A millionaire property developer with a "criminal lifestyle", who illegally built a £4m house in an exclusive conservation area, yesterday received the U.K's highest-ever fine for ignoring planning rules.
Privately-educated Piers Rance, 42, was fined £100,000 at Isleworth Crown Court and ordered to pay £100,000 costs to Hammersmith & Fulham Council. He will also have to meet his own costs, estimated at £300,000.
Rance (pic.bottom r.) fought the council tooth-and-nail during an original trial at West London Magistrates' Court and a subsequent Crown Court appeal.
However, he lost both legal battles and was told by a Judge he was: "Taking the Mickey" if he expected the court to believe he had zero assets and his only income was a £110 a week per diem from his mother.
Rance, of Inglethorpe Street, Fulham, South-West London paid £2m for the corner property in the nearby Bishops Park Conservation Area - illegally demolished it - and built a larger house complete with basement swimming pool without planning permission.
His assets are hidden in a complicated web of offshore companies based in the Caribbean island of Anguilla, and St. Helier, Jersey as well as in his wife Marianne's(pic.bottom r.) name.
Rance was convicted of causing the demolition of a building in a conservation area, namely 39 Cloncurry Street, Fulham,(pic.top) between June 18, 2007 and March 12, 2008, contrary to the Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act.
After he was threatened with imprisonment following his conviction Rance was given thirty minutes to come clean about his wealth to a Crown Court judge then returned to admit he had immediate access to assets totalling £60,000, then a month later revealed the true figure was at least £2m.
Judge Simon Oliver told Rance, who attended £9,500 per-year Bryanston School, Blandford, Dorset: "You are taking the Mickey if you expect me to believe you are not a man of means.
"Own up and give us an answer or you are going through the door to your right. It does not bother me sending you to prison, I will happily do it.
"It is time to 'fess up, come clean, and tell us what is going on."
Rance eventually admitted having £800,000 equity in the Cloncurry Street property and £200,000 equity in his four-bedroom £1m-plus Inglethorpe Street house, which has been advertised for rental at £1100 per week.
His family's Jersey-based trust also own two commercial properties in Exeter, currently rented out, which have a combined equity of £50-£100,000.
Rance's property company AEDS Ltd. has £30,000 in the bank and Fulham and Hammersmith council found resident parking permits for a £15,000 Ford Galaxy and £3,000 Saab.
The Cloncurry Street property was in joint names with Marianne, but has since been signed-over to her alone so the defendant can avoid foreclosure and bankruptcy, Rance claims.
"This is the type of thing businessmen do. Put assets in the name of other people," announced Judge Oliver. "He has been moving the money around offshore and out of the jurisdiction.
"I am not going to take money from his mother. I am not prepared to believe he is a man of straw on one hundred and ten pounds a week."
Rance also admitted being the director of a Hersham estate agent's and a Surrey property company.
Judge Oliver insisted Rance detail his assets in a sworn affidavit. "The reason for that if there are any lies in it he can be done for perjury."
The case had been adjourned previously so Hammersmith and Fulham Council can conduct a full investigation under the Proceeds of Crime Act and the court heard Marianne's finances may come under scrutiny.
They have valued the illegal house at £3.4-£4m, but have never gained access.
"In this case distress has been caused, the elderly next-door neighbour had to move out after a crack appeared in her wall and that property is currently undergoing top to toe restoration," said prosecutor Mr. Richard Heller.
"Mr. Rance, on the facts found in the magistrates' court, has a criminal lifestyle, although I am sure he will dispute that.
"Taxation is at the forefront of Mr. Rance's mind in the way he conducts his financial affairs and a further financial investigation is warranted."
Contrary to this report I have always prided myself on being a considerate contractor with a real passion for beautiful buildings. I had started stripping out this building while waiting for the Council to grant planning permission. We removed a very unattractive 1960s back addition to discover that over the years it had become a support for the rest of the house. The flank and rear walls were unstable, and I was advised by my surveyor that they posed an immediate danger of collapse. This was only feet away from the pavement and the public highway. I therefore carefully dismantled the wall and saved all the architectural features to rebuild it as it was before.
ReplyDeleteThe basement extension is a common feature of refurbishment projects in Fulham, and had nothing to do with the demolition. The building techniques I used are quite standard for basement retrofitting. To my surprise, LBHF fought and won a case by suggesting that the demolition of this lovely building was somehow an advantage to me. This was patently wrong.
On conviction, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham claimed £3.5 million from me through the confiscation procedure. Resisting this claim has been an ordeal that has lasted over a year. Fortunately, the judge was persuaded that such an order would be completely wrong.
I continue to maintain that I have done nothing wrong, but I am exhausted by fighting this case through the magistrates and crown court and will not appeal any further.
I continue to work in the building trade and to take pride in the quality of my work.
I would warn other Fulham residents to be very wary of a London Borough which is both aggressive and greedy in its approach to law enforcement".