A 76-year-old homeowner has been told her three-bedroom bungalow will be sold unless she pays £113,266 to her neighbour within three months after losing a five-year legal dispute over a strip of land of about 1 foot, a judge ruled at Bournemouth County Court.
District Judge Ross Fentem said he had "no confidence at all" that the claimant, Pauline Clark, would be paid what she was owed except by an order for sale, describing the remedy as a "last resort" but necessary to bring the long-running dispute to an end. The matter was heard in the defendant's absence after the homeowner, identified in court documents as Jenny Field, failed to attend.
The dispute between neighbours in a cul-de-sac in Hamworthy, Poole, Dorset, began in June 2020 after one of the women replaced a wooden fence. The other neighbour said the new fence had been moved about 1 foot onto her land and later instructed contractors to remove a six-foot fence that she said encroached on her property. Legal proceedings for damage, theft and trespass were brought in February 2021 and a judge issued a final ruling in December 2022.
Judge Walsh's December 2022 judgment found in favour of Pauline Clark and ordered Jenny Field to pay £11,800 for damage to the fence and a retaining wall, plus £2,120 in legal costs. Following a series of further applications and attempts to overturn that decision, the sums owed to Clark rose into six figures as additional costs and judgments were added.
Judge Fentem said Field had repeatedly tried to relitigate the original ruling and had sent the court what he described as "hundreds if not thousands" of pages of documents in recent months, a volume the judge said was excessive and a disproportionate use of court staff and judicial time. A civil restraint order was imposed amid concerns the correspondence could be perceived as vexatious.
Field had sought to counterclaim, seeking about £500,000 in damages alleging "sham litigation," trespass and harassment, but another district judge dismissed that application. Judge Fentem said the assertions of fraud were "totally without merit" and upheld earlier findings that the original ruling should stand.
Anna Curtis, representing Clark, told the court that the defendant had indicated she had no intention of paying the sums ordered and that there had been no proposals for refinancing or settlement. Curtis told the judge there was sufficient equity in Field's property for her to pay the debt and still obtain alternative accommodation in retirement.
When contacted in court, Field said she did not have the money to pay the judgment and that estate agents were visiting her home to market it at about £600,000 so she could meet the court-ordered sum. She told reporters she would sell because she had to and had become "fed up with living here," adding she would offer to pay Clark "£1 per week."
Clark, a widow who brought the original action, told the Daily Mail that the five-year dispute had left her "to hell and back." Court materials and reporting said the stress of the dispute led to private counselling and, according to her account, ill health that prompted her to leave a local government job.
Judge Fentem added a further £7,454 in costs in the most recent hearing, bringing the total amount Field must pay to £113,266. He noted that the December 2022 order was intended to be final and criticised repeated efforts to reopen settled matters, saying the parties needed "to find a way of putting the entirety of this dispute behind them."
The court gave Field three months to settle the debt. If she does not, the order allows for the sale of her £420,000 bungalow to satisfy the judgment. The judge described the sale order as "draconian" but concluded it was necessary on the specific facts of this prolonged dispute.