A Crickhowell family is facing being evicted from the farm where they have lived for decades after clashing with planning authorities over the siting of a mobile home.

The Stinchcombe family, which has lived at Ty Gwellt at Cwmdu for 30 years, could be forced off their land by Brecon Beacons National Park Authority (BBNPA) because they moved their mobile home, falling foul of stringent planning laws.

Sam Stinchcombe said, he, his wife Nikki, three-year-old daughter and newborn baby girl, could be turfed off their land and rendered homeless, if authorities push ahead with an enforcement notice served on their mobile home.

The agricultural craftsman said the BBNPA claim the move constitutes a ‘new development’, and one his family must seek planning permission for.

The 40-year-old said he was convinced he was well within his rights to shift the mobile home, as the land belongs to his father.

Mr Stinchcombe claims he has tried repeatedly to work with the BBNPA, but his pleas have fallen on deaf ears, with the authority keen to push him into a costly and lengthy legal battle. ??

“What we are fighting at the moment is an eviction notice served on our mobile home. I’ve been on the farm since I was 17, I’m 40 now,” said Mr Stinchcombe.

“When planning officers first came out to see us, we were told that this could be sorted out with paperwork and that legal advice was not necessary.

“The next time they visited was to serve an eviction notice. This was served less than one week before my second daughter’s birth. We were only given 28 days —legally, the shortest possible time — to appeal.

“The first eviction notice was lifted temporarily due to local outrage, and a great deal of pressure from our supporters, however this local support, rather than assisting us only seems to have made BBNPA more determined,” he said. ??“What we did was move the mobile home away from the lambing sheds, because we had issues with abortion in some of the ewes. Given that we were planning a family, it was pretty frightening. The move was for health reasons and based on advice from both a vet and a GP.

“So, we moved down from the bottom of the field, to the top, nearer to one of my work sheds and by doing that we opened up ourselves for eviction because we have lost any claim we had for the place we were. ??“BBNPA are saying that by doing so we have lost any claim we had for the place we were.  Initially, they were claiming that there was no record of me being here at all.

“We cannot prove we have been here long enough to have a claim. They won’t let us stay where we are, and they won’t let us go back. Their only interest is getting us off the farm,” he said.

The tradesman recently appeared on ITV News Wales, where his situation was underlined by the support of the local community, and local politicians from both the Welsh Assembly and Westminster.

He said the issue is one of technicality, and now he hopes to get the chance to sort out the paperwork, and remain on the farm where he has lived on for decades.

“We would like the chance to sort out all our paperwork retrospectively. It’s technically my dad’s land. But, it is ours. What we have done is shift our residence within that land. I thought it was something I was completely able to do.

“They [The BBNPA] are saying it’s a ‘new development’, despite us moving our residence a few hundred metres. They’re doing anything they possibly can to get us off the farm completely.

“I have the whole support of the village. We have a legal fight to get us back to where we were, which won’t be great for the kids as it’s so close to the farmyard.

“They aren’t going to tell us the outcome of that until it’s too late,” he said.

The six-month battle has been ‘difficult’ he said, as BBNPA are ‘reluctant’ to discuss the ‘live’ case.

“We’d like to stay where we are. We are only talking the length of a small field. All his has been done with the support of the community. It doesn’t make sense to anyone.” ??Support has come across parties, with Kirsty Williams, Welsh Liberal Democrat AM for Brecon and Radnorshire, who said, “We have been actively assisting Mr Stinchcombe in his case.

“I have visited the site and have arranged two meetings with the National Park and local County Councillor Kathryn Silk.

“We will continue to offer Mr Stinchcombe and his family assistance and advice going forward.”

Chris Davies MP, a Conservative for Brecon and Radnorshire, has also backed the family’s fight to stay put.

“I find the decision by the National Parks Authority simply baffling. Sam Stinchcombe and his family have been in the area for over twenty years, they are well liked and backed to stay in their current location by their neighbours,” he said.

“They have been involved within their community for many years now and have created a lovely environment to raise a family.

“I believe the National Parks should look again at their decision and start focusing on the real dangers that our National Park faces.”

James Williams, a spokesman for BBNPA, said, “Brecon Beacons National Park Authority does not have any powers to issue eviction notices to landowners.

“The Authority is responsible for enforcing breaches of planning control regarding the unauthorised use and development of land.

 “There are several ongoing enforcement investigations related to the alleged unauthorised use and development of buildings on land at or around Ty Gwellt.  

“One of the enforcement investigations relates to a residential bungalow structure on the site. 

“The Authority served an enforcement notice on January 12, 2018 on interested parties seeking the cessation of the use within 18 months and removal of the structure within 24 months. 

“The interested parties have a right of appeal against the notice to the Planning Inspectorate for Wales.

 “The first enforcement notice was served in July 2017, however, the Authority withdrew it on compassionate grounds in August with the intention that it would be re-served at a later date and the notice was re-served on January 12, 2018.  

“We appreciate Mr Stinchcombe’s family circumstances and officers have had several meetings to discuss the case and the requirements of the planning system.” ?