.png)
What is latest with Willows Green traveller site scandal? Uttlesford Council slammed over lack of action - read full 'reason' here - emergency talks full report
A COUNCIL has refused to seek enforcement of a High Court injunction banning the continued occupation of a controversial traveller site, despite a Judge inviting the authority to do so, an emergency meeting was told.
Last night, on September 17 2026, councillors were slammed for alleged inaction over 'ongoing and flagrant' breaches of planning laws at the 12-pitch unauthorised traveller site in the quaint hamlet of Willows Green, near Felsted, Essex.
But, John Evans, Uttlesford Council's Cabinet Member for Planning, (pictured at the meeting below) suggested the High Court was to blame for the authority's inaction, because it has not issued a written judgement for the case three months after the injunction was made permanent.
In May residents were left watching in horror as travellers concreted over the field over the first May bank holiday weekend.
The work began as soon as Uttlesford Council closed its offices on May 1, with the local authority doing nothing to prevent the unlawful development despite an earlier Essex News and Investigations article warning the illegal development was likely to happen.
Using lights and diggers, an army of workers and around 30 vehicles began turning over grass ready for hardcore and asphalt.
It was part of a trend that sees travellers build unauthorised developments over long weekends when council enforcement teams are at home. They then apply for retrospective planning permission in a bid to get permanent approval.
The council didn't act until four days later, when it reopened, serving temporary stop notices before an interim High Court injunction was obtained on May 7.
At a full hearing on June 18 Judge Mr Justice Derek Sweeting made the injunction permanent after slamming claims from travellers the site had been occupied before the interim injunction was granted.
The continued residential occupation and development of the site can be considered to be in contempt of court if the council seeks to enforce the injunction.
At an extraordinary full council meeting on Thursday night residents, who staged a protest outside the building, asked why the council had not brought evidence of the ongoing breaches back to the court.
Outside the meeting in Saffron Walden residents chanted 'What do we want? Action. When do we want it? Now?' while holding banners accusing the council of betrayal.
Inside the talks, former Met Police Commander Roy Ram (speaking aboveon the night), who investigated the 1983 Brink's Mat robbery, and is now Felsted Parish Council's chairman said in ten years on the authority, he had 'never before witnessed the anger, the upset and the mental anguish that the conduct of the travelling community had caused across the parish.'
He said: 'Residents are incensed and they believe that everything that could have been done was not done quickly enough.
'Many, including many elderly residents, are deeply distressed and afraid to leave their homes for fear of intimidation and abuse from the travellers who remind them that they know where they live or they are afraid to open their windows due to the noise of the travellers' generators.
'The situation is made worse by what they perceive to be the council's inaction and failure to use the full power of the law when an opportunity to do so was presented in the High Court.
'I support our community in seeking a clear understanding of why this incursion could not be prevented, why the opportunity to be granted enforcement action, that appeared to be offered by the judge at the full injunction hearing was not taken, what happened next and what the council intends to do to stop it happening again.'
The meeting, to provide answers about what the council is doing about the planning breach, was only called following a previous protest when about 100 villagers held a demo outside the council offices on September 3.
The first protest was called after East Herts Council acted swiftly to stop a similar unauthorised traveller site development being created over the late August bank holiday weekend through a High Court injunction.
Several seats were empty after large numbers of councillors failed to show up to the emergency talks last night.
Residents spoke of alleged threats and intimidation received from travellers for speaking up against the site.
These included former police officer Tracy Williams who said threats had followed her to her place of work and on the Sunday of the development a vehicle was driven towards residents when she and Mr Evans were there.
Speaking at the talks (below) she said this was now the residents' day-to-day lives and they shoukd not have to live like this.
It was also alleged that council planning officers had felt intimidated by travellers who turned up to the council officers to argue they were being made homeless.
It was claimed that Judge Sweeting had asked the council during the last injunction hearing if the authority wished to bring enforcement proceedings, after hearing it had been continuously flouted, but that it had declined.
Mr Evans (at the talks below) denied the authority was doing nothing about enforcing the injunction, but said he was limited in what he could say for legal reasons.
He said: 'Evidence provided by residents is assessed by planning enforcement officers.'
But, he said an application to enforce the injunction was unlikely to be made until the written judgement is handed down.
He said: 'The council has still not yet received from the court the sealed order arising from the 18 June hearing, the written judgement setting out the court's reasons, or an approved transcript of any oral judgement delivered at the hearing.
'Officers have repeatedly asked the court for these documents. Accordingly, the council's account of the court's decision is currently limited to the matters confirmed orally during those day’s proceedings.
'The formal court documents will be important in determining the precise terms and effect of the court's decision and in assessing any potential further enforcement action, including whether there is an evidential and procedural basis for an application for contempt of court.'
The meeting heard the council was warned on April 15 that a traveller was trying to secure large amounts of base material to be delivered to the land over the bank holiday.
It received a further warning by email on April 30 and carried out a Land Registry search which showed the land to still be owned by a property company that paid for £125,000 for the site a year earlier.
Even though the property firm has been linked to other unauthorised traveller site developments, on this basis, Mr Evans said there was not enough evidence to apply for an injunction against any development before it started.
No emergency plan was put in place and Mr Evans admitted the council has no out of hours emergency cover for planning enforcement matters.
It was also revealed that the council had updated its planning enforcement policy just...weeks before the unauthorised development, but it made no mention of how to deal with illegal traveller sites.
Mr Evans added that as a result of the events at Willows Green, the council has commissioned officers to undertake a review of its planning enforcement processes, including to look at the effectiveness of current out-of-hours arrangements and communication with affected neighbours.
Residents outside the meeting accused the council of making excuses over paperwork about their lack of action to enforce the injunction.
Travellers from the site also claim to have been intimidated by hostile protesting villagers.
Anthony Mongan, the applicant for the retrospective planning application, said the application would help meet a "significant" unmet need for traveller sites.
Michael Mongan, who was also part of the application for retrospective planning permission for the site, said in a statement after the first protest "We believe the proper planning process should be allowed to take its course.
"The application should be considered and decided by the planning committee on the relevant planning, safety and safeguarding matters, rather than being decided through local pressure or protest.
"This is not about attacking or criticising the local community. It is about protecting the privacy, safety and wellbeing of our families and children."
Images & videos: Essex News and Investigations - meeting stills Uttlesford Council.