A 74-YEAR-OLD has been fined a total of £5,000 for building extensions to his workshop – despite being warned not to. Retired Raymond Pipet, who has six months to pay or faces 250 days in prison, told the Magistrate’s Court that he had no way of finding the money.

After court, he described the fine as ‘a bit steep’. He was not considering an appeal, in case the fine was increased, and said he was unlikely to pay until the last possible moment.

Environment Department planning enforcement officer David Perrio visited Mr Pipet’s home, Les Cocquerels, Rue des Bergers, Castel, in October 2000 and saw that an extension was being built on the western end of an existing workshop. It had not been there two years previously when he visited on an unrelated matter.

The following year, work had started on a carport on the eastern end, which was completed by November 2003.

Mr Perrio took pictures during the visits, copies of which were shown to Assistant-Magistrate Cherry McMillen.

He spoke to Mr Pipet and warned him not to carry on with the work, he said.

‘For both extensions, no permission had been granted by the Island Development Committee,’ he said.

Cross-examining Mr Perrio, the former builder disputed the dates on which the IDC claimed that the photos were taken – although these were both handwritten and laboratory-printed on the reverse.

Mr Pipet said he could not remember specific dates, but was sure the work was done before 1993, when the court fined him for another IDC planning breach.

The two structures, estimated to be 30ft x 15ft and 30ft x 20ft, were used as a carport and storage, said Mr Pipet.

He claimed that they were part of the existing workshop, rather than extensions, and as such no planning permission was necessary.

But Mr Perrio said that whether they were considered to be part of the main building or not, permission would still have been required.

Mr Pipet, who represented himself in court, said that he had been given verbal permission many years ago by the IDC to replace a greenhouse on the site with the workshop.

His son and friends now use part of the building to fix and store racing cars, he said.

‘We don’t make anything from it. I don’t charge for electric or water or anything.

‘I wish all the people who cause trouble on the roads could see them working in there. We have been through hell.’

Under questioning from Miss McMillen, Mr Pipet said that when he and his wife bought the property more than 30 years ago, a significant area was under glass.

He insisted that the extensions were not new and that he had already paid his dues for them.

Finding him guilty of two summonses, the magistrate said: ‘In all respects, I prefer the evidence given by Mr Perrio. When he first visited, there were no extensions.

‘Mr Pipet said that the pictures could not be relied on and said the buildings existed long before the dates, or before 1993, but I reject that.

Calling the work ‘flagrant breaches of the law’, she added: ‘It is clear to me that he knew he should not be building either of them and he was told not to carry on building them.

‘These are not small structures – they could be possibly by described as major development.’

Mr Pipet was fined £2,500 for each extension.