After a five-year battle against a deep-pocketed developer, aided and abetted by Croydon Council’s planning department, residents on Downsview Road in Upper Norwood have claimed victory in the High Court.
But they now face financial ruin because of the huge costs of running the case.
Five-year battle: residents of Downsview Road took their case to the High Court, and won
The dispute centred on a planning application submitted by Hambridge Investments Ltd to build nine flats on the site of a Downsview Road bungalow.
However, this land — along with neighbouring bungalows, including 283 and 285 Beulah Hill — forms part of the original Beulah Hill Estate, which neighbours claimed is protected by a 100-year-old legal covenant.
This restriction, established during the estate’s original planning, was known to the developer and planning officials from the outset, according to Peter and Caroline Fenech, whose home is next door to the proposed site.
The developer decided to roll the dice, guessing that a lengthy and expensive challenge from residents to any planning permission granted by the council would be unlikely. Croydon Council granted planning permission for 19 Downsview Road in July 2020.
Concerned about the impact on the character of the area, the strain on local infrastructure and the principle of upholding legally binding agreements, the Fenechs formed a small group of residents to challenge the plans.
“We were really lucky on this road that eight households came together,” Caroline Fenech said.
“But it stretched us to our limits – it’s an expensive process and I think developers know that.”
Victory: the Downsview residents’ group who took their case to the High Court – and won
In the past five years, Downsview Road has seen additional planning applications submitted to Croydon Council, with residents challenging two further proposals for flat developments on plots occupied by bungalows that are also subject to the same covenant.
One application — also from Hambridge Investments — was submitted to replace another bungalow with a block of nine flats, based on a private arrangement with the previous occupier.
Before: how No19 Downsview Road used to look
A second, separate proposal sought to build eight flats on the site of a single bungalow. Developers are aware that any planning application for 10 or more residential units will require them to provide 30% “affordable homes” in their scheme – blowing a huge hole in their profits.
Both applications were refused on the grounds that the proposed developments were too tall and out-of-keeping with the surrounding area.
Earlier this year, following a four-day hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice on The Strand, His Honour Judge Dight ruled in favour of the residents, granting an injunction against the development and issuing a declaration confirming that the covenant remains valid and enforceable.
Directors of the development firm could face a jail sentence if they press ahead with the plans – which makes the hole left in the ground where 19 Downsview Road once stood an interesting case for Croydon’s planning enforcement officials.
After: despite the legal covenant, the developers demolished the bungalow before the case came to court
“This landmark decision effectively prohibits the proposed development at Downsview Road and sets an important legal precedent,” Caroline Fenech told Inside Croydon.
Despite the judge awarding the community activists their legal costs, the combined expenses of legal representation, the expert witness and a costly legal insurance policy has still left the campaigners substantially out of pocket.
The residents are angry that they have had to fight a case that the law ought to have prevented from arising in the first place. Croydon Council washed its hands of any involvement, saying that its statutory duties over planning are entirely separate from civil law and land ownership.
“The process must be followed regardless of whether covenants apply,” the council has said. “It is a developer’s responsibility to make sure they get all necessary permissions and consents before starting their development.”
Fenech and her campaign group say that such an approach gives determined developers licence to push their luck. “In our case, the developer just ignored us thinking that we weren’t going to take them to court because it’s so expensive,” Fenech said.
“But we knew we had a legally-binding covenant there and we wanted to uphold it.
“This was not just a victory for our community, but for any neighbourhood facing inappropriate development that disregards legal protections,” Fenech said.
“We are both relieved and proud that our perseverance has paid off. It is a testament to what a community can achieve when it stands united. The decision is a clear message to developers, that they cannot ignore legal covenants and that community voices matter.”
Residents say that they hope this outcome sends a clear message to developers to respect existing legal constraints and engage meaningfully with communities, while appealing for donations to their online fundraiser.
PAID ADS: To advertise your services or products to our 10,000 weekday visitors to the site, as featured on Google News Showcase, email us inside.croydon@btinternet.com for our unbeatable ad rates
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
What happens if the developers appeal this decision? If these residents now face financial ruin because of the huge costs of running the case, how will they fight that? Shame you can’t live on this lovely road unless you can afford a big house – apart from all the HMOs they have of course. Good job
Sooooo, they’ve left themselves out of pocket and now there is a an abandoned building site on my road. Slow round of applause………
Hahaha 🤣 explain the win part? Out of pocket & space for god knows what to be built now… congratulations to you all
Astounded by the comments above, were they written by the chancer developers?
Surely the rule of law should be upheld especially when parties act inappropriately because they think others can’t afford to protect their own rights against their avarice.
Yes indeed the residents did win against the developers but once more the courts are essentially only available to those that can afford the process, this has to change especially when it comes to such basic issues like upholding long standing planning terms. Presumably with the demolished house they can build another single floor dwelling and go where they came from.
Haha sorry but haha. The only winners in all these cases are the barristers. One question, who turns down more money than their property is worth cause they really want to save the area that is being filled with flats everywhere? You must all love the Norwood life. Left it 10 years ago & never looked back but good on you. 😬