50 Shades Of Pink: Council Threaten Homeowner After Painting House Too Pink | Damned Designs 

I agree 100%. Eddie and his family are acting unlawfully in the face of a perfectly sensible law there to protect the landscape. what did they expect would happen? i'm in school for architecture and urban planning and disregard like that blows my mind. ostentatiously ignorant people like that put sustainable design in such a bad light.

@@AliceHasenkohl exactly! I don't understand how he thought this was going to work out anything but badly.

Eddie and his wife seem to be creative and genuine people. It's such a shame

Unfortunately there are people out there who are absolutely living in their own head. They can be the nicest, most genuine human beings but complete dreamers. That’s where they run into problems. They’re in their own dreamland and forget about society’s rules and regulations.

Eddie is a former property developer - he knew full well that he couldn't just build whatever he wanted, wherever he wanted.

The doctor obviously had his architect prepare 2 different sets of plans, one for the council and one for the builder.

@@pcb1962 nah, the planners just got a A3 sized copy of the A2 drawings. The reduction would easily make up the 55% increase of the actual build. /s

@@NZOrbital if that's the case how is the builder not on the hook for fixing the problem they created... I work in the USA and if i dont make sure my prints are right it is my fault

@@jacobhatfield4970 100% on builder. No way they built something without measuring it

You mean for creating the litigation right? Then destroying lives for the sake of a bruised ego?

Council should have had the plans in place long before….

It's cruel.

And with god as my witness, I am that fool! - Gomez Adams.

How else can he afford to go to court? The alternative is to lose everything he and his wife have worked for!

First said by President Lincoln in 1853, I believe. He was right even then !!

Why? Because I consent to being told I am unable to use what is mine for the benefit of the people and pay for the privilege of being told this 🤔

@@moanahughes3593 no. It’s because you live in a community and must abide by the laws that benefit the community as a whole. You probably wouldn’t want someone building a ten story building right next to your house or doing anything that would bring your home value down.

These are NOT laws, only rules and regulations subject to human interpretation and influence therefore can have a 10 storey structure erected should privileged desire, just saying , if community says no then so be it .

@@moanahughes3593 they knew it before. You can't build where you want in most parts of Europe. And you can't build how you want. Besides to the prices between building and agricultural land there are safety and infrastructure issues.

@@kikifisselstein7322 if not all, the majority.

It's a beautiful shade of pink not harming anyone

@@kymclinton3140 It was like a sore thumb! Tacky. It's a preserved in aspic Middle Class village ,not a fairground .

@@kymclinton3140 Hope you're joking, it was a horrible shade 😂😂

Yikes, candy floss pink in a conservation area. Has this person lost her little marbles? They come in pink too😂

Yeah but allowing the owner to construct anything on agricultural land will encourage developers to do the same.

@@user-xg6zz8qs3q Creating a precedent can be dangerous. But if a portion of an agricultural lot is deemed unsuitable for that purpose due to the soil, terrain or other reason, it might be proper to allow a house for the family that is working the surrounding farmland.

@@Bobrogers99 Again, developers are absolute sharks. If developers ever learn that they can buy cheaper land under these specific circumstances, then all farmland will be surrounded by many houses, and many buildings.

@@user-xg6zz8qs3q I must agree that if the law is in any way compromised, even for a noble purpose, developers will use that to make a profit. Eddie may not be doing any harm, but a hundred Eddies would be overwhelming. Give one developer an inch and 100 developers will take a mile. Sad, but true.

@@Bobrogers99 Not to be rude. But Eddie is worthless. A Developer is worth 10000 Eddies.

I agree. She says it was a waste of everyone’s time as it’s still pink. Yes, but baby, light pink, as opposed to the raspberry eyesore you thought was suitable replacement before.

I have mix paint for over 20 years and I can say some people dont notice/care about shades of colour. It's like blue please. French blue, ice blue, Prussian blue, navy, cobalt, sail, sea, or just plain citron. They dont have a clue. Rainbow challenged, poor things.

She was somehow annoyingly ignorant

@@anjapeggy727 Its because she knew that she wasn't allowed to paint it that color. Listed houses have very strict rules, everyone in the UK knows this.

​@@caroleberreur9585salmon...

Same is true for anything done with a permit

Also, in the US, don't you have to use a realtor?

@@Frohicky1 NO

This isn’t abt how small the UK is ... it’s abt nasty jealous neighbours and nasty petty bstard officials...

@@thedogpound1977 Google seems to agree. I've been misinformed by a Yorkshireman!

But didn't you hear that only 10% of their land is in development, as in 'Housing'? HOW MUCH GREEN SPACE does the island need, if its citizens are packed into those minuscule ratholes parading as abodes??!! I also live in the States, and appreciate that there are building codes here to determine how construction has to be done, and Building Inspectors who regularly check at every stage of development.

It’s dumb there is even a rule on how YOU build YOUR home🙄 glad to live in America!

@@CarisstaRashele America is the one with crazy HOAs

@@CarisstaRashele The US don’t have a long history enough to understand old buildings need to be preserved like they do in Europe. 🤷🏻‍♀️

HOAs exist if you decide to buy a home in to one. You know before you sign. Government sucks! They complain about homelessness and people going hungry, then they turn around a demolish a good functioning home because a “committee or council” wants it to be so. Power goes to people’s head!

@Carole Berreur these peoples houses that they’re building has nothing to do with historic value 😅🤦🏽‍♀️

@@kikifisselstein7322 EXACTLY!!!

Depends on the designation. The upper tier registration requires the building is kept in good repair.

Actually those bright colours do fade in time nicely to a more mellow shade. Suffolk is well known for them.

Yeah, I have to agree with them on that one too. She changed it from a subdued, pretty pale pink to a eye-burning hot pink. She knew the difference. She was just playing dumb.

It’s her house, her property she should be allowed to do as she likes so long as the council don’t know the place

Its not a museum. These are people's homes. Why shouldn't they be allowed at least small changes?

So fckn what ? It’s her house ; it’s HER property.. She can paint ‘HER’ house any colour she likes..

If you let one person bend the rules it sets a precedent and soon everyone is doing it

The man that did that was a scammer. The caravan could have easily received the housing permission if he'd made it only 19 inches narrower. The place was HUGE. And if it had been 19 inches narrower, it still would have been huge. Only he and his wife lived there. He just thought he found a loophole, but tape measures don't lie and are 100% objective.

You know I have a thought. What if Eddie said he needed the buildings for his farm? Since it's farm land?

it was probably unhealthily cold in those flimsy houses . She has a baby to look after.

His obsession may have been much of the issue. He may have chosen the place over the wife and child. He said as much.

SO people can have freedom, but no so much?

@@David-sq2en people can freedom but not to the extent of anarchy their needs to be law and order

@@alexanrustler2611 Law and order would be making sure they are structurally safe and within the parameters of the land you own. That's where it should end. British people are so bitter and imposing.

@@tackytoya What an ignorant comment. You cannot just “let anyone do whatever they want within the confines of their own land”. What’s stopping them constructing an ugly eyesore on the edge of a medieval village, or some monstrous 7 storey tall building in a 2 storey neighbourhood, or perhaps a great big McMansion nightmare in the middle of rolling open countryside… You need guidelines! Plus this not only applies to new builds, but even more importantly to existing historic architecture - which cannot just be “left alone” for the owner to do with as they see fit.

@@tamaracarter1836 You people are zombies. You act as if you'd melt at the sight of free expression so we MUST curtail all freedoms because God forbid everything doesn't look uniform and isn't to the council's idea of good taste! Do you hear yourself??? How utterly embarassing.

Hence why I moved away from a community with an HOA that didn't pre-approve my shed - stated that it's not the same color as my house as well (even though I had woods surrounding 3 sides of the yard - and will never move back to one.

@@susank.4945 I agree; HOA rules can be excessive. When we were house hunting we were shown a neighborhood with a literal book of rules. One of those was not using colored lights outside as holiday decorations; only white. And not leaving a car parked in the driveway overnight. Those I don't care for. But I do like the ones that require you to maintain the upkeep to your home and yard. It boils down to what you want to live with and look at in your own neighborhood. A dilapidated house/yard is an eyesore for me and affects my property value; so that is important to me. Having autonomy over your home is important to you. We are lucky that we have multiple options to choose from to suit all our needs. (And I for one like your idea of an alternate color for a shed. Too matchy-matchy is boring.)

@@susank.4945 HOA in most cases seem to be run by clueless power hungry people

Agree, the doctor must have had an architect draw up too sets of building plans one he submitted for approval by council and the other he have to the builder. A builder bids on the size, materials and labor necessary for the building plans they were given by the doctor. THe builder would Not build a house 55% larger than plans submitted as it would have costs significantly more. A builder is not in the business to lose money. Clearly the builder was given a different set than the council approved building plans. Maybe the doctor thought the neighborhood committee wouldn’t check his approved building plans-comparing it to what was being built, or council would approved the building as built rather than what they approved. Luckily for the doctor, the building was stopped before it was finished.

Definitely something fishy going on there

Guy was wrong…

S Venter Bribery and corruption are a staple throughout the world and even in Briain too these peopole are just unlucky not to know the right people in the right places,

Its a listed building....If she wanted that she should have bought a modern house.

I am more concerned about what he has done to the inside. From the outside that must have been a beautiful and now rare example of a Victorian pub. He has reduced it to a rather ugly booze dispensary. the 'shed' is the least of it. As he has already wrecked it, but seems to have a community, let them get on with it.

They would be minor infractions if the pub wasn't a listed building.

@@pcb1962 The Extension is the minor infraction as it's classed as a temporary erection and it's hidden from view but we don't know what was done to the actual listed building yet that warrants all the fuss.

@@hogwashmcturnip8930 I do beg the question if it was so great before his changes why was no one wanting to take care of it properly?

@@jacobhatfield4970 Maybe no one was in the financial position to? It is one of the UK's great ironies that they have all these listed buildings sliding into dereliction, but the moment someone tries to save them, they hit them with all manner of rules and regulations and make the project unaffordable. It happened to us, and we were just in a bog standard 2 up,2 down terrace! The council lent us the money to buy the thing, because it was cheap and got us of their housing list ,but when a few years later we applied for a government backed grant to modernise ,they raised so many objections and extra jobs that had Not been a problem when they gave us the mortgage, the estimate ended up at least double what the house was worth! Our architects and builders pulled out ,because they had been messed around so much ,and they hadn't even done any work! We sold to a builder ,who did not need a grant, did the minimum to make a profit , but reduced the house to half its size in the process. So I wonder how many greased hands got his 'renovations' through?

because it would have cost the tightarse too much money.

Because he was born crooked and everything he does has to be done crooked. A blight on humanity.

@@kentbetts whoa! Born crooked and blight on humanity... your prejudices are showing...

In West Virginia, people can just build a house without filing paperwork of any kind, and nothing bad has happened from it.

@@owendavies8227 West Virginia has an area of 24,230 sq mi, and has a population of 1.793 million. Wales has an area a third of the size of WV, and a population 165% of that of WV. That's a population density of 77 persons per square mile for WV, compared to 382 persons per square mile for Wales = 1:5 ratio

@@Penguin_of_Death Building a house with NO permits, filing, etc. sounds LUDICROUS to me. So someone decides to build on land that they don't 'think' belongs to anyone??? I can think of so many other things that are so wrong about 'no paperwork of any kind'

Act tactfully so as not to bring their shortcomings to their attention?

He became obsessed with the house 25:30 I guess she made her daughter's wellness a priority which he could not. If you prioritise the "land" over family, you can expect a split. Should this little child be traumatised with loosing a safe home in a brutal way because her father cannot understand basic things? Ask yourself who is selfish here! I guess they could have lived there a bit longer (a child needs social life and education, too). The real problem was he made a living of it. He wanted to be an exception, while allowing others to be that too, would destroy all this greenbelt area and his sanctuary business. (Would he want other busy buildings next to his land?) It is lack of imagination and double standards I think.

Of course they wouldn’t. The majority of churches in England are medieval (and if not medieval then at least historic), meaning that they would never be allowed. If someone modified the church in a way that negatively impacted its architectural heritage (e.g. replaced a centuries old stained glass window with modern plain glass), then yes, they would demand the modifications to be reversed.

Of course they will. This was not about the house at all was it? Listen to that nasty little oik, with his golf courses and 'community' They were delighted to be getting a doctor, Until they found out his skin colour. If I was him I would sell the land, ideally to something they will hate, and find a Real community

The owners bought it knowing it had that status. Everyone in the UK knows about this. The UK has many old buildings, they cant all be museums.

grow up

Sounds like you don’t know what a dictatorship actually is.

It is not absurd at all: 1. Her cottage is at least 500 years old and listed (i.e. historically and architecturally significant); a bright bubblegum pink is hardly appropriate for a building of its age. 2. In this region of England, traditional villages are made from a mixture of exposed stone/ painted buildings in cream, white, “soft” pink and pale yellow. The colour she chose is “similar” to the sorts of colours you can find on half-timbered buildings in villages across Eastern England (Suffolk and Northern Essex in particular), where shades are far stronger, but definitely not Devon (which is in South-West England). The fact we have building materials/ colours specific to certain regions is important. Just to give an example: I grew up in the Cotswolds region of England; where every building is constructed using beautiful honey-coloured limestone, I now live in Suffolk (a region that lacks good quality stone), and is therefore filled with masses of half-timbered architecture - two completely different styles. This is not only the case between different areas of the country, but within each area itself. For example, the further north you go in the Cotswolds, the richer the stone becomes (i.e. stone in the Southern Cotswolds will be much lighter in tone, than stone in the Northern Cotswolds). The same in the East of England; as you move from Suffolk to Northern Essex the painted buildings become richer and deeper in colour (not to mention also a higher concentration of medieval wall art known as “Pargeting”). It may seem silly to you, but these regulations ensure the protection of authentic regional variation across many of England’s beautiful historic villages and towns.

That was Salmon not bubble gum. Bubblegum is the same tone as the current pink...just more shaded.

Because you cannot allow a precedent to be set

Its a historical grade 2 listed building, there are strict rules as to what you can do to it, including the colour of the paint. Anyone in the UK knows this including this lady.

@@atodaso1668 quite so. That hot pink was just wrong.

You need a permission for that.

Leave it how it is, a demolition site.

Wow you must be fun at parties borinnnn

I agree on that part that Eddie would not want an office building or big parking lot next door as it would affect his sanctuary business. Double standards I guess. Nothing wrong with the pub next door IMO. BTW the owner knew he had built it for commercial reasons and acknowledged his wrong. It will only lower his income.

Without planning permission no building inspections happen.

SA?

However planning permission isn’t always given so they build anyway in hopes it doesn’t get torn down

@@iitbn4197 as long as it’s not super crazy you are very likely going to get planning permission. If you build without planning permission then it’s very likely it will be found out and torn down. I think I know which one I would rather go with.

and go to jail

Oh yes! Look at the oik in Bolton! Ok, the house was getting ridiculous, but That was not the issue. The guy's colour was.

The one guy bought farm land, not a rural property. The land was cheap because its supposed to be used for farming not building.

Obviously uk have the worst healthcare and surgical procedures

@@Short_knowledge India is cheaper to do the surgery I would say.