A ‘horse whisperer’ animal trainer faces a £3,600 legal bill after a nine year feud with her council – over some stables she illegally built on greenbelt land.

Stephanie Dale, 40,repeatedly ignored Cheshire East Council demands to demolish a stable erected without planning permission in leafy Astbury, in Congleton.

Crewe Magistrates Court heard the mother-of-three – who has worked with horse since she was 20 – had been allowed to build one stable block but added a second without permission.

JPS were told she was in dispute with the council from 2016 she was first issued with two enforcement notices ordering she take down the stables and remove its concrete base and a caravan and associated utilities on the land.

Dale unsuccessfully appealed and in 2018 was fined £1,000 for breaching two orders. She moved the caravan but still failed to demolish the stables and was charged again following further investigations last year.

Now in her absence she has been convicted of breaching a new enforcement order, fined a further £1,100 and ordered to pay £2528.22 costs.

The court heard she had provided a sick note citing anxiety and depression and a hospital orthopaedic appointment at the time the trial – but JPs ruled the case should proceed without her.

She was unavailable for comment when later approached at her home.

The court heard Dale was joint owner of the land with a man called ‘Mr Foster’ but she was the “driving force” behind the development.

Prosecutor Khalid Mahmood explained: “Notices were served in December 2016 and an appeal was lodged by Stephanie Dale.

“The appeal was dismissed and the enforcement notice upheld whilst the second notice was complied with – the caravan was removed around September 2022.

“Despite reminders the defendant has failed to comply with the first notice and no word or explanation has been provided. There has been a disregard for a considerable period of time.”

Senior planning officer Zafer Faqir told the hearing: “Planning permission was granted for keeping horses and stables would be part and parcel of that, keeping them away from the elements.

“But It was the additional stables that was problematic because of the impact of the unauthorized stables on the green belt itself.

“The land subject to enforcement notice is designated as green belt and in plain English, the type of development allowed is very restricted.

“The defendant was required to demolish the stables block and to break up and remove the concrete base and remove all the materials.

“The other notice served was in relation to a stationary residential caravan, hardstanding and the installation of utilities.

“Miss Dale has subsequent appeals against both notices and both dismissed. The second notice was complied with after the appeal but the other which relates to the stables block has not.”

The council worker added: “I had visited the site to see the notice has been complied with. I could see that the notice had not been complied with.

“On January 25, 2024, I wrote to the defendant by email to bring to her attention that the notice had still not been complied with and needed to be complied with.

“l did a follow-up visit as well in February 2024. One of the stable blocks is still standing.”

He added: “Development does not work on a punitive basis. Where we consider it expedient to take action is where harm has been caused.

“That determines whether or not we are likely to take action. In a case like this officers would have determined as part of the enforcement notice whether permission could be granted with conditions attached.

“Conditions can be used to make developments acceptable but where conditions could not override the harm we naturally move to refuse them.

“The planning inspector would have listened to arguments from both parties and come to his own conclusion as to whether planning permission should have been granted,.

“As far as I am aware, she is the one who has had all the active involvement. She has been the driving force with the development on site.”