Notting Hill resident Dr Michael Young has been put through two-and-a-half years of hell fighting a planning enforcement notice issued by RBKC council against a wooden terrace screen that its senior officers had already approved. Here, The Citizen gives volume to his voice.
‘For a quarter of a decade, RBKC’s Planning and Place division pursued enforcement action against me over a timber screen on my property. Their own files – and later the Planning Inspectorate – confirmed it was approved. Not once. Three times. In 2019, 2022, and 2023, they signed off. Then, in January 2024, they ordered me to tear it down. You do not need a planning degree to read your own files. You just need to read them.
The Inspector said the notice should never have been issued. The Council says they now “accept the decision” of the Inspector and will now close the file. But they do not apologise. They do not admit they were wrong. The Inspector found the breach never existed. You cannot have a different interpretation of something that was never there.
Even a week before the Inspector ruled, a senior planning officer sent an email – accidentally copied to me – insisting his concerns over the screen had been “proved correct.” The email was addressed to the Director of Planning and Place. She said nothing. That email is a window into how the Council thinks: certain they are right, even when they are wrong.
The Council’s mistake cost me nearly £10,000. Do you know what I could have bought with that money? A wheelchair for my father. He has dementia. He cannot walk. That money could have given him dignity, mobility, a bit of freedom. Instead, it went to lawyers, architects and planning consultants – defending my home against a notice the Council should never have issued. The Council sees a file to close. I see my father’s mobility taken away from him.
When I asked for disclosure under FOI, they refused. The ICO forced them. They sent me my own emails. No internal records. No notes. Just my words, returned. I am starting to think there were no files. Just “vibes”.
The Council signs off every email with “Our Values – Putting Communities First, Respect, Integrity, Working Together.” Let me translate. Putting Communities First? They chased me for years over a screen they had already approved. Respect? They refused to apologise. Integrity? They sent me my own emails as “disclosure.” Working Together? They refused every meeting. Those four values are not a promise. They are a punchline.
If the Council can spend so long chasing a screen that their own files showed was approved three times, what else are they getting wrong? A screen is simple. Planning is hard. But if you cannot get the simple things right, you should not get to be trusted with the hard things.
The Council has a choice. Admit they were wrong. Reimburse my costs. Or keep stonewalling. One choice shows accountability. The other shows they have learned nothing. I am ready to talk. The only question is whether they are ready to listen – to be honest with themselves, and with the residents of Kensington and Chelsea.’
© Dr Michael Young
A spokesperson for Kensington and Chelsea Council 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.”
