Skip to main content

Some of our online payments including garden waste and licensing will be unavailable from 2pm Thursday 28 March until midday Tuesday 2 April due to essential maintenance.

Developer fined almost £12,000 for failing to meet highway requirements

This news article was published more than a year ago. Some of the information may no longer be accurate.

Published: 19/10/2016


We have successfully prosecuted a housing developer to the tune of nearly £12,000* after they admitted failing to secure funds to support road construction, including drainage and street lighting, at a Lyde Green housing development site.

Under legislation covered by the Highways Act 1980 we are required to serve a Notice on a developer to make an advance payment or sign up to a guarantee to cover the cost of the associated street works of a residential development. This measure is to protect future purchasers of the properties from having to fund work themselves to bring the road up to a suitable standard. This prosecution was brought against Persimmon Homes Severn Valley after we discovered they had started building works on the Lyde Green development without providing the funds required by the council, in breach of the Notice served.

Council officers first noticed work had started at the site on 24 August and they continued to monitor the development over the following month.

Persimmon Homes pleaded guilty to the 12 counts of failing to make provisions for street works at the new development where a total of 56 new homes are to be built. The house builder was fined £650 for each offence, totalling £7,800, and were also ordered to pay costs of £3,987.23 plus a victim surcharge of £170.

Environment and Community Services Chair Cllr Heather Goddard said: “This is our first successful prosecution of this nature and is an excellent result for the council. It is vital that the supporting infrastructure is taken care of alongside the house building and sends a clear message to developers operating in our area that they must meet their legal obligations.”

The case was heard at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on Friday 14 October.


Is there anything wrong with this page?