Man Hires £150-a-Day Security to Protect Tiny Wall from Developer Dispute

Roger White, 59, is spending £150 daily to hire security guards to protect a two-brick-high wall on the outskirts of Gloucester. The “dwarf wall,” located in Hempsted, is at the center of a dispute with Lioncourt Homes, a developer constructing 70 houses on adjacent land.

Mr. White inherited the wall and the narrow strip of land it stands on from his father in 1997 and insists he is the legal owner. However, Lioncourt Homes claims the wall must be removed to provide an emergency access route required by their planning permission. The developer argues that the access has been created using their own land and adopted highway land, without needing Mr. White’s property.

Feeling “bullied” by the developer, Mr. White says Lioncourt Homes never approached him to buy the land before beginning construction. The developer previously sent him a cease-and-desist letter stating he had “no entitlement to a ransom” over the wall.

To prevent what he fears may be an unauthorized demolition, Mr. White has hired a security company to protect the wall. He also plans to repair the structure, which has not been maintained since it was built by his father in 1974. Mr. White has provided Land Registry documents from 1971 to prove ownership, while the developer claims to hold evidence dating back to 1964 supporting their case.

Mr. White expresses frustration and sadness over the conflict, viewing the wall as a legacy from his late father, who was a local estate agent known for purchasing so-called “ransom strips” as investments.

Gloucestershire County Council stated that legally, the developer’s land boundary adjoins the public road and that the highway status takes precedence over ownership beneath it, allowing the emergency access work to proceed lawfully.

Lioncourt Homes maintains that the emergency access has been completed on land it owns or on adopted highway land, without involving any third-party property.

This quirk of property law has escalated into a costly security standoff over a wall just a few bricks high, reflecting the complexities of land ownership adjacent to new developments.