• About
    • Ethics policy
    • Privacy Policy
    • Ownership, funding and corrections
    • Complaints procedure
    • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact
  • Support
  • Newsletter
Brighton and Hove News
25 July, 2026
  • News
    • Politics
    • Business
    • Opinion
    • Community
  • Arts and Culture
    • Music
    • Theatre
    • Food and Drink
  • Sport
    • Brighton and Hove Albion
    • Cricket
  • Newsletter
  • Public notices
  • Advertise
No Result
View All Result
  • News
    • Politics
    • Business
    • Opinion
    • Community
  • Arts and Culture
    • Music
    • Theatre
    • Food and Drink
  • Sport
    • Brighton and Hove Albion
    • Cricket
  • Newsletter
  • Public notices
  • Advertise
No Result
View All Result
Brighton and Hove News
No Result
View All Result
Home Brighton

Landlord who gutted 16th century manor fined £82k

by Jo Wadsworth
Wednesday 17 Oct, 2018 at 8:11PM
A A
1
Landlord who gutted 16th century manor fined £82k

Ewhurst Manor

A Brighton landlord who “closed his eyes” to the need for planning permission before gutting a listed manor house has been fined tens of thousands of pounds.

Lars Vestergaard, who lives in Roedean Way, bought the 16th century, Grade II listed Ewhurst Manor for £3 million in 2014 and proceeded to rip out original features, including a stone fireplace, as well as walls, floors and beams.

The house was also underpinned, which involved pouring concrete into the ground below – itself a Grade I scheduled ancient monument dating from the reign of Edward I, when the first moated manor house was built there.

When officers from Horsham District Council were made aware of the work at the end of November last year, they visited what was by then the building site – but were denied entry by Mr Vestergaard even after showing him a warrant. And even after the visit, work continued on the house.

Prosecuting on behalf of the council and Historic England, Nicholas Maggs said: “By the time they were allowed inside, it was dark and it was difficult to see precisely what had been done, but there was no doubt that significant work had been undertaken.

“They were told the defendant was carrying out repairs and restoration, but it was clear that the work went significantly beyond that. A large section of the upper floor had been removed, plaster lathe wattle and daub had been torn out, part of the ground floor, walls and fireplaces removed.

Mr Vestergaard, a Danish non-dom, said his solicitors had told him the property was listed when he bought it, but that they didn’t explain what that meant, and so he sought advice from professionals.

He said his architect, Colin Midgley, told him “in this country we don’t ask [for permission]” – but he also said that Mr Midgley had told him not to let anyone from the council onto the site if they turned up.

In a bizarre twist, it was also revealed that Mr Midgley had been the council’s informant.

Mr Vestergaard also said that a structural engineer he only knew as Tom who worked for a unnamed Brighton-based engineering firm which has since gone bust told him that in the UK you don’t need planning permission for the work he was undertaking.

However, he did not supply any paperwork or contracts between him and any tradesmen who worked there.

The prosecution also cited an application he had made for a conservatory at the Roedean Way house in 2011, after his marriage had broken down and he was intending on selling it as proof that he was aware of the UK planning system.

Mr Vestergaard added: “If I look back I can see that I haven’t been informed correctly, but if I have done something wrong then it was not done intentionally.”

He also said that the reason he had not told investigators that he had been acting on Mr Midgley’s advice was because he didn’t want to get an 60-year-old single man who “lived very humbly” into trouble.

And he said that much of the alterations he had made had not been to original features, but those installed in the 1960s or later.

However, district judge Tessa Szagun said: “I am sure that Mr Vestergaard has not been completely transparent about the state and condition of aspects he has had removed and some have been historical.

“Listing buildings is an effective protection of the historic environment and sustain its heritage values and ensure it remains for future generations to enjoy.

“I find it difficult to accept that being a resident of Roedean Way where the immediate surroundings are renowned locally as a heritage site that he wouldn’t be aware of this.

“It’s extraordinary that he would commission builders and works without establishing conditions and establish a proper scheme.

“It’s inconceivable that, knowing that this is a listed building, he would not have known this was a kind of work which would require planning permission or that that required proper oversight.

“To embark on such a project without was clearly a deliberate closing of his eyes to cut corners and costs.

“Having been informed of the requirements, work should have stopped.

“Some of Colin Midgley’s behaviour was indeed bizarre but the responsibility was Mr Vestergaard’s to ensure that the work was conducted in a professional manner.”

Mr Vestergaard told the court that although he had millions in the bank from shares he was given by the white goods company he worked as sales director for in Germany and Luxembourg, his bank would not allow him to withdraw this because of his sizeable debts.

He has exchanged contracts on his Roedean Way house, which he sold for £2.215 million, but after paying off the mortgage, his ex-wife’s share, his overdraft, lawyers fees and other fees from Ewhurst Manor, he will only be left with £58,000.

Meanwhile, the value of Ewhurst Manor itself has dropped from the £3 million he took out a 100% mortgage to buy it with in 2014 to £2 million because of its current state. The estate includes three cottages which he rents to four tenants for a total of £7,200 per month.

He was fined £22,000 for the two charges of executing works, plus a £120 victim surcharge, plus £60,592.48 in costs.

Support quality, independent, local journalism that matters. Donate here.
ShareTweetShareSendSendShare

Comments 1

  1. Pingback: The Importance of Obtaining Planning Permission | The Sash Window Workshop

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most read

Landlord who gutted 16th century manor fined £82k

Parking problems prompt third consultation in Hollingdean

Fatboy Slim helps save Brighton music venue

Brighton rapist jailed for life

Thousands sign petition objecting to red route in Western Road

Leading councillor criticises Royal Pavilion trust in searing resignation letter

Police hunt suspected jewellery thief

Ancient cedars fenced off to protect trees and public

Brighton MP leaves government as Burnham appoints new team

Restaurant boss criticises licence review as ‘monstrous waste of time’

Newsletter

Arts and Culture

  • All
  • Music
  • Theatre
  • Food and Drink
Madrophenia: Madness Ride the Ska Wave on to Brighton Beach

Madrophenia: Madness Ride the Ska Wave on to Brighton Beach

24 July 2026
Raise a glass to Sussex: Roebuck’s summer wine bar pops up at the Pavilion

Raise a glass to Sussex: Roebuck’s summer wine bar pops up at the Pavilion

23 July 2026
Fatboy Slim helps save Brighton music venue

Fatboy Slim helps save Brighton music venue

23 July 2026
First wave of acts announced for debut Melancholy Fest

First wave of acts announced for debut Melancholy Fest

21 July 2026
Load More

Sport

  • All
  • Brighton and Hove Albion
  • Cricket
Bruce on the Boundary – Robinson ready to take the next step

Sussex well beaten in One Day Cup at Durham

by Thomas Ridley - ECB Reporters Network supported by Rothesay
24 July 2026
0

Durham 352-5 (50 overs) Sussex 280 (43.5 overs) Durham (4 points) beat Sussex (0 points) by 72 runs A magnificent...

Bruce on the Boundary – Robinson ready to take the next step

Sussex fall short in One Day Cup opener

by Blake Bint - ECB Reporters Network supported by Rothesay
22 July 2026
0

Glamorgan 295-8 (50 overs) Sussex Sharks 283-8 (50 overs) Glamorgan (4 points) beat Sussex (0 points) by 12 runs Glamorgan’s...

Council submits plans for £65m new King Alfred Leisure Centre

King Alfred short-changes children and young people, say objectors

by Sarah Booker-Lewis - local democracy reporter
22 July 2026
14

The new King Alfred swimming pool offers little for older children and young adults, according to objectors. Hundreds of people...

Council submits plans for £65m new King Alfred Leisure Centre

Heritage groups criticise King Alfred plans

by Sarah Booker-Lewis - local democracy reporter
21 July 2026
20

Conservation groups have criticised the design of a proposed new £65 million King Alfred swimming pool and leisure centre, saying...

Load More
October 2018
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Sep   Nov »

RSS From Sussex News

  • Go ahead for £20m rubbish and recycling depot and solar farm 24 July 2026
  • Group leave woman injured in early hours attack 23 July 2026
  • Fatboy Slim helps save Brighton Music Venue 23 July 2026
  • Sussex Police officer sacked over ammunition and knife 23 July 2026
  • Five drug smugglers face jail over £34m cocaine haul 20 July 2026
ADVERTISEMENT
  • About
  • Contact
  • Support
  • Newsletter
  • Privacy
  • Complaints
  • Ownership, funding and corrections
  • Ethics
  • T&C

© 2023 Brighton and Hove News

No Result
View All Result
  • News
    • Opinion
  • Arts and Culture
    • Music
    • Theatre
  • Sport
    • Cricket
  • Newsletter
  • Public notices
  • Advertise
  • About
  • Contact

© 2023 Brighton and Hove News