Just weeks to raise funds so ‘little people can take on lord of manor’

LEGAL action will be pursued against two major developments if at least £10,000 can be raised from residents in Staindrop and Gainford in just a few weeks.
Gainford Parish Council and Staindrop Parish Council have jointly agreed to request a judicial review if the funds can be gathered by March 24.
The review would challenge approval given by Durham County Council allowing Raby Estates to build 151 homes across the two villages.
Until now Gainford has been sharing costs with Staindrop Parish Council for legal advice into the decision and issued judicial review pre-protocol letters.
Going forward to a full judicial review could cost between £15,000 to £25,000, wiping out parish reserves.
Gainford Parish Council held a virtual meeting last Wednesday to see what residents in the village wanted to do.
Cllr Lisa Johnstone, council chairwoman, said the advice received from barrister Nicola Allen was the decision to give planning consent was “unlawful and challengeable” due to “errors of law on the part of Durham County Council” .
Permission was granted under Historic England’s “enabling development” scheme, which will see profits from the houses going towards major makeovers at Raby Castle and Gainford Hall. The scheme allows potential developments to side-step some planning policies.
She said: “The next stage is to proceed with a judicial review and we wanted to make sure we have a mandate for spending this kind of money. There is a time limit and the clock has already started ticking.”
More than 50 residents attended the meeting, with 26 sharing their thoughts. Opinion was split with some calling for the parish council to “make a stand” with offers of financial support, while others expressed concern it could bankrupt the parish council.
Resident Maire Kennan said proving Durham County Council acted illegally and was materially misled by Raby Estates would be difficult, adding it would not reverse the decision.
The Walsh family said the parish council would “have all the burden of proof and everything to lose” .
Another resident supported taking action. She said: “We may not get the planning reversed but things don’t change if people sit on the fence.”
Louise Westmarland said: “We should crowdfund – it is like the little people against the lord of the manor.”
Resident Carol Jackson said: “Why should we be bullied into accepting it? We are being rail-roaded by Raby Estates.”
Householder Sally Roscoe said she was in favour of going ahead with action and the council was missing a lot of support from people who do not use the internet and this needed to be addressed.
Mary Anne Roff said: “It is going to cost £25,000 if we win that’s great, but that doesn’t mean we don’t get the development – they can start again.”
Barry and Fiona Divers said: “We have to be careful not to throw good money after bad.”
Duncan Peake, Raby Estates chief executive, said: “We have heard lots of opinions. We completely respect the right of the parish council to bring a judicial review.”
He added the parish council would get a £68,000 payout towards the children’s play area and public open spaces as part of the development.
Mr Peake said: “I would urge the parish council to share the advice from their own counsel, but also that from Raby Estates and Durham County Council before you take this action.”
Cllr Rachel Neville suggested that a survey should be undertaken to provide a more accurate reflection of support.
Cllr Mark Charge said: “We are not just looking at £15,000. What happens if we lose? We could be looking at £40,000-£50,000. It could bankrupt the council. I am not in favour of the development, but we have to look at where we are sitting.”
Cllr John Grundy said: “It is not about the planning, it is about the legality. In view of the financial risk and the chances of losing I propose that we don’t go ahead with the review.”
Cllr Sarah Hannan put forward a counter proposal. She said: “The barrister has said we have ideally a 75 per cent chance if we go to judicial review. If we can get pledges of financial support from residents at a minimum of £10,000 within three weeks, we could submit a judicial review.”
Members agreed to Cllr Hannan’s proposal, setting the cut-off date of Tuesday March 24, when an extra ordinary council meeting will be held.
In a statement issued on Monday, Raby Estates said it was seeking further talks with people in Staindrop and Gainford. Mr Peake said: “During the public consultation late last year, the majority of residents supported the housing and the tourism development which will provide a real economic boost to the area.
“Some villagers in both locations have raised points of detail about the housing development proposals and we are keen to discuss those further with the communities
as well as the parish councils.”
He added: “We are anxious that the support this has received from thorough public consultation continues to be reflected in the local public debate over the proposals.
“We have written to both parish councils today and hope to be invited to contribute to a special meeting of Gainford Parish Council this week.”