Somerset Spite

Why is Somerset Council acting like a bad loser over a footpath in Frome? And as the end nears for the Life Factory project in Glastonbury, serious questions remain unanswered.

Dear readers

You might think that Somerset Council could use all the good PR it could get right now. But apparently you would be wrong! And as the Beckery Construction Company Limited (the company delivering the Life Factory project in Glastonbury) goes into liquidation, we ask, what next?

This issue of Somerset Confidential is for all our readers. If you can subscribe to help us write more material and hold those in authority to account, then we’d welcome your support. An annual subscription is just £30! You can subscribe here:

Thank you

Andrew Lee - Editor

---

Somerset Spite

You would not imagine that a piece of overgrown but much-loved land could attract such attention. The green space at Packsaddle Fields on the edge of Frome has been at the centre of a battle between Somerset Council and local residents for 3 years now.

This week Somerset Council tried to stop residents using it. But first, a little context.

This has been a peculiar situation from the start. Somerset Council owned the land at Packsaddle Fields. Half a century ago, they thought they might build a school on it. Then they forgot about it. Hard to imagine how one forgets to build a school, but there you have it.

Left to its own devices, the site turned into a green wilderness used for recreation by local people. Decades passed and this became normalised.

Then out of the blue, Somerset County Council (as was) decided to develop it in 2022. They chose Live West as their development partner and the latter popped in a planning application.

This is where it gets complicated. Somerset County Council were the landowner. The council’s officers agreed the deal with Live West, although it was ratified by the Council’s Cabinet, which was at that time (2022) made up of elected Councillors from the Conservative administration.

However, the decision on the planning application was taken (in 2025) by a different set of (cross party) elected councillors sitting on the Area East Planning Committee.

This group of elected councillors decided to refuse the application that Somerset Council officers and the Executive had promoted. Conflicts of interest all over the place.

Live West appealed.

That appeal was heard from 12 to 14 August 2025 and duly dismissed in a written decision dated 29 September 2025, by Planning Inspector M. Chalk.

Local people have been vociferous about this development from the start and what it would mean for the loss of their open space. They formed their own action group: “People for Packsaddle”. They raised funds, obtained legal representation and took an active part in the Planning Appeal process.

In making his decision, the Inspector noted the considerable benefit to local people of having the open space for recreational use and considered this benefit outweighed the harm that would be incurred by the loss of it. On the other hand, the Inspector concluded the benefit of the new housing to be built by Live West would not outweigh the harm caused by losing the open space.

In making that determination the Inspector made two observations that are relevant for what follows. Firstly: “Plainly some of that enjoyment has derived from the active use of the informal paths around the site which exist without the landowner’s consent. For the sake of clarity this aspect carries negligible weight in my determination”(our emphasis). And, secondly: “there is a permissive path across the site, as well as the PROW. I heard no evidence to indicate any intention to remove the permissive path.”

So what?

Live West, having had their appeal dismissed, have now decided to take the Planning Inspectorate to Judicial Review. In a pre-action protocol letter (a formality in which someone going to Judicial Review lays out their case to the other side) addressed to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Live West claim the Inspector erred in law.

And that is where this week’s story really kicks in. On Monday (3 November) this week Somerset Council decided to act in support of Live West. They announced that: “Somerset Council is removing access to a site earmarked for development to assist the developer in obtaining planning permission.”

They will achieve this by closing the permissive path running south to north across the field and fencing off the public footpath located in the north/northeast corner of the field.

In justifying the decision they noted: “It’s clear that there is a compelling case for the developer to challenge the appeal and we have a legal duty to secure the land in support of the development proposals.”

To local people this looks much more like an act of spite. In a statement in response, People for Packsaddle said they: “deem this decision to be cruel, immoral and indefensible. Somerset Council purports to ‘put all the people of Somerset at the heart of everything we do’, yet it prioritises the bullying demands of a developer ahead of the welfare of local people and the decision of a Planning Inspector and Government Legal Department.”

Just as importantly, the action of the Council does not make a lot of sense. Firstly, let’s go back to the comments by the Inspector. He noted that while residents derived enjoyment by walking over areas where consent may have been withdrawn, he attached “negligible weight” to the fact that permission had not been granted.

So to say now that removing access to the permissive path is somehow acting in the interest of the applicant is barely credible.

The Inspector also noted that at the time of the Inquiry, there was no indication from the Council that they intended to remove access to the permissive path. To take that action now, having failed to do so for the previous half-century, looks ridiculous, a naked attempt to play the system.

Added to that, the statement that there is “a compelling case” for the developer to challenge the result of the Planning Inquiry is surely more a matter of hope than anything else. To make that assertion before reading the response from the Secretary of State is, we respectfully suggest, if not foolhardy, at the very least a hostage to fortune.

The fact that the Secretary of State has now replied to Live West in dismissive terms, rather demonstrates the point. It is a long letter with some complex legal and planning background, but it is neatly summed up in one paragraph in the introduction: “The proposed statutory challenge under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (“the 1990 Act”) is considered to be unarguable and will be contested in full.”

It is true to an extent that they would say this wouldn’t they, but the terms in which it is expressed suggest that Somerset Council’s assertion that the developer has a compelling case was at best premature and, at worst ill considered.

Meanwhile, there has been cross-party condemnation of the Council’s attitude. We contacted three councillors who represent Frome on Somerset Council for their views.

Conservative Cllr Dawn Denton told Somerset Confidential®: “I am aghast at the decisions made by the Somerset Council administration. I have always supported the protection of these fields as the heart (and ‘lungs’) of the community, and thus withdrew myself from the original planning application vote as I was pre-determined. A recent article in the MNR Journal claims that our area’s access to green spaces is less than the national average, which is even more reason to continue to the fight. Building on the Packsaddle Fields will be a disaster for the People of Packsaddle, wider Frome and all those who visit to spend time with loved ones and enjoy this magical outdoor space, and for many reasons including wellbeing and protection of wildlife. I am 100% behind the People for Packsaddle.”

For the Green Party Cllr Martin Dimery told us: “The decision to close off Packsaddle Fields by Somerset Council will be seen as vindictive and spiteful. The legal reasons for choosing to do so have now been completely undermined. Officers and councillors involved in this decision need to be reminded that Somerset Council are custodian of the land on behalf of the people. For nearly 50 years, Somerset has neglected this land and failed to build the school that was promised. Local people have treated the land with great respect and it has become a hugely valued open space. The planning application was thrown out by the planning committee and by an inspector on appeal. Those decisions should now be respected.”

And finally, the LibDem Cllr Adam Boyden told us: “When I was told the council was going to fence off and close Packsaddle Fields to the public, I was appalled and objected strongly, as reducing the community’s access to green space would be very harmful to the community I serve as a Lib Dem councillor.”

However, Cllr Boyden may also have some good news to share after he and local MP Anna Sabine intervened: “after further discussions with the Executive portfolio holder Cllr Rigby, and Anna Sabine MP, Cllr Rigby has agreed to instruct officers to not take any action to fence off the site, pending further consideration of the Government legal team’s response to LiveWest’s pre-action letter and any response to that by LiveWest, and in consultation with me as local councillor. So I am grateful for that and the support of Anna Sabine MP. As always, I will be working to try and secure a positive result here for the community, so that the fields remain accessible as a green open space.”

It is not yet a promise that no action will be taken.

But perhaps, as we suggest above, it points to the fact that a wiser course of action might have involved waiting for the outcome of any Judicial Review proceedings before taking what has been widely perceived as an act of spite.

If nothing else, this is an appalling look for a council that could really do with some positive PR at the moment.

Life Factory: the end game

The ongoing saga of the Life Factory, one of the projects in the Glastonbury Town Deal appears to be drawing to a close. The project was being managed by the Red Brick Building and was supposed to use £2.85m of Town Deal money and match fund it with £2.85m from elsewhere.

That match funding never happened.

The Red Brick Building set up a subsidiary: Beckery Construction Company Limited, to do the work. Most of the £2.85m of Town Deal money has now been spent.

The project only stalled after Somerset Council (which acts as banker to the Town Deal Project) instigated an audit by SWAP of the project last year.

The result as we have reported previously, made for unhappy reading. A lack of financial control, a lack of documentation, and documentation which didn’t match payment claims, all contributing to an impression of chaos.

However, we also discovered that Somerset Council had approved payments after councillors and officers attended meetings at which it should have been obvious that controls were not in place and questions needed to be asked. You can read more about that here.

Finally the Police were called in. Their investigation is ongoing, and for now they are not prepared to comment, although they have suggested an update may be available in early December.

However, this week we learned that Beckery Construction Company Limited, is entering a Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation. Formal notices have been posted and a creditors’ meeting called for 12 November 2025.

The insolvency practitioners are Rikki Burton and Jasmine Baxter of Anderson Brookes Insolvency Practitioners Limited, a business based in Chorley, Lancashire that specialises in small and medium enterprises.

They have now drawn up a statement of affairs as at 3 November 2025 which shows assets of just £4,800 and unsecured creditors, nearly all of them local businesses, amounting to £686,243.

There are no funds to pay these creditors beyond the £4,800.

It now looks clear enough that a project that was supposed to nurture and support the growth of small local businesses is proving to be an unmitigated disaster for the local economy.

26 companies are owed between £16 and £351,480.

The only director left when the administrators were called in was Dawn Donfrancesco (the name registered at Companies House), and she had only been appointed on 15 August this year.

It is now almost certain that the Government, which provided the funds for delivering the Town Deal project, is going to have questions about how this could happen. And of course the liquidation process does not stop the Police investigation, which will continue and possibly be informed by the investigations of the insolvency practitioners.

Meanwhile, as part of the liquidation process, the liquidators have to ask questions of their own as because this is an insolvent liquidation.

They will want to investigate why,, when many businesses have not been paid others have. When a company is heading towards insolvency, there is an extra responsibility on directors to ensure that no one creditor is given a preference over others.

There will be questions about when the company should have known it was insolvent and did it carry on trading beyond that point.

All questions that may well have to be put to Somerset Council, as well as the directors, because of the unusual nature of the relationships in a town deal project (all town deal projects are funded the same way; this is not something peculiar to Somerset Council).

Somerset Council will have to satisfy the administrators of the logic through which some creditors were paid, partly or in full and others were not.

All of which may bring closure, but little comfort for those local companies who acted in good faith, thought they were supporting an important project for their community and have been hung out to dry.

Happy Days

After all of the above, we felt the need to end this week on a happier note. And we have the results of the CPRE Somerset photo competition to share with you. Regular readers may recall that we promote the competition for CPRE Somerset and our editor is one of the judges.

The theme of this year’s competition was “Somerset: life in the countryside”. There were some great photos and as ever judging proved tricky!

However, we now have two winners in the adult and Under 18s categories. In the adult category the winning photo was taken by Stuart Watson:

The photograph was taken at Knowle Moor, just outside Wedmore. Stuart says: “Hay making time required a whole family effort and first outing for our old David Brown 995. Some people might remember seeing this on our driveway - it was our Covid Lockdown Project!“

The Under 18s prize was won by Olivia D’Ovidio (age 14) for her photo: Chicken in the meadow.

Olivia told us: “It was so lovely to find out that me and my chicken, Mini, had won the “Life In The Countryside” photography competition 2025.The photo of Mini is very special to me because she is one of my pet hens which I hatched out from an egg in spring this year with her 5 brothers and sisters. I enjoy the great outdoors and being around and looking after my pet chickens, they all have such individual characters and are very entertaining. I especially enjoy fresh eggs for breakfast. Well done to everyone who entered.”

Both winners received a prize of £100. Congratulations!

If you’d like to have a go, why not keep your eyes open and have a go in next year’s competition?

---

If you found this news release interesting, please share it with others so they can read it too:

Why not gift a subscription as a present for a friend or family member? You can do that here:

Somerset Confidential® is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.