The ongoing battle of KJ Building Supplies

In the heart of a thriving Lewisham community, in southeast London, KJ Building Supplies stands as a vital resource for builders and homeowners alike. However, this seemingly unassuming DIY business has found itself at the centre of a complex planning and enforcement dispute with the Council, prompting questions about the boundary between local governance and the law.

The saga began when KJ's was invited to apply for planning approval for an open storage area adjacent to the shop. The request was met with disappointment as planning officer Russell Brown exercised "officer delegated powers" to deny the application. The decision hinged on two key allegations: first, that the land had undergone an unauthorised change of use to a "builder's yard," and second, that a shipping container had been installed without proper permissions.

In response to this setback, KJ’s owners appealed the decision to the planning inspectorate, seeking a reconsideration of the case. Here, the plot thickens. The planning inspector raised concerns about the wording of the allegations and invoked a section of the 1990 Act, allowing corrections if no injustice would result. The inspector's fixation on the grammatical nuances of the allegations, particularly the placement of apostrophes in "builder's yard" from "builders yard," introduced an unexpected diversion.

The dispute centred on whether the land in question belonged to a single builder, multiple builders, or KJ's as a builders' merchant. The misplaced emphasis on grammatical minutiae overshadowed a more critical issue: the categorisation of the land as a "builder's yard" in the first place. KJ's Building Supplies primarily serves as a builders' merchant, specialising in the sale of building materials, with the adjacent land serving as an open storage area.

As the planning appeal was dismissed, enforcement officer Samuel Cadman reignited the enforcement action. By describing the land as a "builder's yard" in a letter delivered on June 6, 2023, Cadman took an unconventional approach, citing the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and stating that owner Kevin Bottomley had "the right to remain silent." This legal development raised questions about the proper role of local councils in advising individuals of their right to remain silent through written communication.

The battle between KJ Building Supplies and Lewisham Council has stirred a groundswell of community support under the banner of "Betterfication, not Gentrification." Over 800 supporters have signed a petition, highlighting the importance of preserving community assets against aggressive planning enforcement.

This ongoing legal saga underscores the challenges businesses like KJ's face when confronted with planning and enforcement actions and raises broader questions about the intersection of local governance and legal procedures. The fight to safeguard KJ's as a community resource continues, and it remains far from over.

Coming soon: The right to remain silent.

Copyright (C) The Big Retort