Can anyone spot the deliberate mistake in this newspaper story?
"It cost Peter Howell £400,000 to build and was everything he and his wife had ever dreamed of. It was here, nestled in the rural tranquility of North Yorkshire, that they planned to retire. But their dream was reduced to a dusty pile of rubble.
"At the end of a bitter five-year legal battle with local planning officers - costing hundreds of thousands - the bulldozers went in and demolished their five-bedroom home. Howell, 63, began building the home in Ingleby Arncliffe in 2004 after he was granted outline planning permission by his local council. Expecting his application to simply be 'rubber stamped' work began almost immediately. He submitted plans to Hambleton Council, but no major objections were made.
"Then, after a letter was sent to every villager claiming building had begun without proper consent, a flood of objections arrived on the desks of planning officials. Eventually, Mr Howell lost his bid for retrospective planning permission. He tried a further four times to convince planning officials but lost each time.
"Yesterday morning, his five year legal fight ended in a haze of dust and bricks. Taking the body blow to his house in some might say a pragmatic light, Mr Howell said: 'It's a terrible shame that a perfectly good house is being torn down just so the council proves it can be.'
"The demolition brings to a close a long-running legal wrangle between the couple and the council over the three bedroom house in Yorkshire. The complex saga has involved repeated wrangles, a police investigation into a violent planning meeting, several public inquiries and cost both sides a total of well into six figures. But in October last year it was concluded that the property 'harmed the character and appearance of the surrounding area'. It was 'dominant and visually intrusive by virtue of its height, bulk and colour', they said, and was 'not in keeping with the general character of this part of Ingleby Arncliffe'.
"Mr Howell, a property developer with 30 years experience, said he had lost hundreds of thousands in the collapse of his dream. His business is in liquidation, with the Royal Bank of Scotland now owning the property.
"Mr Howell now believes another house will be built later on the site, similar to the one knocked down. 'I'm extremely upset by allegations that we have flouted the law, we would never do that,' he added. 'The land had outline planning consent for the construction of a house. The principle for development had therefore been established, this is unequivocal and irreversible. The site had outline permission and the original scheme had the support of planning officers. Without these two factors, I would never, ever have started building. I have put a house where a house should be.'"
Well, did you spot the mistake?
It was this: Mr.Howell has been a very, very silly boy. He's an experienced property developer who must have been through this process many times before. He fought a battle for five whole years, a battle that involved lawyers, public meetings and even referral to the High Court. And he missed one trick, the simplest trick in the world that hundreds of other people know about, a trick that would have guaranteed him victory overnight.
The trick? Claim to be a traveller. Planning rules don't apply to them, and local authorities are terrified of offending them.
Simple as that, Mr.Howell. Just say "You're picking on me because I'm a traveller and that's racist."
Game over! You need a caravan, of course.
either on this site or on the World Wide Web.
Copyright © 2009 The GOS