CRAYS HILL: £2m bill to evict gipsies
MORE than £1million of taxpayers' cash has been spent in court fees fighting travellers at Britain's biggest illegal camp site.
And the bill to Joe Public will reach more than £2.3million if and when an eviction goes ahead.
The shocking revelation came as Basildon council leader Malcolm Buckley announced the authority would not be defending a legal challenge by gipsies at Dale Farm, Crays Hill, over its controversial log-cabin community centre – which was built without planning permission – because of escalating costs.
Instead, council chiefs will wait for a Court of Appeal hearing in December when a final decision will be made over a potential eviction of both Dale Farm and the Hovefields site in Wickford.
Cllr Buckley told the Gazette: "Following the Court of Appeal hearing we expect to be in a position to press ahead with the eviction anyway.
"It would cost a substantial five-figure sum to fight this in court and we can't justify spending more of taxpayers' cash, especially when we may be able to remove the cabin soon depending on the outcome of the Court of Appeal hearing."
Travellers had sought another judicial review to challenge the council's decision to remove the £12,000 cabin, which was controversially funded by Essex County Council's Youth Opportunity and Youth Capital Funds, and then built on Green Belt land without planning permission back in May.
The legal wrangle is on top of Basildon council's appeal hearing, set for December, which challenges the High Court ruling in May that decided travellers could stay as the council's decision in December 2007 had not taken into account their welfare or the fact they would be made homeless.
However, Mr Justice Collins admitted that 86 traveller families at Dale Farm and 15 at Hovefields could not stay for ever.
Cllr Buckley said: "The total pot will reach in excess of £2.3million, but you can't put a price on maintaining the law.
"So far as we're concerned, we wish we didn't have to spend so much money, but we have no choice. If we didn't challenge the travellers, then it would signal a free for all for everybody and we don't want unchecked developments going up anywhere in the district.
"When you think what this money could do, say for example improving the environment in Billericay and Wickford high streets, it could make a dramatic impact."
But speaking in response to the council's decision not to defend the judicial review, lead spokesman for the travellers Grattan Puxon said: "This is a curious legal situation because our solicitor's opinion is that the council can't withdraw in this way. Its decision to remove the community centre still stands, it has only been suspended, so the judicial review will go ahead and the council will also face costs."







3 Comments
by shelly, southend
Tuesday, November 04 2008, 6:16PM
“If anyone wants to extend their home or live on the green belt, then do so, what is good for one is for the other. If you are taken to court, then use this illegal and ignired site as an example.
My question woudl have to be, how was this site alowed to become so huge before any action was taken. Gypsies that parked at Shoebury were moved in days, so how come this development was allowed to become so big before anyone started to complain.
We only want fairness, if they apply for planning permission and get it legally, then fine, I wish them luck. If not, the laws that apply to me must also apply to them.”
by Bonzer, Billericay
Wednesday, October 29 2008, 9:13AM
“Mr Buckley feels he's accountable,Mr Puxon,in his cavalier use of legal aid grants from the public purse does not.
Mr Puxon and his lawyers have still to present and win their case before costs are awarded.
What is their case ?
Have they applied for planning consent and been refused ?
Is the enforcement action disproportionate ?
Do the Equality and Human Rights Commission want another chance to posture in the High Court ?
Or is this just another piece of attention-grabbing propaganda that Mr Buckley and his colleagues should have anticipated and then delayed making an enforcement decision ?
No prizes for right answers !”
by Russ, Basildon
Wednesday, October 29 2008, 8:57AM
“It seems to me that yet again the law is being very one dimentional on the side of the travellers if it was me being evicted from my house via the council and I went to court and lost then I would be responsible for the costs, correct me if I am wrong but it looks like in this time of economic crisis and credit slump it pays to buy a caravan and do exactly as I please.I do not have anything against the honest travellers but most of the time they flirt with laws and get away with it especially when it comes to taxes and land rights.
I know this will probably cost me more money in the long run when do the good people of this country get any breaks .”