The Good Life Gone Bad Week In Week Out

Anything to say about that? Tonight - what happens when those

responsible for your protection fail to act? Seek legal advice.

started with a planning complaint which spiralled out of all control.

I thought that other people could believe what these agencies were

saying about me. The council has been heavily criticized in a

damning report. By refusing to accept the evidence the council

implied the complainants were dishonest. And there are questions

about how the police handled the case. Get out! Get out! Get out!

Get out! Had you concluded she is the aggressor? Has there been a

It was a dream and when we saw the cottage, it did what look nice on

the internet but when we came here it was so pretty and it was

everything I wanted, the cottage was sweet. The garden was pretty.

The land was perfect. We were delighted to find this place

because it is ideal. Nine years ago, Trish and her partner Eddie moved

to Carmarthenshire. We want to have a cattery. The cattery would have

led to other things and we could have taken in some rescue animals,

that's what we wanted. A good life, yes. I suppose, yes, you could call

it that. We had every intention of staying. I would have stayed here

until I had been carried out, probably. But Trisha and Eddie's

dream of the Good Life was soon shattered. We became aware of the

nuisance straightaway. We had noise, noise, noise. Digging around in the

quarry area... To haulage activities, to maintenance on

vehicles. All kinds of noises that should not really have been taking

place on a so-called farm. And the numbers of lorries that were there

were a clear indication of a haulage yard. When they bought the

cottage the couple were only able to visit it in the middle of the

day, when all was quiet. Before buying this, we have looked into

whether Ron not there were any industrial activities around and

about. -- whether or not. We were told by the council there were none.

We thought it was a farmer but it wasn't a farm. The neighbours,

Andrew Thomas and his partner Karen, who's since died, were running a

haulage company without planning permission. Trisha and Eddie rang

Carmarthenshire Council and complained to a planning officer.

The response was, well, I don't think anything untoward is going on.

It is a farm. When I tried to explain that there were things

going on but are not conducive to being a farm, I was told we will

investigate all monitor and keep an eye on it. Did she feel you're

taken seriously? No, not at all. I felt he was fobbing me off. He did

not want to deal with my complaints. The council suggested that the

couple and Eddie gather evidence themselves. They filmed lorries

leaving from 6am and work going on into the early hours. They gave the

video to Carmarthenshire Council, hoping it would take action.

Looking back to that period - it was 2004 - it's clear that if only

the council had acted on Trish and Eddie's complaints then, the couple

might have been spared the nightmare that was to come. Now the

council has been strongly criticized in this stinging report

just released by the office that monitors Welsh public services.

difficulty is if you don't tackle them early, they have a tendency

not to go away but to get worse. If enforcement had happened, the

subject matter of much of the dispute would not have existed. And

although it is only speculation, the likelihood is that the

extremely the vitriolic nature of the neighbour dispute would not

have been as it was. The couple couldn't understand why that

Carmarthenshire council didn't stop the lorries. So they put in a

freedom of information request to find out more about the case. They

were shocked to discover they weren't the first to be bothered by

the lorries. Council records revealed a catalogue of complaints

going back two years before they moved in. In the files Mrs Breckman

found several logs of lorry movements kept by a previous owner

of their cottage and by a neighbour. 30th, 2002. Three haulage lorries,

or 9pm, three haulage lorries, one in a lock-up, one with Crane,

6:00pm, haulage lorry loaded with rocks. 4:00pm... Margaret Rees is

one of several neighbours who wrote more than once to the council's

planning department. There would be diggers and they were building

sheds for the lorries so there was a lot of noise in that respect but

also the noise of the lorries going back and forth, people shouting. I

stopped walking with the dogs because they were so large, the

lorries, and it is quite dangerous. She told the council there were

five lorries on the site, but they refused to accept there were that

many. Nothing happened, that carried on for quite a number of

years. I would say they didn't have This view is echoed by Clive

Cochrane. Two years ago he was brought in as a government

inspector to look at a planning appeal to do with the site, some

nine years after complaints began. I gather from the evidence that the

haulage business had grown over a number of years. It had probably

grown through a lack of attention from the local authority, to be

honest. I got better impression. They turned a blind eye to two

lorries so if someone saw a lorry coming in and out, but could be one

of the lorries. By do know. They turned a blind eye. The lorries

kept running and the couple kept complaining. They carried on

gathering their evidence but the council refused to accept it.

Apparently there were numerous site visits over the years but they did

not find evidence of anything I was complaining about. The planners

said Mr Thomas was entitled to bring a lorry home because his main

haulage site was elsewhere. The farm, they insisted, was

agricultural which is not what the council said. They' d applied for

permission to build a shed for agricultural storage, but the

council refused, saying there was insufficient evidence to show it

qualified for agricultural use. The shed was built and another one but

these were allowed on condition they reduced agriculture. -- they

were used for agriculture. The Ombudsman says that this process

was flawed because it didn't give Mrs Breckman and Mr Roberts a

chance to oppose the sheds through the planning system. They had to

live with the truck movements, the buildings going up without planning

consent, and all of that had a major impact on them as individuals,

their health and well-being. What started as an argument over a

haulage business was taking a new and disturbing turn. Be warned

about back camera. The couple's lifeline to the outside world is

this lane through the Thomases land. The couple had a legal right of

access, but it was about to become In May 2005 the Thomases narrowed

the lane with motorway crash barriers and put in extra gates.

property. It is my property. are harassing me, go away. You are

intimidatingly. Go away. You! are videoing me. Go away, you

stupid man. Go away. I have my rights. It is my gate and my

property. Dates have not been on the land for 20 years. Having

narrowed it and put the crash barriers up was very intimidating.

And to put two gates which were boarded over, it felt as though

they were dictating we would stay down here, when we came home we

would enter our property on their terms, not ours. I am moving

animals. I opened the gate to go out. It had a devastating affect

psychologically. It was horrific. The Thomases also started building

right next to the couple's cottage. Inside, the couple kept filming.

They believed that their camcorder and a CCTV system which they had

set up - the evidence of harassment would be all too clear. Right on

the boundary line the Thomases also put up a wooden board to block the

view from the couple's bedroom window, a cockerel and an old

removal van. Not what to call friendly. It is harassment. It was

put here to harass and annoy. there was worse to come - the lane

has become the front line. You are obstructing my right of way.

Anything to say about that? Mr Roberts... Seek some legal advice.

How is that? A nice bit of violence, you hit me in the face. But his

assault. Don't tell lies. You push that into my face. You are a liar.

It is not a nice way to live. It is very unpleasant. Very. Some people

would have packed up and left. cannot give in to police. --

bullies. In desperation, Trish and Eddie went to ask their Assembly

Member for help. He wrote to the council on their behalf. The way in

which they decided to look at the case coloured influence and

decisions they took. If I was you, I would be worried. If I was as low

as you two, underwent you crawled out of England. The couple appealed

to the police for help and protection but in vain. The police

were not helpful. I expected them to at least say it we would talk to

them or something, given there had been history. But they didn't. They

were just very non-committal, were not at all helpful and certainly

The couple kept calling the police. A meeting took place here at

council headquarters between planners and Dyfed Powys Police.

According to the Ombudsman's report, the meeting hear that all the

planning complaints had been investigated and complaints to

police had been mostly about civil, not criminal matters. Even worse

for the couple, they were accused of making possibly malicious

complaints. Rhodri Glyn Thomas feels that the way the council was

handling this case could have influenced the views of others.

you hear a senior officers saying be very careful with these people,

they create problems, then that will naturally affect the way in

which you look at allegations which they take part in. Anyone seeing

that evidence and looking at it objectively would agree there was a

strong case for action. By refusing to accept the evidence they implied

the complainants were dishonest and they made that view known to other

agencies. I felt dirty by a head, I felt soiled by a out. Mud sticks,

and the thought that other people could believe what these agencies

were saying about me was so deeply hurtful, I cannot even begin to put

it into words. The confrontations continued and

the couple kept sending their video evidence to the police. But to

their astonishment they found that they were being accused of

harassment. Trisha Breckman was arrested 6 times and given three

police warning in two years. She was charged several times and was

even convicted by local magistrates. But when she appealed all charges

were dropped and the conviction was overturned. The most distressing

incident occurred in May 2007. Andrew Thomas can be seen driving a

horse down the lane through the gate and onto the couple's property.

Mrs Breckman just manages to get out of the way. At the time she

needed a hip replacement. She tries to send the horse back up the lane.

But he drives it down again. Karen Thomas appears, armed with her own

video camera. Get off of my property. A non I 99! 999, now

please! Because she was going to walk into me, I put out to my left

hand to say do not come any closer to me. Just stay at that distance

because they knew where she came barging into me, I would have

fallen over. I can hold you back. That is, are sold! To not to come

into my space! That is, an assault! Police, please! I had been

assaulted! You're in my space, get out! Get out! Get out! Get Howard!

The police arrived, but after a tense discussion in the cottage,

the result was not the one she anticipated. I said please wait

until Eddie comes home. With that, he just handcuffed me and told me

Trisha Breckman was brought here to Carmarthen police station to be

questioned, where she was read a statement by Karen Thomas. They say

that as a result of you opening the lower gates and causing the animal

to startle by making a noise that the animal got free and entered

your property is that correct? comment. We showed the footage to

Mrs Breckman's AM. He was astonished that she was the one who

had been arrested. I do not know how you could come to the

conclusion that she is the aggressor on this kind of a

situation. He is clearly sending this animal down, isn't he? This is

the difficulty, to try and decide how people came to these decisions

based on the evidence that was available. Trisha Breckman was kept

on bail for eight weeks then the charge of assaulting Karen Thomas

was dropped. Dyfed Powys Police declined our request for an

interview but in a statement they said... Our previous reviews of

police involvement have revealed that the actions of individual

officers have been reasonable. Our conclusions are supported by review

by ourselves and other agencies such as the Crown Prosecution

Service and the Independent Police The couple's AM, says there is

something wrong here and he wants senior officers to review the case.

Have have asked the acting chief Constable to look at this again,

the allegations, the incidents that took place, but they do not want to

prejudge anything that she would decide about this. I think there is

sufficient evidence to look again. Since moving to Carmarthenshire

from Sussex, the couple's fight with the council took over their

lives. These two pensioners never gave up their campaign. As bleak as

this period was, 2008 did bring some good news. They brought a

civil action against the Thomases and won significant concessions out

of court. They had to remove the gates. They had to widen the lane,

take off the middle gate, unboard the top gate and leave it open.

They had to sign a declaration they would not her Rassau intimidate us

in that area. It was wonderful to see brigades gone so we could drive

in and out in peace. But their sense of relief was only short-

lived. They made a disturbing discovery. Carmarthenshire Council

had, without telling them, put the couple on an internal blacklist.

You cannot just say, you worry come pleats consistent complainer, there

has to be something to go with that. Asked four times in all and

eventually I was sent their persistent complainant policy.

way the couple were put on the council's persistent complainers

list draws strong criticism from the Ombudsman. They Procedures sets

out how to assess this and how you go to fire person that their

complaint is persistent and not justified and the steps that are

taking to show you will not engage with that person in the future.

They just did not do what they were supposed to do, they did not follow

the road policy. Essentially the outcome was wrong. The Ombudsman

also criticised the fact that the council had meetings to review the

couple's status as persistent complainers and didn't tell them

the outcome. The council also blocked them from emailing all

Carmarthenshire Councillors. Then a development changed everything and

it came from an unexpected direction. Andrew Thomas had

started another business on Blaenpant Farm. There were

complaints the council took action. They served in enforcement notice

to stop this. Andrew Thomas appealed but that turned out to be

a mistake. His appeal triggered a public inquiry presided over by a

Government Inspector. At issue was what Mr Thomas liked to call a

storage area. But his neighbours said it was a scrap yard.

Carmarthenshire's planners asked the inspector to confine his

inquiry to just this part of the activities on Mr Thomas's farm. The

inspector disagreed. I was unsure if it was an active discouragement

or just a mistake on their part. Certainly, it wasn't in their

interests for me to look at the whole farm. It was in their

interest for me to just assess the storage area in isolation. By

questioned the council's evidence heard they said there was no

planning history to the site, simply because I thought that was

planning history for the whole agricultural unit. The inspector

insisted on looking at the whole site. It is about 60 hectors and

most of that was in agricultural use. Certainly, the grazing of

animals and the cropping of pay, that is agriculture road. But it

was the farmyard itself that I found was not in agricultural use.

Inside, in one of the modern sheds, there was a lorry after a lorry

after a lorry. About 10 of them. There was another yard facing onto

the property which had another array of vehicles, nothing to do

with farming. I got the impression that neither the yard or the quarry

area at or the sheds were what you might call in agricultural use. If

anything, the haulage business had taken over and therefore, I can't

confirm that everything that Patricia and her partner had been

saying. The council says that they made numerous visits to the site

and could only act within planning law on the basis of existing

evidence. When the chief planning office visited the site in 2010,

after viewing Mrs Breckman's video, he says he saw a lorry in one

building and there wasn't anything that convinced him that there was a

material change of use to a depot. But Mr Bowen had been there six

months before? Fourth he came to a very different conclusion. It is

surprising, but they do not know what he saw. I cannot answer that

question about what was there at that time. He must have seen a

lorry business going on. He must have seen a certain amount of scrap

vehicles and lorries. There was all sorts going on there. For Mr

Cochrane turned down Andrew Thomas' appeal. It was the most important

moment for the couple, because they then took the findings of his

inquiry to the Ombudsman and he agreed to investigate the whole

case. His report said the council was guilty of maladministration and

he found that the couple had suffered an injustice. There was a

succession of opportunities to address these issues, and each of

them was missed in turn. The council was taking views that are

not supported by the facts and state to give you 1 the character

of the complainants which was not justified in doing this. There are

many things that should have been brought to a head and dealt with.

The Ombudsman concluded that the council should make a fulsome

apology to the couple, that it should address the enforcement

issues arising from the haulage business at Blaenpant. And that it

should re-consider the whole way it deals with planning enforcement

cases. The couple felt they had been vindicated. Absolute relief,

because yet again, my complaints and my allegations were all found

to be absolutely honest and truthful. The last few years have

been quiet on the lane. But there are still a lot of unanswered

questions. Why did the council allow the Thomases to run their

business for ten years without planning permission? Why did they

stick to their claim that there were no more than two lorries there,

when there was evidence there were many more? And why did they smear

Trisha and Eddie? We wanted to put these and other questions to

Carmarthenshire Council but they declined to be interviewed. But the

statement they did give us shows they still think this was a simple

dispute between neighbours. The Authority has agreed to the

Ombudsman's recommendations and will be implementing them within

the timescales identified. Disputes between neighbours on planning

matters are always problematic and it is impossible to satisfy both

Not good enough according to the local AM who says after this case

and others, there needs to be a thorough inquiry into the council's

planning procedures. A public inquiry would be the best way to do

it, let them explain how they came to some of these conclusions. I

think a lot of people feel that they need that opportunity to have

that are open discussion in public. I think there is now sufficient

evidence to do so. Neighbour disputes happen all the time.

Nearly every enforcement cases and neighbour dispute, but not like

this, where there has been a justified complaint a ignored. It

is the first, have come across this, however. And I was an inspector for

24 years. It has destroyed our dreams and our future and we have

lost 11 years of our retirement to just misery. But council have

provided the couple with some compensation and issued an apology,

but Patricia says it is not good enough. Abalone have peace of mind

when the people involved, that is the council and the police, have

apologised to me properly. And I mean properly and publicly, when

somebody says to me, it misses back man, because it's so wrong. And we

are so sorry. That is what I want to here. Just days ago, the