An entrepreneur and her husband in Milton Keynes have been left reeling after receiving a demolition order for a substantial garden annexe they constructed without proper planning consent. The couple, who transformed a detached garage into a three-bedroom dwelling for elderly relatives, now have twelve months to remove the unauthorised structure following a failed appeal.
From Modest Garage to Substantial Annexe
Hannah Edwards, 35, and her partner Elzan Seraj undertook significant works at their £625,000 home on the Westcroft estate. What began as a project to convert a modest single-storey garage with a sloping roof evolved into a considerable three-bedroom annexe complete with a loft conversion, a flat-roofed dormer, and a glass-fronted Juliet balcony. The couple intended the ground floor to provide step-free accommodation for Mr Seraj's elderly parents, with additional bedrooms upstairs for visiting guests.
Council Enforcement and Neighbourhood Impact
Milton Keynes Council first refused a retrospective planning application in 2021 and subsequently issued a formal enforcement notice in June 2024. Council planners criticised the development, describing the flat-roofed dormer as 'bulky and excessive'. They concluded the scale and design caused harm to the character and appearance of the area, with raised windows and the balcony leading to a 'harmful erosion of privacy' for neighbouring properties.
Local parish councillors also objected, labelling the project an 'overdevelopment' that was 'out of character for the street and surroundings'. Concerns were raised about the building being overbearing and exacerbating parking pressures on narrow roads.
Couple's Stunned Reaction and Failed Appeal
When visited this week, the couple claimed to be unaware of the demolition order, stating their architect had been handling communications with the council since last spring. 'This is the first we have heard about any decision to demolish any building work,' Mr Seraj said. A visibly distressed Mrs Edwards turned to her partner to ask, 'Where will your parents live now?'
Despite their arguments that the building was ancillary to the main house and caused no harm, the Planning Inspectorate dismissed their appeal. Inspector Zoe Franks noted the couple's existing large three-storey home had ample space to accommodate relatives and guests. She highlighted the annexe's design and materials—dark grey boards and dark window frames—clashed with the surrounding red-brick properties with tiled peaked roofs.
Neighbourhood Perspectives and Financial Fallout
Neighbours expressed mixed reactions. Yagmur Wilkinson, whose home backs onto the property, stated she had received no communication from the council about the works and had no privacy issues, though she noted unresolved fence damage from the original construction. Another anonymous neighbour echoed the lack of consultation but reported no personal disputes with the reclusive owners.
The couple now face the prospect of incurring thousands of pounds in demolition costs to make their property compliant. Mrs Edwards, who runs three pubs in Buckinghamshire, had argued the annexe was essential for family needs, but the inspector found no evidence the main house could not serve those purposes.
The saga underscores the critical importance of securing correct planning permissions before undertaking major developments, even with well-intentioned family motives.
