The disgruntled resident challenged Croydon Council over a long-running planning dispute at a property on Purley Way during a heated public questions session
Croydon’s first full council meeting since the election got off to a fiery start last night after a resident refused to hand back the microphone, resulting in an eight-minute standoff with council members.
Despite initially attempting to move the meeting on, the Civic Mayor eventually allowed elderly resident John Watton to ask his public question. Unhappy with the response, Mr Watton told the chamber: “I’m short-circuited on this because the summary is totally inadequate,” adding that he had waited four months for an answer from the council.
Mr Watton submitted the first question during the public questions section of last night’s council meeting (July 20) – the first full meeting since Mayor Jason Perry was re-elected in May. He raised concerns about a planning enforcement notice relating to 518 Purley Way, which he said he had been pursuing with the council since 2023.
He said he believed the property, located near the busy Fiveways junction in Waddon, was not fit for habitation due to what previous inspectors described as its “severely oppressive” design. Giving a preamble to his written question, Mr Watton then cited a senior planning opinion from June 2023 which found the building’s conversion to residential use was “unauthorised and therefore unlawful”.
He also referred to expert reports raising concerns about inadequate natural light and questioned why the council continued to house people at the property despite a previous planning inspector’s view that it could potentially cause physical and psychological distress.
Halfway through his address, Mr Watton was interrupted by newly appointed Civic Mayor, Councillor Mohammed Islam, who asked him to move on to his submitted question. Cllr Islam, who was chairing his first public questions session, cited the limited time available and the length of the meeting agenda.
However, Mr Watton was dissatisfied with the written response he received from Cabinet Member for Planning and Regulatory Services, Jeet Bains, saying: “The summary I have just been handed does not bear a full resemblance to the question I asked, and therefore the answer is inadequate because it does not reflect the agenda.”
He told the chamber the response had only been handed to him as he walked into the chamber “five minutes ago”.
During a tense exchange, Cllr Islam attempted to hand over to the council’s Director of Legal Services and Monitoring Officer, Stephen Lawrence-Orumwense. Yet this proved ineffective as Mr Watton continued to question him about the enforcement issue and his correspondence with the council.
Cllr Islam reiterated that members of the public were required to ask the question they had submitted in advance.
Still dissatisfied, Mr Watton said: “So I’m not entitled to read out the letter which originally raised my questions. Therefore, I’m short-circuited on this because the summary is totally inadequate.”
When Cllr Islam refused his further question, Mr Watton asked why the council had not followed through on a commitment made nearly two years earlier to obtain leading counsel’s opinion on the effectiveness of the planning consent.
Mr Watton then refused to hand back the microphone as council staff attempted to move the meeting on. A security staff member tried to take it from him, but he did not relent, saying: “I have waited four months to try and get an answer to this question.”
Nearly eight minutes after the exchange began, Mr Watton was eventually allowed to ask his question, which he directed to the Civic Mayor, Executive Mayor and council’s legal department. He asked whether they would honour a commitment to obtain legal advice on the validity of the planning consent for the property.
Instead of answering his amended question, Councillor Bains read the original written response which was published ahead of the meeting. He confirmed the council’s housing team had not directly placed Croydon tenants at 518 Purley Way.
Cllr Bains added that planning enforcement action was discretionary and had to be proportionate and necessary. He said the council had concluded the alleged breaches did not cause enough planning harm to justify formal enforcement action and that no further action would be taken.
Mr Watton remained dissatisfied with the response, while Cllr Bains said he would follow up with him after the meeting.
To see all the planning applications, traffic diversions, road layout changes, alcohol licence applications and more in your area, enter your postcode below or visit the Public Notice Portal HERE
