at Blaenpant. And that it
:25:53. > :26:03.should re-consider the whole way it deals with planning enforcement
:26:03. > :26:05.
:26:05. > :26:10.cases. The couple felt they had been vindicated. Absolute relief,
:26:10. > :26:14.because yet again, my complaints and my allegations were all found
:26:14. > :26:17.to be absolutely honest and truthful. The last few years have
:26:17. > :26:27.been quiet on the lane. But there are still a lot of unanswered
:26:27. > :26:28.
:26:28. > :26:31.questions. Why did the council allow the Thomases to run their
:26:31. > :26:34.business for ten years without planning permission? Why did they
:26:34. > :26:37.stick to their claim that there were no more than two lorries there,
:26:37. > :26:41.when there was evidence there were many more? And why did they smear
:26:41. > :26:44.Trisha and Eddie? We wanted to put these and other questions to
:26:44. > :26:47.Carmarthenshire Council but they declined to be interviewed. But the
:26:48. > :26:51.statement they did give us shows they still think this was a simple
:26:51. > :26:53.dispute between neighbours. The Authority has agreed to the
:26:53. > :26:57.Ombudsman's recommendations and will be implementing them within
:26:57. > :26:59.the timescales identified. Disputes between neighbours on planning
:26:59. > :27:09.matters are always problematic and it is impossible to satisfy both
:27:09. > :27:12.
:27:12. > :27:15.Not good enough according to the local AM who says after this case
:27:15. > :27:25.and others, there needs to be a thorough inquiry into the council's
:27:25. > :27:29.planning procedures. A public inquiry would be the best way to do
:27:29. > :27:34.it, let them explain how they came to some of these conclusions. I
:27:34. > :27:39.think a lot of people feel that they need that opportunity to have
:27:39. > :27:46.that are open discussion in public. I think there is now sufficient
:27:46. > :27:51.evidence to do so. Neighbour disputes happen all the time.
:27:51. > :27:57.Nearly every enforcement cases and neighbour dispute, but not like
:27:57. > :28:03.this, where there has been a justified complaint a ignored. It
:28:03. > :28:12.is the first, have come across this, however. And I was an inspector for
:28:12. > :28:18.24 years. It has destroyed our dreams and our future and we have
:28:18. > :28:22.lost 11 years of our retirement to just misery. But council have
:28:22. > :28:26.provided the couple with some compensation and issued an apology,
:28:26. > :28:33.but Patricia says it is not good enough. Abalone have peace of mind
:28:33. > :28:37.when the people involved, that is the council and the police, have
:28:38. > :28:44.apologised to me properly. And I mean properly and publicly, when
:28:44. > :28:50.somebody says to me, it misses back man, because it's so wrong. And we
:28:50. > :28:53.are so sorry. That is what I want to here. Just days ago, the