A 77-year-old pensioner from Dorset is facing the forced seizure and sale of her £420,000 home after a five-year legal battle with her neighbour over a one-foot strip of land culminated in a High Court eviction order.
The Dispute That Sparked a Legal Nightmare
The conflict between neighbours Jenny Field and Pauline Clark began in 2020. It centred on the placement of a party fence erected by Mrs Clark at their adjoining bungalows in a quiet Poole cul-de-sac. Ms Field, a grandmother, contended that the 6ft fence had been positioned 12 inches onto her land. In response, she hired contractors two months later to dismantle and reposition the fence, an act intended to reclaim what she believed was rightfully her property.
This action, however, ignited a protracted civil court case. Earlier this year, District Judge Ross Fentem ruled decisively in favour of Mrs Clark, 64. The judge stated that Ms Field had "no reasoned basis" for her claims and subsequently ordered her to pay her neighbour's substantial legal fees, which totalled £113,266.
Court Deadlines Ignored, Eviction Looms
Ms Field was given a strict deadline of midday on December 5 to settle the debt, with a requirement to vacate her home by 4pm the same day if she failed to pay. The pensioner, who bought the three-bedroom bungalow nine years ago in 2016, defied the order. She remained in the property, vowing to "sit tight" in the home she insists is rightfully hers.
As a result of her non-payment, Mrs Clark's solicitors successfully applied to Bournemouth County Court for a writ of possession. Court bailiffs have now served notice that they will take possession of the property on January 26. On that date, the locks will be changed, and the home will be listed for sale. The proceeds will be used to clear the outstanding legal bill.
A Last-Minute Bid and Emotional Toll
In a desperate final attempt, Ms Field has launched a bid to have the eviction suspended. She claims the eviction notice is invalid and alleges trespass by Mrs Clark during the original fence construction. A court hearing is scheduled for the new year to consider these arguments. "I am not moving. This is my home and I have paid for it," Ms Field stated defiantly. "They want to evict me from my home but they can't do that, I have got human rights."
The fallout has been deeply distressing for both parties. Mrs Clark, a widow, described the six-year ordeal as "living a nightmare" and revealed she has undergone private counselling to cope with the "horrendous" situation. Her solicitor, Anna Curtis, noted there was ample equity in Ms Field's property to pay the debt and still allow her to purchase another retirement home mortgage-free, with cash left over.
Legal papers confirm Ms Field will be allowed time to remove her possessions on the day of the eviction. She has been advised to contact the local council's housing department and the Citizens Advice Bureau.
