Bassetlaw woman must pay more than £4,500 for failing to clear up eyesore house

Mary Usher, owner and landlord of 37 West Street, in Retford, was ordered to pay a £3,000 fine when she appeared before Mansfield Magistrates’ Court.

She must also pay £1524.68 to cover Bassetlaw District Council’s prosecution costs, bringing the total to £4,524.68.

The Council’s Environmental Health Team received a complaint about the property and visited in May last year to investigate.

The empty building had a hole in the roof through which pigeons were entering and becoming trapped in the upstairs rooms. There was also a build-up of waste in the rear garden.

In September last year, the council served Usher with a notice which required that she:

• Cut back the overgrown undergrowth from the front and rear of the property
• Dispose of all waste accumulations at the front and rear of the property

But when officers visited again last October, they found that the front yard had been cut back, but no further improvements had taken place.

As a result, another notice was served in November, requiring Usher to correct the damaged roof to avoid attracting feral pigeons and prevent them from roosting and nesting inside the building.

During subsequent visits and at the time of issuing proceedings it was found that Ms Usher had still not complied with the conditions set out in the notices, resulting in the council being required to undertake the works to correct the remaining issues.

Councillor Lynne Schuller, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing at Bassetlaw District Council said: “Residents raised their concerns about the unacceptable conditions of 37 West Street, caused by the accumulation of waste and presence of bird droppings.

“The council gave the owner ample opportunity to resolve the issues that posed a threat to the health of local residents, but were unfortunately met with little co-operation. The resident did not uphold their duty of care to store and dispose of their waste responsibly, and did not act on the notices issued.

“In this case, the council was left with no other option than to proceed with prosecution, and used the necessary powers available to them to protect public health.”