Unfair, excessive and bad in law.

In this very special series of exclusive articles for The Property Chronicle, Australian property legend Norman Harker reflects on his extraordinary 50-year life in real estate. He will pull no punches partly because, as he freely admits, Norman has a limited life expectancy of five years from December 2018 due to a diagnosed terminal blood cancer, which he has cheerfully accepted in preference to (in his words) “kicking the bucket without notice”. We are honoured he has chosen us to publish these brilliant, funny and incisive reflections of a lifetime in property.

A future client phoned and said, “I know your boss’s father!”

Me, “I never thought he knew his father!”

“I know your boss’s father!”

It went downhill from there.

Client, “I’ve got a problem. I live in Luton.”

Me, “Their soccer team is worse than Arsenal.”

Anyway, hoping no one would see me, I went up to Luton and investigated and here’s the schematic diagram of the problem:

Some explanations for those readers unfortunate in living outside the now (dis)UK.

1. Luton was a nice quiet town 35 miles from London. In 1905, a motor works was established. It was regarded as the posterior orifice of the Southeast of England, where an atomic bomb might cause £4 17s 6d damage.

2. The Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) system in the dis(UK) is the system where various government bodies are able to acquire land from landowners.

The local authority, Luton Borough Council (LBC) had acquired some back land for a new school and had largely completed it by using a right of way to it. There was no other means of access.

A right of way only carries the right to pass and re-pass. The LBC served a CPO on the five owners who controlled the right of way.

An owner could object that the CPO was excessive and that they, the owners, were prepared to sell just the land that was required.

I served the necessary objection on my client’s behalf. My client got the other four owners to do the same. Effectively, the other four got free advice.

It was May when the inspector made the decision that the LBC’s CPO was excessive. He indicated that a CPO would be granted for just the 30ft of land required for the access road and footpaths.

The five owners celebrated. They now had plots of land fronting on to the new road, built at LBC’s expense. They could build or sell as development blocks.

In June, the LBC served a new CPO for just the 30ft of land required. 

In mid-July, the period for appeal against the new CPO expired.

Two days before that, on behalf of my client, I appealed against the new CPO on the grounds that it was, “Unfair, excessive and bad in law.”

Calamity! The school was built. Teachers and administrative staff had been employed, 350 children were already enrolled for the start of the new school year at the beginning of September. With no access road…

I served the (new) objection on the LBC. I told my secretary to expect a call for me from the LBC within the hour. She was told to tell them, “He’s out.”

I was out. I was out with my client. Getting confirmed instructions.

LBC: “What grounds have you got?. 

Me: “The CPO is unfair, excessive and bad in law.”

LBC: “But the inspector said he’d grant this CPO!”

Me: “We’ll see what a new inspector will decide in around six months’ time.”

LBC: “But you’ll lose.”

Me: “But your school will not open in September. And, my friend, the editor of the Luton Gazette will be advised of the reason for the enormous waste of public money, the twiddling of thumbs of appointed administrative staff and teachers, and the problems of all those parents whose children will need schooling elsewhere.”

LBC: “What’s that reason, then?”

Me: “Your stupidity, self-stimulating greed. Evidenced by trying to build a school at the effective expense of just five landowners and not the entire community as should be the case.”

I gave my client’s terms for withdrawing the objection:

1. We will be given detailed planning consent for a development of a house fronting the new road. (We had had some pretty plans drawn up.)

2. We will receive £2 10s 0d per square foot as compensation for the value of the land acquired.

LBC asked, “What is your justification?”

Me: “Experience of LBC. If we didn’t object, LBC would take forever and a day to grant the required consent and even longer to agree the compensation.”

I added, “I’ll give you 24 hours to agree. After that, my instructions are to continue with the objection and speak with the editor of the Luton Gazette. I hope all of your councillors, your bosses, are looking forward to the local council elections next year!”

Next day, we had agreement. I told LBC, “Immediately your cheque has cleared we’ll withdraw our objection.”

My client asked, “Are you sure that your parents were married?”

I replied, “It’s probably the same as with John Ritblat’s. Married, but maybe not to each other.”

I never felt guilty about this case. 

The administrators, acting for LBC, had tried to get a school built at the cost of just a few landowners rather than the community at large. 

My ‘strategic’ second appeal was in the belief that it would take years to agree because of delays, powers and the ‘retribution’ of LBC. 

I always had my client’s best interests in mind and their full agreement.

Subsequently, the full terms of our agreement were ‘accidentally’ passed on to the other four landowners and that undoubtedly assisted them.

I’ll leave you, the readers, to be my judges although I doubt that it made anybody Spurs supporters.