Couple Faces £150K Legal Bill After Neighbour Dispute Over Home Extension

A married couple from Goring-on-Thames have been burdened with legal fees amounting to £150,000 following a dispute with their neighbours over a home extension. Kevin and Elizabeth Harrison-Ellis purchased their bungalow in March 2020 for £740,000 and added a first floor to accommodate their family. This development was initially unchallenged by their neighbours, Stuart and Anita Hunt, who reside in a property valued at £2.3 million.

The controversy escalated when the Harrison-Ellis family constructed a small wooden bin store in 2022. This prompted the Hunts to raise objections, claiming that the extension had made their view of the scenic “Goring Gap” unsightly and diminished their property’s visual amenity.

Legal battles ensued, culminating in a High Court decision that mandated the Harrison-Ellis family to pay £25,000 to the Hunts while allowing them to retain the modifications made to their home, known as Hillside.

Legal Challenges and Financial Strain

According to Kevin Harrison-Ellis, the couple’s legal expenses throughout the five-year ordeal have reached nearly £150,000. He expressed deep regret about the situation, stating, “This was supposed to be our dream home. Now it all just feels tainted.” The couple initially sought to ensure amicable relations with the Hunts, reaching out to them before moving into their new home.

The Harrison-Ellises were aware of historical building restrictions that limited the property to a single-storey home, as the two properties once shared the same plot. The couple attempted to contact the Hunts through their estate agent, offering to discuss their plans and seek permission to modify the covenants. Unfortunately, they did not receive a response, which led them to proceed with their purchase and subsequent renovations.

Planning permission for the extension was granted in June 2020, and the construction was completed in December 2020 without any reported issues. In contrast, the Hunts initiated their own planning process to replace their property with a modern three-storey house, which received permission in May 2021 and is nearing completion.

High Court Ruling and Future Implications

In January 2023, the Hunts formally objected to the modifications made by the Harrison-Ellis family, citing breaches of the original restrictions. They argued that the changes altered the character of the area and infringed upon their privacy. The Hunts sought legal action, claiming that the value of their home had diminished due to the Harrison-Ellis’ alterations.

In response to the Hunts’ legal challenge, the Harrison-Ellis family applied for modifications to the original covenants. The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), led by Judge Elizabeth Cooke, found that while there had been some loss of privacy for the Hunts, their objections appeared to have arisen only after the construction of the bin store was completed. The tribunal noted that the Hunts had shown no prior concern over the extension until the bin store was built.

The judge concluded that the Hunts’ delay in raising concerns about the extension indicated insincerity in their objections. Ultimately, the court ruled in favour of the Harrison-Ellis family’s application to amend the covenants, allowing them to keep the extension while imposing the £25,000 compensation order.

Reflecting on the lengthy legal battle, Kevin Harrison-Ellis remarked, “It’s not nice after fighting for two-and-a-half years, but in a way we get to keep the house that we built.” He underscored the financial toll the situation has taken, stating that the legal fees had interfered with their plans for their children’s education.

The Harrison-Ellis family hopes that their experience will serve as a cautionary tale for others navigating similar property disputes, emphasizing the importance of understanding property covenants and the potential for unforeseen legal challenges in home renovations.