When you hear people talk about Rye it’s more often than not with affection. The cobbled streets, the beautiful buildings and architecture, the fascinating historical connections and the eclectic mix of artisan shops, tea rooms and cultural events – it’s no wonder Rye attracts visitors in their tens of thousands all year. For many, the pilgrimage includes a visit to Mermaid Street, probably one of the most famous and most photographed streets in the United Kingdom, home to the famous Mermaid Inn Hotel.
Rye News has often featured this iconic location in a variety of articles as our readers are fascinated by its architectural significance and historical provenance but sadly, on this occasion the focus is for a different reason.
Many have asked: “Who owns this house?”; “What’s happening to it and why has it been allowed to fall into semi dereliction?”; “Surely it must be a Grade 11 listed building?”
These questions all relate to No 9 Mermaid Street which, as you can see from the photograph, is not what you might have expected to see, particularly as the property is Grade 11 listed and officially deemed to be of great historical or artistic value that has official protection to prevent it from being changed or destroyed. Why then has it been allowed to fall into such obvious disrepair?
The property is vacant and we understand the gentleman owner is now living elsewhere with friends, has no next of kin or relatives and is also sadly not in a position to maintain the property. But, despite the fact that the property is listed and in a poor state of repair the 1990 Planning Act clearly states: “There is no specific duty on owners to keep their buildings in a good state of repair but local authorities have powers to take action where a designated heritage asset has deteriorated to the extent that its preservation may be at risk.”
If a local planning authority (or Historic England) considers that a listed building is not being properly preserved, it may serve a repairs notice on the owner which enables it to carry out urgent works for the preservation of listed buildings in their area after giving notice to the owner.
If at least two months have elapsed following the service of a repairs notice, and it appears to the body who served the notice that reasonable steps are not being taken for the proper preservation of the building, they may begin compulsory purchase proceedings. Compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) made by a local planning authority or by Historic England require the Secretary of State’s confirmation, and the Secretary of State must consult Historic England before making an order herself or confirming an authority’s order.
I interviewed the owners of the adjoining property, No 8 Mermaid Street, a beautiful Grade 11 listed property which they adore. However, their enjoyment has been compromised over the years due to the deteriorating state of the neighbouring property resulting in internal damage to their house which I witnessed whilst there on my visit. Their wall and ceiling plaster is cracking and beginning to fall away due to damp penetration through the party wall. For the owners of No 8 it’s a relatively simple problem to fix but there is no point in attempting to repair the damage as the cause is out of their control and so the damage is getting progressively worse.
The rear garden at No 9 is completely engulfed by brambles and vegetation, as high as the boundary fence, a haven for birdlife and wildlife but alas vermin too. The gardens also engulf the buildings at the rear of No 8 and cause damage to the roof and brickwork but apart from taming the overhang, the neighbours are powerless to deal with this without trespassing. Not nice to look onto or live next to so why is it as it is and what’s the solution?
I contacted Rye Town Council who quickly responded by stating that Planning Enforcement at Rother District Council have been aware of the problems at this property for a number of years and that the latest problem that the local council was aware of was the “dangerous guttering”. This situation has been partly resolved by removing and taking away the fallen guttering but now, the roof water just pours down the front of the property and no doubt is speeding up the dereliction process.
I then contacted Rye Conservation Society who confirmed that they were also aware of the property and its issues and had been for years but as the property is privately owned there was very little they could do. They did make me aware of a property with similar issues, next door to the Queens Head in Landgate, another listed building.
My next stop was speaking to Dan Bevan at Rother District Council. He is the Principal Enforcement Officer and team leader at Directorate of Place and Climate Change at Rother District Council. He explained that he has been involved in this difficult and sensitive case for five years and is in contact with the owner, various professional bodies and departments as well as social services and the neighbours at No 8 Mermaid Street. He is also a key holder and the main point of contact.
When pressed on answers to some of my questions he responded by saying: “There is a lot going on in the background which I am not able to discuss with you” but the inference was that progress is being made and that the external elevations of the building fronting Mermaid Street were the main point of discussion. When pressed for more information I was then referred to the council’s press office who responded with: “Our enforcement team are working with the owner and owner’s representatives regarding 9 Mermaid Street in Rye and it would be inappropriate for us to comment further.”
In summary, we have a building of historical interest, in a Conservation Area which has fallen into a serious state of disrepair, a situation which the legal owner is not in a position to change. Rye Town Council and Rye Conservation Society are aware of the issues but other than reporting them to the relevant authorities are powerless to act further. Rother District Council have been involved with this case and the owner of the property now for five years but due to the sensitive nature are unable to divulge any information to me or others. In the meantime, the neighbours at No 8 have no choice but to sit back and watch their own property deteriorating in front of them and are at a loss as to what they can do next.
As sensitive as it is, perhaps a staged progress report could have been communicated to the neighbours at least, as questions remain unanswered. Do the authorities intend to implement any further powers invested in them and how much longer will it be before this listed building in Mermaid Street, one of the town’s top tourist attractions, begins to look anything other than just another one of Rye’s unloved and uncared for buildings? After all, it is a property which forms part of our world famous and historic heritage.
Image Credits: Nick Forman .
Rother, Town Council and Conservation Society….what a litany of woe! You try changing the colour of your front door, and they come down on you like a ton of bricks. In the meantime, a house in what the Telegraph calls one of the top 10 streets in England is allowed to fall into total disrepair, and all you get is ‘not me, guv’ or a mysterious ‘ there is lots going on behind the scenes’…this has been going on for years and years, with excuse after excuse, and no tangible progress. Rother, on its offical website, states that ‘properties that are left long term empty can fall into disrepair, becoming a potential eyesore and focus for anti-social behaviour such as vandalism and fly-tipping. We want to see empty properties in our district brought back into use, or kept in a good state of repair until they are.Where properties are causing harm to a neighbourhood we have enforcement powers available to require works, force a sale, take over the management or compulsory purchase’. Well, you seem to have the powers, use them, and use them now!
Hear, hear Brian.
Agree with Brian, want to change a beam inside a listed house , planning creates problems.
I cannot believe that all the relevant people have been involved for five years and nothing was done even though the neighbours property was experiencing damage to their house and it will get worse the longer this goes on. It seems like pass the parcel with no-one taking a decisive action.
The fact that all interested parties, principally Rother District Council, have been ‘aware of the problem’ for five years suggests either that their powers are too weak, or that there is a lack of political will, to push for repair and renovations, with the owner footing the bill.
Removing gutters is a mistake; next it will be failure to repair the roof, then a mysterious fire!
Have the owners of Number 8 considered suing the owner of Number 9 for the damage caused to their home? That course of action may well accelerate a resolution.
Of course eventually the Local Authorities will act eventually at great cost to the owner – they certainly have the power but they dont like using them as they have to carry the cost for years until the owner passes away or sells up
Often if the options are explained properly sense prevails . If the owner cannot afford it there are financial solutions such as an interest equity release mortgage which can raise enough for repairs or of course selling up . I say this as there are clearly some major repairs .
BUT if the owner is not going to do anything I think that the garden could be cleared by volunteers . I would assist if neighbours and others take the lead . How about the gardening group at Lamb House ? .
Absolutely ridiculous and selfish that one person can neglect their property to the point it’s impacting on the quality of life and health, and devaluing the property of their neighbour. If the owner is living elsewhere and not in a position to maintain the property, why on earth doesn’t he sell it, or at the very least allow people onto the property to clear the garden? Dan Bevan at Rother District Council needs to pull his finger out and get some action in progress. If he holds a key then he has the power to get things moving and make the owner see sense.
Whilst on the subject when are the local authorities going to act on two serious derelict eyesores in the town,one on South undercliffe, and grist mill on winchelsea Road, surely time the councils served an enforcement notice on these owners,to clean up their act.
The planning permission says that Martello have until July to start work at the Grist Mill site. We shall see….
I would give it till the spring then maybe contact the newspapers. Whilst I accept the sensitivity of the owners situation ,whatever it is it is very unfair that it is impacting the neighbours party wall. I hope that there is a solution soon and it will become someone’s home. Although the likely hood is it will become another air b and b !
The house has already been subject to a Section 215 order, as a result of which a substantial growth of ivy was removed from the frontage and roof and essential repairs to the latter conducted. This process was started by Rye Conservation Society several years ago – but since then there has been further major deterioration and the top floor dormer flank has decayed badly, which will be allowing water to come in. The next steps are to flag the house on the Buildings at Risk Register and/or to suggest that Rother should apply for a compulsory purchase order if there is no further progress.