Geekologie I Watch Stuff The Superficial Hedonistica

'Hobbit House' Being Demolished Due To Lack Of Permits

hobbit-house-1.jpg

You see this house? British couple Charlie Hague and Megan Williams built it with their own four hands. And now it's set to be demolished because they didn't bother getting any permits for the thing. Also, because the building "harms the character and appearance of the countryside", which I think we can all agree is complete bullshit because Hobbit houses are like the textbook definition of the character and appearance of the countryside.

The pair acknowledged their property was built without prior consent but said there was no other way for them to afford their own home.


Locals nicknamed it the hobbit home but most people did not even know it was there because it is so secluded.

The couple's appeal was dismissed by planning inspector Iwan Lloyd, who ruled the development harmed the character and appearance of the countryside.

The inspector upheld the council's enforcement notice, which requires the roundhouse and all associated work, including the timber decking, be demolished.

I'm guessing that somebody with a friend on the council happens to own a neighboring home with windows that face the Hobbit house and they just obsess about seeing it gone. First, they put up curtains, but that wasn't enough. Curtains only blocked the house from view, not from EXISTENCE. I imagine they were *this close* to burning the house down themselves before deciding to take the legal route.

Hit the jump for a couple shots of the soon-to-be-nonexistent interior.

hobbit-house-2.jpg

hobbit-house-3.jpg

hobbit-house-4.jpg

hobbit-house-5.jpg

Thanks to PYY, who wants to live in a treehouse. OMG, SAAAAAAAAME. SAME SAME SAME SAME SAME.

There are Comments.
  • pontefractious

    For anyone who wants to know the outcome of this story, go to:
    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-...

  • pontefractious

    Make the punishment fit the crime.The message the council and inspector want to send is that you can't just build buildings and ignore local procedures. Well, they can do that just as effectively by making the owners take all the steps they should have gone through to build the home. If the building is indeed an eyesore (these things are pretty subective) then give them the option of planting trees or taking other measures to make the view more acceptable. Make them bring the building up to code. This may involve some messy work if it involves checking pipes and wires embedded in walls etc - so be it. Once that work is complete the owners should obtain the required certificates at their own expense. Only if the building is determined to be dangerous and the owners unable or unwilling to mitigate the danger should the building be demolished.
    Making the owners demolish the building just sends the message that the council and inspector are petty minded individuals frustrated in their jobs and out to take vengeance on anyone they can. If a company makes a car with faulty brakes we don't make the company destroy the car - we say "recall the car and fix it". If a bank sells a product with a misleading description we tell it to refund the money. We don't close the bank. Enforcement of laws is necessary but it must be rational and appropriate or people lose respect for the law.
    Of course, when something like this comes up, a responsible authority will also take a look at the current laws and costs of complying with same to make sure that they are appropriate.

  • Well as far as the bureaucrats involved in this atrocity if someone did the same thing to their homes I believe it would be justice. I wouldnt do it myself but I would applaud anyone who did.

  • pontefractious

    Not sure if you saw my post of yesterday but it appears common sense prevailed in the end (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-.... But even so it leaves a bad taste in one's mouth. One gets the impression that from the bureaucrats' point of view here, the issue was not "is this house OK", but "what can we do to punish these people for not following the rules". And while I have no doubt that leniency would encourage others to flout the rules they should also realize that the occasion well justified exception reinforces the public's perception as to the fairness of the process.

  • That's good. This crap kind of hit home with me because Im planning on saving up my money to buy lots of land and I want to build a hobbit hole. Im kind of worried some bureaucratic tyrants might give me a hard time.

  • And all they had to do was apply for planning permission first.

  • What if the tyrannical bureaucrats dont want them to have a hobbit hole in the first place? Might be hard getting permission to build such a home. Permission they shouldnt need in the first place.

  • antalicus

    Someone should donate some money for them to get permits and build something that is actually ugly in its place.

  • Perhaps someone should do the same thing to the houses of the bureaucrats that condemned the hobbit hole. Then build something ugly. Perhaps a junkyard. Or perhaps someone should move next to those bureaucratic people and burn manure in a firepit every time the wind blows in the direction of the bureaucrats property.

    There are ways to mess with such scum...for years and years. Here in the states if in a rural area living next to such bureaucratic scum I might just go target shooting in my backyard at 1am. Very loud especially 12 gadges and high powered Rifles.

    Also I could play opera, classical, heavy metal, country, whatever pissed the bureaucrat off the most.

  • Lu Cho

    isn't there any kind of petition to avoid this?

  • Beegeezee505

    I take serious issue with people who seek to destroy the labor of others. What do you think the earliest settlers would have said to a government that sought to demolish their home because it didn't meet their standards?

    This is flat out tyranny. How have we reached this sad state in our society that you can't build a thing without the approval of the almighty state.

    These brown nose, busy bodies need to die in a fire. This house is a magnificent creation, to which they hold no claim to. Whatever happened to individual sovereignty? Whatever happened to creativity?

    The soul of man is reduced and forced into conformity! REVOLT! RECLAIM YOUR HUMANITY!

  • Captain Matticus, LP Inc.

    You shall not pass...inspection!

  • You win the Internet, cap!

  • that's horrible!!! They were just featured on CNN, and I'm sure that's why they are getting the boot: http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/01/.... CNN should have left these ppl alone. I hope they run a story on these folks behalf!!!

  • $12217504

    I don't understand, did they own the land? Or did they build the house on someone elses property?

  • In America, some people don't get to build their dream homes in the first place - http://myfreedomfoundation.com...

  • brodan2013

    Aside from the argument - I just want to input that cases like this are when the community needs to be involved. The community should vote anonymously on whether the house is left alone or not.

    Because there really was just one bitter person who hated himself for never doing anything with this life, who made it his mission to get this couple in trouble. Let the community have SOME kind of say, as they aren't ALL bitter, jealous busy-bodies.

  • In THIS Middle-Earth, Sauron *always* wins.

  • Conrado Parra

    tearing peoples home is such a dick move /:

  • Yes it is. So is defending this bureaucracy like some people here are doing. Bertw192 is a sack of vermin. He is defending the bureaucrats because of his jealousy.

blog comments powered by Disqus