Retired couple David and Denise Hopwood put up a seven-foot fence for privacy and security – but lost their planning appeal after a neighbour complained about its height and appearance
Charlie Fenton and Lee Grimsditch
19:24, 16 Mar 2026Updated 21:46, 16 Mar 2026
The retired couple have hit out at council bosses(Image: William Lailey / SWNS)
A retired couple are facing orders to tear down a £4,500 seven-foot fence they erected for ‘privacy and security’ after losing their council appeal.
David and Denise Hopwood, from Bolton, installed the 25-metre-long grey composite fence around their home seeking privacy and minimal upkeep.
It took the place of an aging nine-foot-high hedge that had become progressively harder and more expensive to look after given their advancing years and medical issues.
But a neighbour lodged a complaint with the council over its height, compelling David, 67, and Denise, 66, to apply for retrospective planning permission.
Last year, the pair were informed permission had been denied on grounds it clashed with the ‘character and appearance of the surrounding area’, reports the Manchester Evening News.
The retired couple fought back, pointing out that the hedge had set them back £800 annually to maintain and that the fence – fitted with a 1ft trellis and gravel boards – had ‘transformed’ their lives.
David’s neighbour complained(Image: William Lailey / SWNS)
READ MORE: Meningitis ‘new strain’ fears – everything you need to knowREAD MORE: Woman’s ‘petrifying’ meningitis seizure after ‘sharing vape’ in Canterbury outbreak
The couple challenged the decision at the time but in recent days, following a site inspection last month, the council held its ground, leaving them staring down the barrel of dismantling the fence.
An official document listed five grounds for rejecting their appeal, declaring that its position, materials, colour and dimensions ‘appears a discordant and strident feature in the street scene’. David said: “We both have arthritis and the hedge was out of control, we weren’t able to look after it. We put it up for privacy and security, as well as it is ideal for maintenance purposes.
“I feel we have been hard done by saying it doesn’t fit with the street scene, there isn’t one size that fits all here. They seem to be focused on the colour and the type but there is a right mix already on the street.
“The colour is our choice, I don’t understand why it is an issue. There is a jet black one across the road, a number of brick ones, I feel like we have been picked on.”
‘We had to peg blankets on the line to stop neighbours looking in’.
After removing the hedge, the pair revealed they had to hang blankets on their washing line to prevent people peering into their property before installing the fence.
The seven foot high fence cost £4,500(Image: William Lailey / SWNS)
The home is located at the junction of Plodder Lane and Duchy Avenue, facing open countryside and fields which add to what has been termed a “semi-rural character”.
Whilst boundary treatments vary somewhat along the street, the inspector observed that properties generally feature relatively open frontages with low walls, wooden fencing or railings, frequently complemented by established hedging.
The report stated the 2.1m-high fence, situated at the rear edge of the pavement, is “very prominent” for those travelling along Plodder Lane. Despite being adorned with a decorative trellis, the structure was deemed to completely enclose the frontage and appear “at odds with the open frontages, low walls and hedgerows of the dwellings opposite”.
The inspector also noted that the black composite panels “starkly contrast” with the red brick of the house and adjoining lower wall, labelling the structure as a “discordant and strident feature in the street scene”.
The report stated that they took into account the personal circumstances of the appellant – including privacy and security – but found little evidence to suggest that the ‘height and materiality of the fence is necessary to achieve the security and privacy’.
They also concluded there was ‘insufficient evidence’ to imply that a ‘safe and private environment for David’s home ‘could not be achieved in a manner which causes less harm to the character and appearance of the area’.
The couple say they have yet to receive an enforcement notice but if they were forced to dismantle it, they said it would be ‘terrible’.
He commented: “The appeal is the end of the line, an enforcement notice is usually the next course of action. The whole ordeal has been very stressful. Hopefully they will just order us to change the colour and not replace it with something else.”