Thornton Holdings Ltd, operators of Thornton Manor and the surrounding estate, has been instructed to remove three marquees, one of which has served as a venue for events for more than a decade.

The UK's Planning Inspectorate has dismissed three appeals by the company which sought to overturn a Wirral Borough Council decision not to grant planning permission for the buildings.

Just why Thornton Holdings was seeking planning permission so long after the marquees were constructed and began welcoming guests is a strange story.

Thornton Manor, the landmark events and conference centre, has long offered the hiring of three marquees on the estate: the Waterside Pavilion, the Lakeside Marquee and the Walled Garden Marquee.

Back in April 2010, a planning application seeking permission to erect the three structures was received by Wirral Council, stating that they would be used for private functions and conferences. The land on which they would sit is greenbelt, and therefore subject to tight restrictions.

However, Thornton Manor's park and gardens had been placed on Historic England's At Risk Register in 2010, and a case was presented that the creation of an income stream would pay for their restoration. In other words, profits generated by the new facilities would be reinvested in the future wellbeing of the estate.

This case found favour amid consideration that there were "very special circumstances necessary to overcome the presumption against inappropriate development."

However, the Council also believed that consent should be limited to a period of five years. This would "enable realistic monitoring and review of the financial situation and prevent the establishment of inappropriate structures in the green belt for longer than necessary."

The application was first reported to the Planning Committee on 21 July 2010 but was deferred to allow for a formal Members' site visit to take place. Ultimately it was approved by a vote of 7 to 5, with the five year period beginning on the date of the issue of the Decision Notice.

The next step was for both the applicant – Thornton Holdings Ltd – and the Council to negotiate something called a Section 106 Agreement. This would oblige Thornton Holdings to carry out restoration work in a financially transparent manner.

On 27 May 2011 a draft Decision Notice was prepared and sent to the applicant, and uploaded to the Council website. On November 11 of that year, the 106 Agreement was sealed and issued.

"This," the Council later stated, "is the date that the Decision Notice should have been dated and issued to the applicant releasing the grant of Planning Permission. However, for reasons that it has just not been possible to understand, a Decision Notice was not produced or issued on 11 November 2011. A Decision Notice was produced on 20 December 2011 that was also published to the Council's web[site] and issued to the applicant's agents at that time."

And here lies the rub: "This Decision Notice was issued to the applicant without any conditions listed on the document."

In other words, there was no mention of a five year period. In fact, as far as this Notice was concerned, the marquees were here to stay for as long as the owners wished.

It seems that no one at Wirral Council was aware that this condition free Notice had been issued. Believing the time limit was in place and would lapse on November 11 2016, the Council advised Thornton Holdings that a new application would have to be made to continue the use of the marquees.

Whereupon: "At a meeting on 5th May 2017 with the applicant, his agent and legal representative, the Decision Notice dated 20 December 2011 was produced which had no conditions on it. The Council were informed that this was the first and only Decision Notice that had been issued to them and that they were seeking to rely upon this Notice as being the lawfully issued decision.

"This, in effect, granted a completely uncontrolled grant of planning permission subject to no conditions. The Section 106 Agreement, signed on 11 November 2011, however, was still valid and in place."

Amongst other things, the purpose of the 106 Agreement was to guarantee that earnings from the marquees would fund the restoration of parts of the Thornton Manor estate. This included accounting to the Council for event income on a quarterly basis "to enable the Council to monitor the event profit and the proper application of the event profit to the work programme as required by the planning permission."

The Planning Inspector notes in his ruling that Thornton Holdings "did not adhere to the obligations to keep accounts or records."

Back to March 2018, when the High Court quashed the unconditional planning permission and, the following year, the Council considered the proposal again - and rejected it, subsequently issuing enforcement notices ordering the removal of the marquees.

Hence the unsuccessful appeal by Thornton Holdings - which says its consequences will be grave, telling the Planning Inspectorate that "removing the marquees would mean the [company] would default on its financial obligations. This would result in job losses and the Manor and grounds being sold."

Initially, Thornton Holdings was given between two and three months to remove the three structures, but the Planning Inspector's appeal decision notes that a significant amount of financial work will need to be done "in attempts to save the business and indeed undertake the sale of the property which would be in the interests of ensuring the protection of the heritage assets.

"Thus, it seems to me a period of six months would be a more reasonable time frame, particularly given the direct job losses that would be incurred and the need for those employees to seek alternative employment."

Heswall Nub News has contacted Thornton Holdings for comment.