Neighbour from hell Geri Halliwell accused of 'trolling' residents by refusing to tear down illegal summer house

One neighbour said the couple were "rubbing our noses in it" and showing "complete disregard" for the planning process.

"The pergola and wooden gazebo that were refused retrospective planning permission still exist, and are being used with fairy lights on top," the anonymous resident said, according to The Telegraph.

“It is like we are being trolled as the black wired wrapped-around fairly lights over the length of the pergola are still in situ.

"If that is not rubbing our noses in it and showing complete disregard for the planning process I don’t know what is."

They added that "any ordinary person would have been force to tear it all down", labelling the situation a show of "injustice".

West Northamptonshire Council's Heritage & Conservation Team previously rejected an application by the couple for the gazebo and an an oak-framed pergola near their outdoor swimming pool, arguing it "detracts from the views" of a nearby Grade I listed church.

Several neighbours also opposed the plans, including one who wrote: "This was once a beautiful quaint property and plot in this conservation area. Where are you inspectors, or do the rules not apply here."

Another said: "This has already been built, along with a sauna block higher than the wall which in a conservation area is unacceptable. Trees also removed on site."

In its notice of refusal of this planning application submitted last summer, the council wrote: "The proposed development, by reason its size, positioning and appearance, would result in an unacceptable form of development, and would be considered an unsympathetic addition within the curtilage of the listed building.

"The resulting impact is considered give rise to a moderate degree of less-than-substantial harm to the setting of the listed building and a low level of less than substantial harm conservation area, which would not be sufficiently outweighed by public benefits."

In a design statement submitted alongside an earlier retrospective planning application for the pergola, it was argued the structure was "visually sensitive" and "preserves the character and setting of the host property".

The statement on behalf of the applicants read: "Glebe House is a heritage asset whose significance is derived from its architectural quality and its relationship with the surrounding garden.

"The proposal has been carefully designed to ensure that it remains clearly subordinate to the main house and does not result in harm to its significance or setting.

"The pergola is freestanding and lightweight in form, constructed from natural oak.

"The use of oak reflects traditional garden structures and ensures the proposal sits comfortably within a historic landscape context.

"The open nature of the pergola avoids the introduction of built mass and ensures that key views of the house and garden are retained."

The council is expected to make a decision on the latest planning application by March.