A retired couple is pursuing the Environment Agency through the courts, seeking £4.5million in compensation for damage they claim was inflicted upon their historic riverside residence in Kent.
Roger and Suzanne Brookhouse, both passionate amateur historians, have brought their case before the Upper Tribunal in London over severe damp problems at The King's Lodging in Sandwich.
The Grade-II listed medieval property sits on the banks of the River Stour and holds a remarkable place in English history.
The Brookhouses allege that flood defence construction carried out by the agency caused groundwater levels beneath their home to rise dramatically, resulting in what they describe as catastrophic deterioration.
TRENDING
Stories
Videos
Your Say
The Environment Agency acknowledges it bears responsibility for paying compensation but maintains the sum demanded is far too high.
The timber-framed dwelling boasts an extraordinary royal pedigree, having once accommodated King Henry VIII himself.
In 1520, the 29-year-old monarch stood at the property's window to survey his fleet before embarking for France and the legendary Field of the Cloth of Gold summit with King Francis I.
Judge Elizabeth Cooke, presiding over the case, observed: "In 1520 King Henry VIII stood at the window of the building now known as The King's Lodging to review his fleet before setting sail for the Field of the Cloth of Gold."
The property later welcomed his daughter, Elizabeth I, as a guest.
A retired couple are pursuing the Environment Agency through the courts, seeking £4.5 million in compensation for damage they claim was inflicted upon their historic riverside residence in Kent
|GOOGLE MAPS
The Brookhouses acquired this piece of Tudor heritage in 1991, transforming it into their retirement home over the following decades.
The residence has naturally been modernised since its royal heyday and now features a swimming pool.
Despite the building's considerable age, surveyors deemed it in satisfactory condition as recently as 2013, noting only minor hairline cracks and some ground floor dampness.
Everything changed following the agency's 2014 tidal defence scheme along the Stour.
The works involved constructing a new wall one metre further into the river than the existing barrier, with the gap between filled with drainage material.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
The timber-framed dwelling boasts an extraordinary royal pedigree, having once accommodated King Henry VIII himself
|GETTY
Following completion, the Brookhouses reported their garden becoming regularly waterlogged for the first time.
Mr Brookhouse stated the grounds had never previously been "boggy".
The tribunal heard evidence of water leaking through the wall, including footage from 2019 showing river water seeping along the entire 53-metre length of the garden.
Since the construction, existing cracks have widened considerably, fresh damage has emerged, and part of the building's frontage now bows outward.
The tribunal returned this week following a 2023 ruling in which Judge Cooke determined the agency was liable, finding groundwater levels had risen by up to a metre after the works.
"The building at The King's Lodging has been damaged by the respondent's works and will be further damaged in the future," she concluded.
The Brookhouses acquired this piece of Tudor heritage in 1991, transforming it into their retirement home over the following decades
|GOOGLE MAPS
James Pereira KC, representing the couple, told the court: "The building appears to have suffered more in the last few years than it has done in the last few hundred."
The £4.5million claim encompasses substantial repair costs alongside approximately £1.3million to restore their once-flourishing garden and replace the 1980s swimming pool, which they contend has been damaged beyond repair.
Mr Pereira described his clients as "custodians of this special place" with a "unique property" of national significance.
The Environment Agency, through Galina Ward KC, contests that the compensation sought is "excessive and disproportionate".
Agency lawyers emphasise that the £4.5million demand exceeds twice the property's maximum estimated value of £1.9million.
Ms Ward told the tribunal that agency experts believe the extensive remedial work proposed by the claimants is unnecessary, and any required repairs would cost considerably less than asserted.
She argued that damage could be addressed through the "ordinary process of repair and maintenance" of the historic building, with any groundwater intervention kept "as conservative as possible".
The agency also disputes the swimming pool claim, contending it was already "near the end of its useful life" in 2014.
Ms Ward noted the couple must demonstrate their proposed works are genuinely necessary, given public funds are at stake.
The trial continues.
Our Standards: The GB News Editorial Charter