A millionaire couple who face a £130,000 legal bill after a disastrous court battle over a wall have been urged by a judge to make peace with their neighbour to end the feud.
Liz Peck, who runs a gender-neutral organic children’s clothing business, and her singer-songwriter husband Adam accused neighbour Debbie Ranford of “trespassing” on their East Dulwich property when she built a roof extension to her flat.
Mrs Ranford’s builder used “infill” material on the Pecks’ side of the boundary, prompting the couple to sue to try to force her to dismantle the entire extension. In a ruling last June, Judge Simon Monty QC concluded there had been a “very minor” trespass across the boundary and awarded the Pecks just £200 in damages. Suggesting the couple had used a “sledgehammer to crack a nut”, he left them to shoulder lawyers’ bills totalling around £130,000.
The Pecks have now been granted permission to appeal Judge Monty’s ruling, seeking to increase their compensation payment.
Mr Justice Roth, sitting at the High Court, allowed the case to go forward but urged the neighbours to try to settle the “bitter dispute” without wasting even more money. “This case was a financial disaster for Mr and Mrs Peck,” he said. “As is so often the case, the costs have vastly exceeded the amount of any damages that could ever have been awarded.”
He encouraged the parties to try to settle their differences without coming back to court, pointing out that the neighbours could end up running up more lawyers’ bills while arguing about lawyers’ bills.
“The claim form limited the damages to £12,500 and huge costs have already been defrayed on both sides,” he said. “When one is dealing with what is likely to be on any view a relatively modest increase in the damages and an argument where more costs can be expended in arguing about costs, I think the parties should seek to mediate.” Mrs Ranford, who works for a City bank, had been a friend of the Pecks prior to the legal battle, which stemmed from her construction of a loft room in 2014 — carried out with the Pecks’ consent.
A Party Wall Notice was signed by the couple, but Mrs Peck, 49, said she was shocked to later discover the extension had encroached on to their property, believing there would be a gap between the two homes.
Central London County Court heard Mrs Ranford had sought to avoid “enormous costs” of a trial and offered her neighbours £13,000 to settle the case but it had been refused. The Pecks are set to argue in their appeal that the blight on both houses is worth more than a £200 compensation payment.
