Former Adidas Boss Sues Developer Over £1.3M Home Allegedly Two Meters Too Big

A former managing director of Adidas is suing a property developer, alleging fraudulent misrepresentation after being compelled to demolish a section of his £1.3 million countryside home because it exceeded approved plans by two meters.

Edward and Sally Nixon purchased West Barn, a former farm outbuilding in East Haddon, Northamptonshire, and commissioned developer Barry Howard and his company, Barry Howard Homes, to convert it into a residence. The couple bought the land for £600,000 and entered into a separate £700,000 agreement with Howard to finalize the construction.

The Nixons allege that during a July 2020 video call, Howard assured them the house was built and that planners were satisfied. However, in June 2021, the local council issued an enforcement notice, stating the 36-meter barn conversion was larger than approved plans and demanded extensive alterations or demolition.

The couple discovered the planning violations in December 2020, three months after completing the purchase. According to their barrister, Daria Gleyze, the finished house exceeded its permitted length by approximately two meters and its ridge height by just under one meter. The West Northamptonshire Council determined these changes detracted from the character and appearance of the original building.

In their lawsuit filed at Central London County Court, the Nixons are seeking £900,000 in damages. They claim Howard made misleading statements, including falsely answering 'no' to a question on a standard enquiries form in September 2020 regarding any breaches of planning law. The Nixons argue Howard must have known the building's dimensions exceeded limits when he completed the form.

Barry Howard disputes the Nixons' claim, asserting he was unaware the renovated barn's dimensions had surpassed the approved limits. He contends Mr. Nixon was involved in every detail of the building's design and aware of planning developments. Howard, representing himself, stated he had no knowledge of the building being constructed in breach of planning rules.

However, the Nixons' legal team described Howard's defense as "demonstrably untrue," arguing it is inconceivable that an experienced builder would not recognize deviations from approved plans. The Nixons' lawyers sought summary judgment, but the judge adjourned the case until late November to allow Howard time to gather more evidence and secure legal representation.