I painted my picturesque 16th century shopfront pink – now I’m warned I could be sent to JAIL

A LANDLORD has blasted his local council after claiming they threatened he could be jailed for painting his shopfronts pink.

Kent man Christopher Nevill owns two Grade II-listed buildings, one housing hairdressers and the other a nail salon on Canterbury High Street.

3

3

Christopher says Canterbury City Council in 2023 first warned him over painting the shopfronts without permission as part of their crackdown on bright and showy buildings out of touch with town character.

It came as shoppers previously raised concerns over their main drag being turned into a “second-class Las Vegas” with buildings sporting in-your-face features.

But Christopher said he complied with council concern, offering to repaint his buildings with a lighter shade of pink instead.

The application was approved with a deadline of July 24 this year to begin the rework.

But a month before that date, Christopher has come forward saying he received a shock follow-up warning he could face big fines or even time behind bars.

Christopher told Kent Online: “I received the letter on the very same day I was painting the shops with the colour approved by the council.

“They told me if you don’t do the changes you could go to jail or face an unlimited fine.

“They could have just sent me a nice email asking how the progress of the painting was coming along, but they are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut even when there is no nut to crack.”

Christopher says he was made to feel intimidated by the letter.

He said: “I think this has been a result of incompetence by the council.

“They need to be brought to heel and not exceed their powers. This has all made me feel intimidated and uncomfortable.”

The local authority has for the past year-and-a-half been waging a war on “garish shopfronts that are not sympathetic to the area’s heritage and history, and have been altered illegally”.

The council says the crackdown has been strongly supported by community members.

But it has now issued an apology to Christopher for “confusion” surrounding his case.

The council said: “We apologise to Mr Nevill for the confusion regarding an enforcement notice relating to his shopfront.

“Our work to tackle overbearing and garish shopfronts that are not sympathetic to the area’s heritage and history, and have been altered illegally, has been running for more than 18 months.

“It has been very well received by the community which understands the importance of these issues in an historic city like Canterbury.

“However, a small number of businesses had still not complied with our request to take action to rectify this issue, and Mr Nevill’s was identified as one of these.

“His shopfront was visited on 24 May and as no work had been carried out, enforcement notices legally requiring him to tone down the colour of the paint and remove signage was prepared and issued on 18 June.”

But the council has since acknowledged Christopher has completed the repainting work.

“Mr Nevill wrote to us the following day (May 25) to tell us the paint work had been completed and plans were progressing on the signs.

“We accept that a final check on the premises should have been carried out just before the notices were issued.

“We are pleased that Mr Nevill has now carried out the painting work and once the signage has been removed, we will withdraw the enforcement notice.”

3