Couple’s £400,000 Legal Battle Over Bridleway Dispute
A couple in Hertfordshire are facing a staggering £400,000 legal bill stemming from a six-year dispute over a public bridleway they claim incorrectly runs through their £1.2 million property. David Moore, 63, and his wife, Dr. Dawn Carnell, 59, a cancer specialist, have already incurred approximately £325,000 in legal costs after a recent High Court ruling went against them. Undeterred, they are now planning to escalate the matter to the Court of Appeal, a move that would push their total expenditure towards the £400,000 mark.
The heart of the protracted disagreement lies with Breach House, a property in Little Berkhamsted that the couple purchased a decade ago. They assert that significant renovations have transformed the once-dilapidated house into a “multi-million-pound property.” The conflict ignited when locals, along with ramblers and horse riders, complained after a public right of way, which they contended had been in use for at least a century, was obstructed by signs and locked gates. Both Hertfordshire County Council and the Planning Inspectorate have previously ruled in favour of the existence and location of the bridleway, a stance now upheld by the High Court.
Mr. Moore, who manages an oncology business with his wife, expressed that the financial implications are secondary to their conviction of being in the right. He stated, “The cost doesn’t really come into it at this point in time. It’s whether you think you’re right or wrong.” Dr. Carnell is fully supportive of her husband’s stance, with both believing the county council provided inaccurate documentation when they acquired their home.
“This is not me going off on some expedition into the wilderness and putting my tin hat on and saying ‘Whatever happens, happens’,” Mr. Moore elaborated. “This is two logical people looking at the position given in 2015 and knowing they’re correct.”
This resolute attitude has been met with frustration by neighbours who found themselves unable to access the path they had used for generations. Wayne Morris, a retired Metropolitan Police inspector and current chairman of the parish council, resides next door and admitted to having “fingers crossed” that the couple would abandon their legal pursuit. However, he acknowledged their tenacity: “They will not let it go. I think with the amount that they’ve spent going to the High Court that they will just carry on.” He added, “They’re so fixated on this matter now that they won’t see reason and I think they will probably try to go to the Court of Appeal.”
The friction between Dr. Carnell, her husband, and the local residents commenced in 2019 when the route through their property was closed off. The ensuing community tension led Mr. Moore to report instances of alleged criminal damage, including damage to his vehicles, and harassment.
The owners of two adjacent cottages, including Mr. Morris, have also reportedly invested tens of thousands of pounds into their own legal defence.
Hertfordshire County Council became formally involved, issuing an order that confirmed the bridleway’s path across land belonging to the six-bedroom Breach House, a property with sections dating back to the 17th century. This led to a formal Planning Inquiry.
During the four-day inquiry, Gavin Harbour-Cooper, a senior definitive map officer, presented evidence that the council had investigated the matter in 1956 and concluded the path traversed Breach House. However, he noted that the initial “definitive map” created three years later depicted an incorrect route between the cottages, despite the Definitive Statement containing the accurate information.
Nigel Adams, founder of online estate agents BigBlackHen.com, whose parents owned Breach House from 1973 to 1985, confirmed his involvement in the 2015 sale to Mr. Moore and Dr. Carnell. He stated, “During this process, I repeatedly discussed with the Moores the existing bridleway and its route through the Breach House land.” William Marques, a former resident of the house in the 1960s, also recalled the bridleway passing through the property, describing its use as a safer alternative to a “dangerous” road route to his grandparents’ home.
Conversely, Mr. Moore contended during the inquiry that the council had acknowledged in 2020 that the bridleway signage near his home was erroneous, leading to its removal. He maintained, “When I purchased the property, I was not made aware of the existence of a bridleway crossing the property.”
The High Court heard the case on November 5 and 6, with the judgment delivered this month. The judge, referring to the “inherent implausibility to the Claimants’ argument,” denied Mr. Moore and Dr. Carnell the right to an immediate appeal. However, they retain the option to petition the Court of Appeal directly for a hearing.
Mr. Moore, who has previously considered legal action against the county council to recoup his expenses, clarified their position: “It’s never been our point that there’s no right of way. It’s the position of the right of way that we’ve argued. It’s on the boundary as far as I’m concerned.” He added, “We’re just people who saved up to buy a house. We followed the correct procedures.” He further criticised the council’s handling of the matter: “What Hertfordshire County Council have done is shoot themselves in the foot because they’ve fought tooth and nail – at a cost of £1 million, I’d guess – to show themselves to be negligent.”
Hertfordshire County Council submitted a claim for £13,791.70 in legal costs. A council spokesperson expressed satisfaction with the High Court’s decision, stating, “We are pleased that the High Court has dismissed the appeal against the Planning Inspectorate’s decision, which confirmed the modification order that will allow the route of this bridleway to be correctly recorded.” They added, “If there are no further legal proceedings, then we will update the Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way in Hertfordshire with the confirmed route in the New Year.”
