The owner of a £1.2 million Notting Hill property has emerged victorious from a two-year planning dispute over a timber screen on his roof terrace, but says the experience has cost him nearly £10,000 and left a sour taste.
Background of the dispute
Dr Michael Young, a financial services professional, was granted approval for the fence in 2019 as the existing metal railings created privacy concerns for both himself and his neighbour. However, in 2024, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Council (RBKC) issued an enforcement notice demanding its removal.
Dr Young maintained that approval had been granted in 2019 and twice more when he submitted subsequent revised applications in 2022 and 2023. Yet RBKC disputed this, and after two-and-a-half years of back-and-forth, the matter was referred to the government adjudicator.
Planning Inspectorate ruling
The Planning Inspectorate has now sided with Dr Young, confirming that RBKC had indeed granted permission for the screen in 2019, 2022, and 2023. According to the report, RBKC maintained the screen breached planning laws as it wasn't referenced in an application Dr Young lodged in 2019. Nevertheless, the government inspector determined that the plans – which the council approved – did mention a roof terrace with black railings, and the privacy screen could reasonably be encompassed within that description.
The report stated: "The description of development does not explicitly refer to boundary treatment on the roof terrace. However, the roof terrace itself is explicitly referred to in the description of development and shown on the approved plans. There is no separate condition requiring details of boundary treatment on the roof terrace to be agreed."
It added: "It follows, therefore, that 2019 permission incorporates boundary treatment on the roof terrace, in the form as shown on the approved plans comprised in the 2019 permission."
Dr Young subsequently applied to modify the 2019 plans in 2022 and 2023. The 2022 plans were annotated to indicate "timber screening" on the black railings, and a "trellis for screen" was also referenced. Since RBKC did not request additional details to be agreed nor explicitly exclude the installation of a timber screen, permission was once more granted.
The 2023 plans were more explicit. The report noted that approved documents "clearly show the erection of a 'pressure treated timber cladding trellis privacy screen'." Once again, however, RBKC failed to request further details regarding the boundary treatment on the terrace, nor did they ask for it to be removed from the plans.
"As a result, I consider the approved plans incorporate the erection of a timber screen on the roof terrace," the inspector said. Concluding his findings, he stated: "Overall, I conclude that the timber screen on the roof terrace subject of the notice is comprised in the planning permission granted in 2019 and subsequently varied in 2022 and 2023. To that end, the alleged breach of planning control stated in the notice, does not constitute a breach of planning control in accordance with S171A(1) of the Act."
Homeowner's frustration
Despite being vindicated, Dr Young says the experience has left him deeply frustrated. He accumulated substantial costs, including architect fees, planning consultants, legal advice, and £516 in appeal fees. Dr Young said: "For a quarter of a decade the council pursued me over a timber screen that their own planning files showed was approved – not once, but three times. The entire two-and-a-half-year nightmare could have been avoided with a cup of tea, a custard cream, and a cursory glance at their own paperwork. But, no. They chose enforcement notices, legal threats, and a humiliating defeat before the Planning Inspectorate."
He added: "I had to assemble a small army of professionals – architects, planners, lawyers – just to point the council back to its own approvals. He found that the alleged breach of planning control did not exist. Not that the Council had a different interpretation. Not that it was a grey area. The council was wrong from day one. They wasted years of my life and thousands of my pounds. They have not offered a penny. They have not apologised. They have not even admitted they were wrong."
Council response
A spokesperson from RBKC said: "We investigated reports of an unauthorised timber screen and served an enforcement notice after determining the structure breached Local Plan policy. Following an appeal, the Planning Inspectorate reached a different conclusion. The Council accepts the decision and the enforcement case will now be closed."
