Prosecution over replacement of windows ‘a triumph of bureaucracy’

The prosecution of a householder for replacing rotten wooden windows without permission is a triumph of bureaucracy over common sense.

Mr Hodges, ‘Little Hitler’ of Dad’s Army fame, would be proud.

The judge himself is reported as saying that the new windows were a like-for-like replacement and that the outside character of the building had not been changed.

The logic of this is that it wasn’t the act itself that offends, but the failure to get permission.

But would permission have been granted anyway? A retrospective application was refused.

It is hard to imagine that the criteria for consideration under a retrospective application would be any different from those under a prior application – apart, perhaps, that the planners were cross not to have been asked first.

There was no challenge in court to the carpenter’s advice that the windows were beyond repair.

The spirit of the law – to protect our architectural heritage – is undisputed and well-understood. But the enforcement of the letter of the law, with no room for common sense, is counter-productive.

Owners of listed buildings will now be wondering if, rather than seeking to restore their windows, it is safer to just let them rot.

Chris Sackett
St Martin’s