We were in the way..................

Police and harassment warning .......... We had been advised by our solicitors to log each and every incident of harassment, as by doing so it would form a larger picture of what was actually taking place, as harassment is a course of conduct.    Our smallholding is quite isolated with no-one to witness what was taking place, so I decided to keep diaries as well as a log of all incidents.  I recorded the date we reported incidents to the police, which officers visited, when they visited, what was said and the outcomes. It became a regular feature in my life as there were incidents almost each and every day from name calling, filming us on our way in and out, friends being intimidated when visiting, deliberately jamming the gates making it impossible to come in, common assaults, criminal damage to our property, and so on....

Given that the Thomases had already abused and threatened two families before us, due to them making complaints about the unauthorised industrial activities, and forced them out due to threats, and were now repeating this same behaviour towards us, it was pretty shocking and deeply troubling that the local police appeared to be taking a side - that of our neighbours, in much the same way as Carmarthen council officers.

The police keep records of all incidents logged with them and these are called 'storm reports'.  At the time of my first formal warning for harassment of my neighbours in March 2005 - we had logged twelve incidents including the Thomases following Eddie to work - taking his picture and being abusive to him.  When the police visited us the evening of the day the Thomases had followed Eddie to work, I thought they were going to inform us that they had warned the Thomases to leave us alone.   That didn't happen - instead, unbelievably, I was warned under the Harassment Act.  It came as a bolt out of the blue, and very frightening, as I knew instinctively that for the police to warn me for harassment was very wrong as not only had we logged several incidents of daily harassment - the neighbours had not logged one!  They hadn't logged any incidents simply because we had not participated in any behaviour that would have warranted any form of allegation to the police.  So why was I being warned under the harassment act and for what?.  I asked the officer what was I being warned for.  He mumbled something about 'filming.'  He clearly didn't have a clue what he was warning me for.  He had just been told to do it!! I later found out that the filming he had referred to was the filming I had carried for the council of the numbers of HGVs being run in and out of Blaenpant proving that a haulage business was indeed operating.

The countless incidents of horrendous intimidation we had suffered were ignored by the police, much in the same way as the countless complaints from many locals and ourselves regarding the Thomases unauthorised activities, were ignored by Carmarthen Council.  They were acting against us in identical fashion.

My prosecution for the assault which took place in July 2005, was to be heard in February 2006.

The disruption to our quality of life continued with another planning application in 2005 for conversion of a cowshed into the 'farm office'.  The portacabin which had acted as the haulage business's office obviously wasn't suitable any longer as the haulage business was expanding. The incessant noise from quarrying which so was debilitating continued with rock constantly being loaded onto lorries and taken off - probably to be sold - or given away???   This was to make way for more sheds and to create space for the haulage lorries and related activities.  Our life here was untenable.

Second harassment warning.....

Prior to my court appearance, I was given a second warning under the harassment act.  I had objected to the council over the unauthorised removal of asbestos from the neighbouring building and was told to provide evidence.  I took a photograph to show to the Environment Agency and for my trouble came this second warning for harassment. How could this be when I had been asked for this evidence?

Again - it is odd the police should warn me again, as the neighbours had not logged one official complaint, they had simply told a local police officer I had taken a picture of the removal of asbestos.   Harassment is a course of conduct - not one incident simply mentioned to a police officer.  This was feeling like a witchhunt and was most convenient for the local CPS because as I was now being subjected to pretrial court appearances (three of them) the local CPS could now rely on the two warnings for harassment to thoroughly discredit me.  This didn't bode well for me. I was acutely aware there was something terribly sinister in what was taking place.  A local journalist who had been following my case voiced his own personal concerns to me that something was very wrong here!

The harassment and intimidation towards us and now our friends continued without intervention from the police. Friends were now being filmed by Karen Thomas when visiting - Eddie had been assaulted by Andrew Thomas in the right of way (on CCTV) reported to the police - my support lady from Victim Support was also filmed and menacingly stared at when visiting me and had written a letter saying she felt too intimidated to visit me anymore at home  - reported to the police - Andrew Thomas had tried to run us off the road in one of his HGVs - reported to the police - Andrew Thomas had paid a visit to Eddie's place of work demanding information on him and been abusive to one of the company's employees - Karen Thomas had rung Eddie's office and was abusive to staff - all reported to the police.  The Thomases would sing 'Two little boys had two little toys' ' every time Eddie left home and every evening arriving home (he looks a little like Rolf Harris) We were whistled at - clapped at - sworn at - still no intervention by the police and still no incidents logged by the neighbours against us.  By the time of the court hearing on February 06, the neighbours had not logged any incidents against us.  By comparison, we had now logged too many to mention.

There was something very wrong with how the police were behaving towards us.  Their conduct was so similar to that of Carmarthen Council's one could be forgiven for believing they were one and the same organisation.  The constant blaming of us - the constant denials the Thomases were at fault in any way.  No action was taken against them for criminal activities by the police nor breaches of planning regulations by the council.    We were in the way!!

7th. February 2006   Court Hearing...................

The evidence from the Thomases was totally contradictory with many discrepancies.  It was surprising that the case brought, but I knew why this was happening.  I believed the whole case was about discrediting me on behalf of the council.  I knew too much and was making waves that were uncomfortable. I knew I was going to be found guilty after all this was the plan. I was prepared for that outcome.  I immediately asked my solicitor to lodge an appeal...............

My solicitor was called over by the CPS solicitor who was prosecuting and informed him to advise me that if I appealed he would bring further charges against me. I was stunned.  I knew he had no evidence to bring any further charges against me as no allegations had been made to the police. I asked what charges he would be bringing. 

Charges of harassment were going to be next!  This was very interesting as again official reports to the police had to be registered and acknowledged as a course of conduct to enable any charges to be brought against someone.  This wasn't the case here as no accusations had been made - at all!   I advised my solicitor I wouldn't be blackmailed by a CPS solicitor into accepting the charge of assault and I wished for him to continue with my appeal.  I received a phone call that same evening from my solicitor advising me to drop my appeal. I was shocked that my solicitor was accepting of this form of blackmail.  I advised him that I found this to be extraordinary and I most certainly wished for him to take my instructions and continue with my appeal.   Lo and behold I received a letter from my solicitor two days later, again, advising me to 'horsetrade'. 'Drop my appeal and the CPS will not pursue me for harassment'.

Well well....something is terribly amiss.  I will appeal and the CPS will just have to bring those charges of harassment against me, won't they!

Trapped....no chance of being able to sell

Trapped..........................no chance of being able to sell

SSSI/SAC - The adjacent property when we moved here.

October 2005.......We were living adjacent to an unauthorised haulage yard - an unauthorised equine business - an unauthorised shed which towers over our small cottage - pigs situated under our bedroom window - a board blocking our window (E. Bowen named it our neighbours privacy board) - a very large blue removal lorry parked across our windows - more scrap vehicles next to our gate - a drainage pipe directing rainwater onto our garden area - two boarded over gates blocking our right of way - the welsh flag hanging over it - and now a floodlight (on all night) directed straight into our bedroom window illuminating it with a horrid orange glow.  As well as this we were being bullied and intimidated on a daily basis.

Floodlight directed at our bedroom window.

 It would be serious enough if we had been the first to complain to Carmarthen Council about the disturbances from these industrial businesses, but we weren't.  This Council - E. Bowen - Brian Canning - and many others, including the Chief Executive Mark James,  all knew that others had complained about the disturbances, and had been driven out.  They knew exactly what was to befall us, when we too were to complain to them.  

The big question was always - why was this authorities Head of Planning/Enforcement allowing these people to run businesses without any planning consents and changes of use.   I would call this corrupt practice and it was affecting every day of our lives affecting our quality of life and the value of our home. 

Code of Conduct...
  
13.0   Corruption

13.1   Employees must be aware that it is a serious criminal offence for them corruptly to receive or give any gift, loan, fee, reward or advantage for doing, or not doing anything or showing favour, or disfavour, to any person in their official capacity.  Allegations of this nature will be investigated/dealt with in accordance with the council's disciplinary procedure.

'Favour'  As Carmarthen Council's Head of Planning/Enforcement was allowing certain individuals to run businesses without planning consents and changes of use, plus turning a blind eye to payment of business rates - this would be deemed giving 'favour'.  He was also allowing an industrial unit to retain 'agricultural rights' which allowed further unauthorised activities to flourish when applying for further sheds - quarrying etc. etc. etc. These applications and activities would not have been given consents under 'equine use' and as for the 'industrial use' - that would have been refused by the planning committee and would not have been taking place at all.


November 2005........Where are the horses??

The horses that had been living on the adjacent land to ours were gone.   I was soon to find out where they were, and the true purpose for the gigantic shed that now loomed over us.   The planning application for this shed was for 'storage of agricultural implements hay and tractor store'.  Why was the tractor always parked on their front yard, and as they didn't keep hay, the application for this shed clearly wasn't the true reason for needing it.  This shed was a giant stable for the quine business.  This is where the horses were kept for the winter months.   In planning terms, this is 'unauthorised use' as there was no application for the keeping of equines in the shed, and there should have been.

There are many other horsey people who run livery yards and who breed and sell horses who would have given their right arm to be given the favours bestowed upon these hauliers and horse breeders by Carmarthen Council's Head of Planning E. Bowen; as they had been allowed to avoid planning permissions - changes of use - allowed to keep agricultural rights, that under normal circumstances only bone fide farmers are allowed, and business rates that should have been paid to the council for both businesses were also ignored.   WOW.

It would have been obvious to most, that the many horses bred at Blaenpant would need to be kept elsewhere for the winter months, as the Special Area of Conservation they had been kept on over the past four years was severely overgrazed and needed to be rested.  Blaenpant did boast other land on higher ground, but as it was extremely boggy and literally covered in rushes, it was not ideal for horses as there was very little grass.  (I was told over many years by E. Bowen, the agricultural activity at Blaenpant was cropping of hay). This was to excuse 'agricultural rights'.   Ummmm - where would the hay cropping have taken place?  Certainly not at Blaenpant: the only fields apart from the SAC were the fields smothered in rushes.  Unless horses have taken to eating rush there was no hay cropping on this unit.  More dishonesty; all very troubling to me as this is far removed from conduct one should expect from the local authority.

I decided to point out to Mr. Eifion Bowen that if he was to exercise his role as Head of Planning and Enforcement he should take heed that the gigantic shed was being used for the equine business not as per the planning application; it required change of use to 'equine'.   It didn't much bother us that horses were being over wintered in the shed, but it was deeply concerning that the Head of Planning Carmarthen Council was ignoring his own statutory duties and allowing more dishonest practices to carry on without control.  It was quite obvious he was giving the neighbours 'favour'.  This didn't bode well for our well being nor our own property investment.  My concern was - where will this giving 'favour'  to these hauliers end, and what effect was it going to have on our property and our quality of life living here. 

Mr. Bowen Head of Planning/Enforcement carried out a site visit to the unauthorised haulage yard, and later was to write and tell me that there was no sign of horses in the sheds.  I was making 'unfounded allegations'.  Really.........

Could these be the horses in the shed???????????

These blatant lies are disgraceful when coming from ones local authority and should never be tolerated.  They should be exposed by politicians from all parties.

This shed was just the beginning

Officers Code of Conduct.

2.1 Planning is not an exact science. Rather, it relies on informed judgement within a firm policy context. It is also highly contentious because its decisions affect the daily lives of everyone and the private interests of individuals, landowners and developers. This is heightened by the openness of the system (it actively invites public opinion before taking decisions) and the legal nature of development plans and decision notices. It is important, therefore, that the process is characterised by open and transparent decision making. 2.2 One of the key purposes of the planning system is to control development in the public interest. In performing this role, planning necessarily affects land and property interests, particularly the financial value of landholdings and the quality of their settings. It is important, therefore, that planning authorities should make planning decisions affecting these interests, openly, impartially, with sound judgement and for justifiable reasons. The process should leave no grounds for suggesting with any justification that a decision has been partial, biased or not well-founded in any way. 2.3 The purpose of this code is to set out clearly the way in which the authority will deal with planning applications. The code applies to both Councillors and Officers.

Everything that has been allowed over the many years, at the adjacent property, flies in the face of this Code.

People can find planning problems a bore - it ceases to become a bore when it affects every aspect of ones life.

No planning no change of use.....................

Industrial business - no planning.

Living adjacent to a haulage business was not a choice of our making.  Had we known through our searches this business had been approved by the Council and licensed to operate from an agricultural unit, we would not have purchased this smallholding.  This wasn't the case though.  This industrial business was not operating within the planning laws and the Head of Planning had no intention of following correct procedures. Two families who had previously owned our property had complained to the Council about this industrial business operating without planning consents, and due to suffering extremely serious intimidation from the hauliers, had beeen forced into moving away.  Astoundingly, Carmarthen Council had not heeded the evidence nor did they monitor this unit.   They refused to accept from anyone that this industrial business was operating.  The hauliers had moved into Blaenpant in mid 2001 and within two and a half years had forced two families out of the property we had just moved into.   We were now facing the same bullying and intimidation that others had found too much to bear, but had been able to escape from.  We weren't so lucky.  The person that sold to us should have informed us, but due to the intimidation, she was desperate to escape from here. 

(The Chief Executive Mark James told me at a meeting recently (2016) that my seller should have told us that this haulage business was operating from Blaenpant.  He blames her!  The Council are totally responsible for failing in their statutory duty to apply proper procedures within the planning regulations).


Carmarthen Council were undeniably responsible for the shameful situation that had befallen three families due to their deliberate negligence in not inviting planning consents and changes of use for two businesses that required both.  The utter disgraceful conduct of the hauliers towards those that dared complain to the council was also the responsibility of the council as the council compounded an already bad situation into one that was far worse.  To lie to all and sundry about the very existence of this business gave the hauliers the belief that they had the right to threaten and abuse all those who were opposing their use of the holding. 

Every complaint made about the neighbours activities, whether it was quarrying - vehicle maintenance - power hosing of HGVs - cutting of scrap - welding etc., was denied by E. Bowen Head of Planning, and this fed into their conviction that they had the right to abuse those who opposed what they were doing.

It is the sole responsibility of Councils to ensure panning regulations are abided by, and had they followed procedure, no-one would have suffered at the hands of these people.
We were advised by Mr. Canning (Enforcement Manager) that Councils rely on members of the public alerting them to planning abuses, but in the case of Blaenpant, officers who should have been taking action, refused to be honest about the very existence of such businesses. As the Public Service Ombudsman Peter Tyndal said,  "Anybody seeing that evidence would have realised that there was a strong case for action. The difficulty with these things is that if you don't tackle them early they have a tendency not to go away but to get worse.  If enforcement had happened then the subject matter of much of the dispute wouldn't have existed and the likelihood is that the extremely vitriolic nature of the neighbour dispute wouldn't have been as it was".   He was absolutely right!

Carmarthen Council are solely to blame for the abuse we were now being exposed to.
The two piglets who were now living within a couple of meters of our bedroom had been given names - our names.   At 6 a.m. each and every morning Karen Thomas would encourage excited squeels and grunts from them by shaking a bucket of breakfast feed as she walked down to the bottom of the paddock to their pen, which was directly outside our bedroom window.  If we weren't awoken by their drivers arriving to begin their day, Karen Thomas would make sure her pigs would wake us. 



 












As always Karen Thomas would verbalise her views on both Eddie and Trisha exceedingly loudly with the two pigs.   Apart from the usual derogatory comments being aimed at 'Trisha' every morning about her eating habits, her grunts, her needing beauty sleep, and much more, on this particular day (following Karen Thomas's assault upon me), the piglet was spoken to in a more sinister tone.  This is part of the dialogue Karen Thomas imparted to me via her piglet........."you are a very naughty girl trish - I'm going to teach you a little lesson - you're going to have such a shock -  silly little pigs - Eddie, trish has had such a bang on her nose -  that's what happens to silly pigs trish, when they go poking their nose where it's not supposed to be poked - play with fire  you'll get burned- just don't go poking your nose into business that doesn't concern you trish - if you keep out of our business you won't get hurt - that's what happens to naughty girls when they poke their noses into where it's not supposed to be poked, they get hurt silly little pig........and on it went.     The police showed no concern, and I was still left facing a charge of assault.

August 05

The abuse of us continued on a regular basis  and changed the course of our lives.  With no support from the police, nor the Council's anti social behaviour department, we installed a small CCTV camera at the top of our driveway as protection and we carried our camcorder with us at all times. This is all we had.

Drainage pipes came next.  These were laid across the neighbours paddock and of course directed onto the rear of our property instead of onto our fields, causing flooding to the area at the back of our cottage.

Drainage pipes to flood our garden area

Eifion Bowen - Head of Planning chatting to Andrew Thomas at the top of our right of way.

 September 05

The pigs were very lively and made a lot of noise especially at 6. a.m. in the mornings at feed time when Karen would deliberately cause a frenzy. The pigs weren't punishment enough though.
The Thomases erected a board on top of the fence in front of our bedroom window blocking out our view completely.  We couldn't see the piglets any more, but we could still hear them.  I did complain to E. Bowen (Head of Planning) who decided the Thomases needed privacy when visiting their two pigs.  He did admit it required planning permission as it exceeded the height of six foot, but said that it was a privacy board and was not in the public interest to enforce against it.  So it stayed for years along with the large blue removal lorry.

Eifion Bowen decided this monstrosity could remain without planning permission.

Eifion Bowen (Head of Planning) was to decide an awful lot of developments and activities at Blaenpant wouldn't require planning permissions, which included of course no planning permissions nor change of use for an industrial business along with an equine business.

Another gate was installed on the right of way and both gates were now heavily boarded over, having the effect of blocking our exit and totally obscuring us from view of the main road.   The psychological impact was very damaging to us.  These gates signalled the end of our freedom to come and go untroubled.  Every day we endured stress from the visual aspect of all around us to the feeling of complete hopelessness at being imprisoned, unable to escape from it.  The gates were shut at all times. When we drove out we would not close the gates as they served no purpose other than to cause us severe anxiety, but they would be shut immediately. The gates and the right of way became the Thomases playground. 

More scrap was eventually parked next to our gate and more mind games were played out on us. Carmarthen Council's Head of Planning continued to deny there was any evidence of a haulage business nor indeed an equine business.  We along with others who had supplied evidence were clearly living in the land of fantasy.

At my meeting with the chief Executive Mark James in 2016, he conceded without prompting, that my neighbours were vile despicable people.  Strange he should be saying this now, when for all previous years he informed all and sundry that this was 'a neighbour dispute'.  

June 05 .................... Intimidation becomes more threatening.......

 
The intimidation was getting worse and taking on a physical side. We were now constantly being waylaid as we went out and came back home.  Friends visiting were also subjected to the Thomases unwelcome presence as they had to stop to open the gate.  Karen Thomas was spending a lot of time in the right of way area and was now constantly either filming us or taking pictures over our gate. She was also videoing anyone arriving to visit as they drove down the right of way.   Our local farmer had been threatened.  He had been told not to cut our fields and three of his tyres on his land rover had been cut.

Due to the local police not giving us any support we had turned to the media.  We had also made contact with an ex police officer for guidance and advice.

July 05

Our friendly farmer had come again to turn the hay.  He stayed and had a cup of tea with me, and  asked if I would open the gate the Thomases had erected at the top of our right of way as the lane  was now too narrow for him to get out of his tractor.  I had gone ahead of him and opened the gate.  As he drove out Karen Thomas was waiting for him in order to take pictures of him.

I began walking back down the right of way when I was aware Karen Thomas was following down behind me.  I then felt a huge push into my shoulder which knocked me into the metal crash barriers.  As I recovered she was standing in front of me blocking my way.  Her very threatening body language, hands on hips, was shocking.  She refused to move out of my way. When I asked her to move out of my way and never to do that to me again her response was "what are you going to do about it".  I naturally felt very threatened and scared by her as there was no-one else around  - I was totally alone again, and I knew the police would say there were no witnesses.  I was awaiting a hip operation at the time and this was appalling behaviour to be assaulted in this way, and clearly the nature of the intimidation had taken on a different tone.  She warned me to stay out of her business, then stepped aside and allowed me to walk down to my gate.  I reported this to the police but as I expected I was told 'it's your word against hers'.   Again, if the police had asked to view her CCTV cameras they would have seen exactly what had occurred, but they declined my suggestion.

Eddie was constantly being confronted in the right of way as he left for work, as he stopped to open the top gate - a gate which had been installed to make life difficult for us.  One particular morning as Eddie was walking back to his car after opening the gate to drive out, the neighbour was as usual in the right of way and deliberately barged into him knocking him into his car.  This behaviour was completely alien to us.  As we didn't have any security, but did have a camcorder, I took to filming Eddie driving out each morning.  In the evening, he would stop and telephone me when he was close to home, and again I would film him driving back in. What had our lives become?   This camera was thus far our only witness, but would hopefully deter the neighbours from these physical threats in our right of way.  We had no other way out of our property and this couldn't go on.

Wherever we were on our property the neighbours would make their presence felt.  Whether we were working in our garden - tending to our horse - mucking out stables  - playing with our four dogs etc. we would be whistled at or called out to.  Karen Thomas would frequently be leaning over our gate, watching us over the boundary hedges, or sitting on the bank behind their newly erected shed.  We were followed around wherever we went.  I was feeling a prisoner in my own home as I was becoming more nervous and anxious whenever I had to go outside.  I wasn't enjoying the garden any more nor was I wanting to go down to the stables. Our lives were no longer pleasurable.

Beer bottles and beer cans were now appearing on our fields along with old knuckle bones.  Sheep skulls were hung on branches of trees around our boundary.  We felt impotent and at our neighbours mercy. I had begun to believe there was some other reason the police were not giving us any support.  Having made contact with a barrister and a race relations director in Cardiff they both confirmed the police should have been doing more to help us, especially as there was a history of aggressive and threatening behaviour towards others before us.   We were becoming desperate for help.

Andrew Thomas had taken to tailgating us as we drove out, and on this day drove his HGV within feet of our small car.  I was terrified.  We felt compelled to drive faster and faster to get away from him.  It was the wrong thing to do but when feeling under such threat knowing we had no support from anyone, flight instinct takes over.  The first chance we had, we swerved off the road, at speed, and let him drive past us.   His conduct was menacing, and of course again, we reported it to the police.  The police said they were logging these incidents but no action as yet could be taken because it was our word against theirs.  This was the theme.  When we spoke to our kindly ex police officer over these matters he was adamant that this was wrong.  He said the police do not require witnesses when there is a clear pattern of behaviour and should have been at the very least warning the neighbours.   I had always believed the police protected people against this kind of dangerous behaviour, but in our case they weren't.  The feeling of isolation just kept growing.

Our lives were a total misery and we were suffering in the same way as the two families before us had suffered.  Not only were we now abused on a regular basis but we were still having to contend with the noise from industrial machinery, maintenance on HGVs, horrendous noise from the constant quarrying and the many other disturbances to our quality of life.  It was obvious that Blaenpant was being developed for an ever expanding industrial business - with zero planning permissions and we were suffering the consequences of it.  
We had by now logged a long list of incidents with the police but still no intervention nor help from them, even though they were aware of the nature of the neighbours and their intimidation and threats to others.   Carmarthen Council were continuing to deny the existence of the obvious haulage business and the many other industrial operations from a site within meters of our home, even though there was an abundance of evidence to warrant enforcement and most certainly applications for change of use to industrial.  It appeared that the neighbours had the support of all local authorities and we had none.  It certainly felt that way and was a very lonely place to be in.   Our plans had to be put on hold and our future was exceedingly bleak. We had no chance of getting away from this nightmare situation.


July 05
 
It was a Sunday and I had driven to the post box which was about a quarter of a mile away to post letters.  As I was returning the neighbours drove past me in the opposite direction. Karen Thomas gesticulated at me from the passenger seat, but I was relieved at least I didn't have to contend with name calling as I entered my home.  I had no longer opened the gate at the top of our right of way, than the neighbours were driving back down towards me.  They had followed me back home.  I was taunted and then assaulted for a second time.  Statements were taken and eventually I was the one arrested and charged with assault.  Yet again the police chose not to view the Thomases CCTV which would have shown the entire incident and shown Karen Thomas assaulting me.  This was seriously wrong, and only added to my belief that the police were acting against us and were for some reason reluctant to take any form of action against our neighbours.  This became the scariest time of my life.   Carmarthen Council were doubtlessly responsible for the nightmare that was now our life. Due to their unwillingness to follow correct planning procedures which was allowing an industrial business to flourish unimpeded, and their denial to everyone who asked questions, that there was no such business operating, they were encouraging aggressive and threatening behaviour towards anyone who was aggrieved by it.  The violent nature of the neighbours towards us should have caused concern to the Chief Executive of this authority.  The TV documentary alone should have seen the end of our nightmare as the truth was shown.   The question still remains today - what was - and still is, the relationship between someone employed by Carmarthen Council and these people, that has caused so many people to have suffered at their hands.

It was imperative now that we install some sort of camera at the top of our driveway as witness to the shocking behaviour of the Thomases, ignored by both the local police and Carmarthen Council. 

Due to my continued complaints to Carmarthen Council about the disturbance to our lives caused by this industrial site I was advised to write to the Ombudsman. I wrote to the Ombudsman but it is no easy task to put together a complaint to the PSOW.  I believed it was enough to simply outline a general complaint.  It is not, and due to my naivety in not putting together enough information, my complaint wasn't investigated.  This is somewhat different to a complaint being investigated and not upheld.  However it is usual it seems that Carmarthen Council play on the fact that a complaint not being investigated somehow exonerates them from any wrongdoing and use it as a weapon against you for ever more when putting in further complaints to them.  The Ombudsman has recently said "the fact a complaint has not been investigated does not mean you didn't have a justified complaint, it just means it didn't warrant resources being spent".  Carmarthen Council need to understand that.

The neighbours had by now received a letter from the council advising them to remove the huge blue lorry away from our cottage, but a few weeks later after the Thomases had refused to move it, the Council took the view this was an agricultural storage unit for a few bales of hay.  It seemed irrelevant that they had just built a huge shed which now towered over us, for the storage of hay.

End of July......We were awoken this sunny morning to the noise from a JCB within inches of our bedroom window.  Our small cottage vibrated from this industrial monster of a machine.  It was removing all of the grass around the area we looked out onto.  We were fearful of what was coming next!   Metal fencing panels arrived a few days later together with an old container and another smaller structure that appeared to be the rear of a small pick-up.  We were left with a sinking sickening feeling.  The neighbours had more plans for us.  Something was going to arrive - but what?   How do you describe the worry and the feeling of being constantly under threat with no-one to help or care?   Bullying of any kind should not be acceptable to either the police nor the local authority, but when it is directly related to the council's negligence, it becomes somewhat sinister.

 

August 05
 
Another week went by and still nothing had appeared under our windows.  We had been shopping, and as always we had a feeling of foreboding upon our return, as we never knew what we were going to be facing.  We were now to discover what the removal of grass - the metal fencing panels - the rusty old container was for.  We were now sleeping within feet of a couple of piglets.  I was also soon to discover the names Karen Thomas had chosen for them....

An abundance of evidence..............


June 2005............Carmarthen Council had ample evidence on which to take enforcement action against an unauthorised haulage business operating without planning consents. They also had an abundance of evidence of aggressive and threatening conduct from the hauliers towards others to warrant serious concern for our welfare.

From the first phone call I made to the Enforcement Manager following the revelations from the two Council officers who first visited me in early 2004 that there had been a history of problems between these two properties, it was the responsibility of this Council to ensure I was not going to be intimidated and abused simply for making my conerns known to them. 
 
From 2001 Carmarthen Council had been in receipt of photos and logs from a previous owner of our property together with several letters detailing the nature of the unauthorised uses at Blaenpant, which included maintenance of HGVs - quarrying - removal of rock in lorry loads from the unit - power hosing etc.  CCC had also been advised of intimidation and aggressive behaviour and threats being made by the hauliers that any further complaints from owners of our property would result in the right of way being changed to 'make life difficult'.  

CCC had received many letters from other local people in 2001/2/3 advising them that this haulage business was being operated from this property, seven days a week, including some from the Community Council. Another local resident had sent the Council a written log together with letters advising them of the unauthorised quarrying and that lorries carrying the rock were travelling down the road past his house.  Mark James, the newly appointed Chief Executive had also been requested to look into matters sometime in 2002.

My local councillor was impotent.  When asking questions of Eifion Bowen he was told the neighbours were agricultural, there was no evidence of unauthorised quarrying and no evidence of industrial activities.   He and everyone locally knew there was.  On one hand officers Brian Canning and Eifion Bowen were saying they didn't monitor outside office hours and yet at the meeting Eddie had with Brian Canning in May 2005 he suggested we keep a log of lorry movements and said quote   "make a note of when vehicles are there because you will find a pattern, these things are never random, we will then visit at the appropriate time whether 6.o clock in the morning or 2 o clock in the morning"  unquote.  I had suggested to Mr. Canning in 2004 that if he drove down the B4297 any evening or any weekend he would be able to evidence for himself the activities taking place.  He told me at the time, this wasn't possible as they do not work outside office hours, do not have the resources etc.  None of the excuses were credible and merely added to the belief that the hauliers were being given favours by Carmarthen Council's planning department to run this business without proper consents.

Unauthorised quarrying again  - unbearable noise.

There was no doubt left officers were wilfully allowing this industrial business to develop without planning and change of use, and were allowing industrial sheds to be built using agricultural rights where there was zero agriculture taking place. 

 

Oppressive Industrial shed built on raised ground.

Officers of Carmarthen Council were also ignoring the intimidation and threatening behaviour we were now facing, with Brian Canning and Eifion Bowen accusing us of making unfounded complaints and causing a 'neighbour dispute'.

Outside bedroom window - what's coming next?

Almost each and every day Eddie and I now faced the prospect of being waylaid by the neighbours within the confines of our right of way,  'your metal enclosure' as the neighbours liked to call it. We were also taunted whenever we went out and again on coming home.  Many a day I couldn't face going out as coming home was such an ordeal. 

We were followed out of our home and tailgated as part of the threatening behaviour we were now having to endure. Friends visiting would also be confronted as they stopped to open the gate at the top of the driveway, and Karen Thomas would sometimes take their photograph. 

We were on our own and needed help and so I had made contact with a retired senior police officer who had great sympathy for the ordeal we were now facing.  He offered us good sound advice when we were feeling at our lowest knowing we were not getting the support we should have had from our local police.  He advised us that the police could intervene using the Harassment Act to protect us from the escalating anti social behaviour.  Having asked for an officer to call us, WPC McWilliams from our local police station rang and advised us the Harassment Act could not be used in our case.  This was odd because according to a local person who had experienced a far lesser problem with a neighbour WPC McWilliams had used the Act in her case.  After speaking to an Inspector the local police officers were told that the Act could and should be used.  We were advised to log each incident with the police.

With excuses for our neighbours coming thick and fast from both the Council and the local police every time we sought their help, it was patently obvious we were not going to have any support or protection from them.  The harassment was being ignored by the police and the ongoing industrial operations were continuing to impact upon our quality of life and ignored by the Council.  I questioned our rights, did we have any?  I believed we had a right to peaceful enjoyment of our home.  It seemed not - certainly not as far as our neighbours and Carmarthen Council were concerned. 

Living as isolated as we were it was a very frightening prospect that the threatening nature of our neighbours was being ignored.   We decided to go ahead with the documentary as to publicly shed light on our impossible plight would give us a form of safeguard. 


16th. June 2005  Wales This Week documentary

Following this documentary which substantiated our complaints as being genuine and justified, I fully expected the Council to accept the horrendous position they had placed us in and offer us the support we deserved.    It was not to be  - Eifion Bowen made our situation even worse, if that was possible, by accusing me of doctoring film footage, and when the Minister from the Welsh Assembly wrote to him having seen the programme, he accused ITV of conspiring to doctor the footage also.  Yet again incredible accusations to cover up the truth.  

"You created this war, you've got war"!

Andrew and Karen Thomas declared war on us.  Carmarthen Council and the local police were fully aware that this conduct had been realised upon two former owners already and we were the third. The difference now is that due to the history of threats being reined down on several people and the right of way being a further weapon used against us, we were now trapped, and had zero prospect of being able to sell and move away from this nightmare.

Less than two weeks after the programme had been aired, our local farmer came to cut our fields as he had done the previous year.   As he entered through the newly erected gate, Karen Thomas stopped him to advise him in her way, not to cut our fields.  He told us what she had said and we made it easy for him to cancel our agreement if he chose to.  He did cut our fields but a few days later when visiting us, having left his landrover parked across the road from us, upon returning to his vehicle found three tyres had been cut.  We paid for these as we felt responsible.  Of course it was reported to the local police but as always and expected now, we were told as there were no witnesses no action could be taken.  This would be correct, except the neighbours had many CCTV cameras dotted around their property which the police could have insisted upon viewing if they were of a mind to, which would would have shown the perpetrator.  They chose not to.

Following this incident and previous incidents which were being ignored, I felt our decision to agree to the television documentary was a positive one.  We might have been in danger and the programme would in some way be a form of protection for us.  It wasn't coming from the authorities.  If two VOSA officers were put in fear by the neighbours it would be obvious we would be feeling that way too.

'No substance to any allegations of an unauthorised haulage business'.... fourteen months later.

Our punishment - new outlook from our windows

March 05..  the bank being built directly opposite us is causing much worry and stress


Preparations for the enormous shed were an added continuing disturbance to any peace for us.  The bank opposite our small cottage had more than doubled in height from it's original gentle slope. Surely the neighbours shed wasn't going to be erected at this newly created height. It would dwarf our cottage if this were to be the case.

April 05

By now I had written several letters to Eifion Bowen Head of Planning and Brian Canning Enforcement Manager.  My M.P. had also written further letters.  There had been site visits and a report issued by Eifion Bowen saying..............'there was no substance to the allegations'..........'no breach of planning control'.....'lorries were only intermittently parked at Blaenpant'....'maintenance was only occasional'.....'no evidence to pursue enforcement' ......'no evidence of quarrying'.....and so on.    With regard to the removal of the large blue lorry parked alongside our cottage - Eifion Bowen said ............'it is a temporary structure used in conjunction with agriculture and is used for storage of hay, therefore no breach of planning identified'.

Vehicle and Operators Services (VOSA) the agency who are responsible for operators licences and who ensure hauliers are abiding by the regulations had monitored the neighbouring property - unlike Carmarthen Council's Enforcement Department, and had evidenced for themselves that there were indeed several lorries being operated from this address without licence. They issued official reports stating this fact and included in their statements that they were 'abused, intimidated and threatened, and had to leave the premises as they were in fear of their safety', when carrying out their site visit.   This further evidence was sent to Carmarthen Council. 

Carmarthen Council had been informed of this haulage business since 2001 by several local people including two former owners of our property - and now us.  It was now conspicuously evident that someone or some ones, within Carmarthen council were allowing these people to continue without planning permissions and change of use.
 
A meeting was arranged with Mr. Canning and our representative from Country landowners, to discuss our ongoing problems in the hope he would finally accept the truth and get the council to take responsibility for the situation they had placed us in.

More quarrying

May 05

Meeting with Brian Canning.........There was only one defining aspect of this meeting with Mr. Canning (Enforcement Manager) which was Mr. Canning's inability to address any of the points made to him with any honesty,  blustering the entire way through the meeting.  He had mastered the technique of avoiding answering direct questions which had clearly been practised over many years as he was so adept in them.

Having had clear evidence presented to him from a reputable person that this haulage business (the subject of the meeting) was definitely not operating from it's official centre, taken together with years of evidence from many other sources that they were in fact operating from Blaenpant.....his response was this..........."what we have done, and Keith James who knows quarrying like the back of his hand, and he knows the heavy goods vehicle trade, he worked for Celtic Energy for twenty five years, and he knows what he is talking about when it comes to these things.  Now clearly, and I'm not quite sure what's being suggested here. Now we've set out in that letter as well we know and like anybody who knows and understands the lorry taxi operator and you own a taxi licence as I understand...". bumbling on and on.

Another example of how to deny an undeniable unauthorised haulage business was for Brian Canning to say this.........."obviously they can't have four five six or seven lorries parking there on a regular basis...... the fact that the lorry drivers turned up because it's her birthday or something is um.... its got to be a regular occurrence".  At this juncture Eddie pointed out that he'd just been shown photographs of large numbers of lorries parked every day over a period of months and had possession of video evidence showing lorries leaving in the mornings on a daily basis, plus evidence from two VOSA officers confirming several lorries were operating from the site.  Brian Canning's response was....."I know, I'm talking about in the future".  

This meeting proved beyond doubt that Carmarthen Council were going to allow the neighbours businesses to continue, unchallenged, irrespective of any evidence we put forward. Mr. Canning suggested we keep a log of numbers of HGVs over a period of months saying 'if you can show HGVs parked at Blaenpant on a regular basis the council would take a look at it'. He already had been shown and advised of an abundance of evidence. To suggest another log at this stage was insulting.

More old tyres for burning

It was clear the scene had been set. KBHS had the wink and nod from the council to continue with their unauthorised business and all the other noisy activities that went with it.  Carmarthen Council's planning department had firmly decided to turn a blind eye, which meant our quality of life had been reduced to living with permanent industrial noise, not being able to enjoy the pretty home we had bought, and the plans we had, were no longer.  We didn't want to be living adjacent to a noisy industrial site, one that was going to get bigger and in all probability even noisier. 

I wrote to the Mark James the Chief Executive explaining our difficulties asking him to look into why these two officers were blindly refusing to accept the truth, as the operations next door were undeniable and making our lives a perfect misery.  My letters to Mark James produced no comfort, only more distress as he blindly agreed with these two officers there was no evidence on which to take action.
  The industrial nature of the neighbours business was growing - the quarrying was ongoing - the maintenance on lorries was common place - the workshop was being used both Saturdays and Sundays for welding - power hosing added to it all. This was our life now, living adjacent to a noisy industrial site which the council knew about and were totally ignoring.

Shed being erected on artificially raised levels, higher than our chimney

More fires at night

We had support from Country Landowners who were as appalled as our solicitors were. Further letters were written on our behalf from those who were experts in planning matters asking why the council were not following procedure.  Every letter written had the same response, saying............'site visit confirmed there was no breach of planning'.......the neighbours were 'allowed one lorry but two would be a different matter'.   They were in fact using eight.

Knowing the neighbouring property was in a SSSI/SAC zone, (Special Area of conservation and Site of Scientific Interest) where special permissions have to be sought for any kind of development, was to cause more distress.  Every tree over one entire area was uprooted using a JCB and the small area of woodland running alongside our fields where Badgers were living, wasn't spared either as trees were pushed over to make way for containers, lorries and industrial equipment.

When purchasing this smallholding the landscape was important to us and played a huge part in helping us decide we wanted to be here, therefore it was exceedingly upsetting to witness aggressive and unnecessary destruction of an area of beauty.  The lack of concern from the council made it clear that our neighbours were immune from any controls, and their activities were going to continue.

Friends visiting were shocked at how we were being treated by our local authority and one friend in particular had contacted the media in the hope that exposure of our impossible situation would lead the council to accept their responsibilities and help restore normality back into our lives.

 The agricultural storage shed for tractor amd implements

A local person who was aware of our plight who had previously been a councillor, had also written to the Minister (Jane Davidson) as she too believed the council's attitude towards us was appalling.  The outcome of that letter was at least a little positive in that her department actually asked for evidence of what we perceived to be the failings of Planning and Enforcement and decided to keep a file on our case. The file was labelled 'a special case' and over the following two years I was to send to Jane Davidson's department much evidence of dishonest conduct from these departments.

Another blow to our plans - due to the much narrowed width of our right of way - Health and Safety had advised us that we could not go ahead with the cattery as we could not now comply with fire regulations, even though we had planning permission.

 
As the torment escalated we believed it could only be due to the support we had from others who were writing to the council on our behalf.   The right of way was now being used as a means of exploiting our vulnerability.  Ponies were now being taken out of the field and left to wander in our right of way.  In order to go out we now had to ask the neighbours if they would move them.  Vehicles would be parked across the top gate and left there, which meant we couldn't go out.  It was an impossible situation.  We felt trapped in a property that was no longer a pleasure to be living in - next to a growing industrial unit - being regularly tormented.  If the police weren't going to help us perhaps the council's own anti social behaviour department would, especially as they knew the neighbours had a history of threatening two other families before us.

The meeting with the council's anti social behaviour co-ordinator went well, she was very sympathetic and advised us that she would arrange a multi agency meeting.  I needed her to understand that our argument was not with my neighbours.  Carmarthen Council had created an untenable situation for us, and it was their responsibility to ensure we didn't have to live with the intimidation from the Thomases that was of their making.

Karen Thomas being a nuisance whilst Eddie was leaving for work.

A multi agency meeting had been held but disappointingly we weren't invited.  A letter duly arrived advising us that there was no evidence of antisocial behaviour, therefore no help was available to us.  I was to discover at a later date that the two officers who had met together and decided our fate were Eifion Bowen Head of Planning and Inspector Edwards.   Mr. Bowen officially ruled out anti social behaviour saying that the behaviour was more to do with planning matters, and Inspector Edwards (the same police officer who had denied the Thomases had followed Eddie to work against evidence they had) ruled that our complaints were 'petty, trivial and frivolous'.  

We were to receive no help from the Council and no help from the local police either.  Another green light to two people who had already shown aggressive and threatening behaviour to several people before we came to live here.  We needed help.  We were feeling very much under threat - and not just from the neighbours.

 ITV had made contact with us and like everybody, other than the council and the local police, were shocked at the lack of concern for our impossible situation.  They wanted to cover our story and I truly believed this would convince the council that they were in the wrong and that they would put an end to our nightmare.

Things don't improve....................