Elderly and vulnerable residents face eviction after being ‘mis-sold’ properties that didn’t have planning consent to be permanent homes.
Locals fear being made homeless after the go-ahead was given for enforcement action to remove their right to stay all year round in 20 ‘illegitimate’ park homes.
Several of the residents paid more than £200k for their properties on Devon Oaks in Dartmoor after they were marketed as ‘main residences’ – despite the seller not having the legal rights to do so.
They are now fighting to stave off eviction after claiming they are innocent parties in a planning row between the original landowner and the council.
They claim they bought the static homes next to the River Walkham on the basis that they could live in them for 11 months of the year, which would be extended to 12 months, with a 35 year lease.
The campaigners argue the homes were all sold and let as full-time residential properties and supported by contracts confirming they could be used as the owner’s only home.
But they later discovered the site only held an eight-month “holiday” planning designation that allowed a maximum stays of 28 days during this period.
Dartmoor National Park planning authority has now voted to agree ‘with a heavy heart’ to allow planning officials to move forward with enforcement action.
Residents have since been granted a further meeting with the enforcement team to plead their case.
But several have now spoken out to express their fears and to plead for a ‘fair solution.’
Peter Birdsall, 76, and wife Jane, 75, paid £206k for their home 20 months ago.
He said: “Initially it was very good – but now we’ve found out we’ve been told a pack of lies.
“This could make us homeless – we have no money to buy another property. We put the money from our previous house and our savings into this. This was going to be our last destination in life.
“I love living here. We’re out in the countryside, which is lovely, and it’s a lovely community. We don’t want to go from here, but now we may have to – all because someone’s sold us a pack of lies.
“I’m hoping we can sort something out with the National Park planning.
“It’s constantly playing on our nerves. We don’t know where we’re going to end up. We’re being punished far too much by the Dartmoor National Park – we bought this place in good faith, and we were sold a pack of lies.”
Jane added: “The owner of the park can come in and do whatever he wants – he’ll still have the park, but we’ll be without a home.”
Kerry and Susan Fice, both 74, have lived there for three years.
Kerry said: “What a time for this to be happening – just before Christmas.
“Since this has started, we have suffered with stress quite a bit, because we just don’t know what’s going on.
“We, in good faith, signed a contract with the landowner for 11 months – Dartmoor National Park knew the land owner was selling these properties four or five years ago with an 11 month period, and they’ve done nothing about that.
“We’re in the middle and we’re getting the brunt because of the landowner who overstepped the planning that was permitted on the park.
“We’re in the firing line and it’s really unfair. There’s been no empathy.”
Susan added: “”As far as we were concerned, we signed a license for the 11 months, with – not a promise, as such – but we were told that it was very likely that they’d get residential.
“We had a questionnaire from Dartmoor National Parks to fill in, asking where we lived, why we bought, what would be the implications if we had to get off the park, did we have any disabilities, all that.
“We had a meeting a few weeks ago at Dartmoor National Park head office, and a few members indicated that they were trying to speak to the chair to ask where these people are supposed to go – but they were spoken down and told that wasn’t really relevant.
“A lot of the members were heavy-hearted when they did vote – I don’t believe they wanted to, but because of the policy, I believe they had to.
“A few ladies that live here were crying – it really wasn’t nice.
“A lot of them were sorry, and I don’t understand why they had to do why they did. I’m no expert, and it is a policy, but I’m just hoping the human side of what will happen will affect the way they view the propositions.”
She added: “Even if they made it eight months that we could stay for – we can’t finance that sort of period of time. Where would we go? It’s just not a viable situation to be in.
“We’re struggling to find ways to get around this.”
The residents campaign is being led by Chris Griffiths, who said the uncertainity and threat of losing their homes has had a huge impact on the community.
He said: “Many of them are elderly, vulnerable, and long-standing contributors to the local community but are now facing the threat of losing their homes as a result of a planning situation they did not create.
“The residents of Devon Oaks are clear: they will not be quietly displaced, they will not be blamed for a breach they did not cause.
“They will not allow a National Park to claim that homelessness, financial ruin, and community destruction represent an acceptable planning outcome.”
“Why are innocent residents bearing the consequences of mis-selling and official inaction?
“And why is the Authority resisting the only solution that protects both people and the landscape?”
Chris said following a tense meeting with Dartmoor National Park Planning Enforcement Officers this week, homeowners have secured a further meeting to present their proposed solution.
They claim the solution would “avoid homelessness, protects the landscape, and costs the taxpayer nothing.”
He added: “The crisis at Devon Oaks was not caused by residents.
“These practices continued for years, including during the period when the Planning Authority was aware of the situation but took no action.
“During this time, people invested life savings, relocated, and embedded themselves into the community, believing the site to be legitimate.
“The current enforcement approach risks punishing the only innocent group involved.
“Instead of acting against the party that caused the breach, the authority has indicated an intention to pursue action that could force homeowners from their properties, despite widespread agreement among planners, lawyers, elected members, and the public that such an outcome would be disproportionate and indefensible.”
Chris said they were particularly alarmed that the “fallback” planning position the authority claims would result from strict enforcement would allow the same number of permanent static units, plus an additional 30 touring caravans or motorhomes, and potentially unlimited tents.
He added: “This would produce more traffic, more environmental pressure, more disturbance, and more landscape impact than the small, settled, year-round community that exists today.
“Yet the homeowners’ proposal – which separates responsibility, applies proportionality, and resolves the issue without harm – has not yet been fully considered.
“How can a National Park justify an enforcement outcome that creates more environmental harm, more social damage, and more public cost than the situation it is trying to correct?”
Dartmoor National Park planning meeting, members heard that despite a series of appeal decisions and court judgements, the authority had been unable to resolve the issue, with “no prospect’” of doing so without taking enforcement action.
They agreed to authorise their planning officers to enforce the rules “with heavy hearts.”
Cllr Michael Fife-Cook called the situation “a disaster” that needed to be discussed with “humanity”.
He also described it as “crazy” that a solution could not be found to let these people stay in their homes.
Dartmoor National Park Authority said the recent meeting explained the planning committee’s decision to take appropriate legal action to stop the land being used in an unauthorised way.
A spokesperson said: “We advised residents that submitting a planning application to regularise site use remains an option for the landowner or for residents.
“As yet, no such application has been submitted. Any application would be subject to the usual planning, consultation and decision-making processes.”
DNPA explained that since 2018, a number of planning applications, appeals and court hearings have highlighted various breaches of condition and unauthorised developments at the site.
“During that period, the High Court and Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the authority and against the landowner,” it said.
“The responsibility for ensuring development complies with legislation and planning policy lies with the landowner.
“In this particular case, we’ve been working hard to address what is a complex legal and planning matter, and we’re doing it with sensitivity and compassion for the people who live there.”
The owners of Barton Park Homes have not yet responded to an invitation to comment.
