Bassetlaw takeaway owner ordered to shell out £1,373 for flouting listed building rules

A Bassetlaw takeaway owner has been ordered to pay up more than £1,300 for flouting listed building rules.

On April 7 2021, Davod Sadeghi Mazidi pleaded guilty to the offence at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court.

He was orderd to pay £64 for the failure to comply with a listed building enforcement notice, along with a victim surcharge of £34 and costs of £1,275.44 – making the total £1,373.44.

Mr Mazidi was first contacted on May 13, 2019 when the breach of planning control was identified due to the unauthorised installation of an illuminated fascia sign, an illuminated projecting sign and security shutters to the front of the building at 10 Bridgegate, Retford, which had been undertaken without consent.

The takeaway owner failed to comply with a Listed Buildings Enforcement Notice served by Bassetlaw District Council.
The takeaway owner failed to comply with a Listed Buildings Enforcement Notice served by Bassetlaw District Council.

On June 24 of that year, Mr Mazidi was issued with the listed building enforcement notice to take effect from August 1 that required remedial works to be carried out on the building.

This included the removal of the fascia, sign and security shutters.

He was also required to restore the buildings original appearance by reinstating the timber fascia board and repainting the shop front.

The compliance date for the removal of the structures was November 1 2019 with failure to comply with such a notice being a criminal offence.

Councillor David Pidwell, chair of planning at Bassetlaw District Council, said: “Listed buildings have very specific requirements to preserve their special or historical features and character.

"Unauthorised changes made to listed buildings that are challenged and being in breach of listed building enforcement can result in fines or even a possible prison sentence.”

“Listed Building consent is required for any works that will alter the character or appearance of a listed building and this includes alterations, extensions or demolition.

"It is crucial that consent for such changes is established before any works are carried out,” he added.

The premises were inspected on March 13 and August 12 with non-compliance with the notice discovered and documented on both of these occasions.

By the final hearing date on April 7 2021, the remedial works remained incomplete and did not meet the expected standard that had been outlined in the listed building enforcement notice.

In these confusing and worrying times, local journalism is more vital than ever. Thanks to everyone who helps us ask the questions that matter by taking out a subscription or buying a paper. We stand together. Sam Jackson, editor.