Camden successfully prosecutes resident for unauthorised building works
A Camden resident has successfully been prosecuted by the Council following unauthorised building works to a Grade II* listed property.
At Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court on 12 November 2025, District Judge Baker found Zoe Chan, aged 40, of 111 Frognal guilty of carrying out unauthorised works to a Grade II* listed property at 111 Frognal, NW3. The works, which involved extensive alterations to the cellar, were undertaken without listed building consent and caused irreversible harm to the historic fabric of the building.
The property, part of a former stable block dating back to the mid-18th century, is of exceptional architectural and historic interest. The unauthorised works included the removal of the original ground floor and the installation of reinforced concrete walls and flooring, permanently obscuring historic brickwork.
District Judge Baker imposed a fine of £48,000, along with costs of £21,841.71 and a surcharge of £2,000, bringing the total payable to £71,841.71 within six months.
District Judge Baker commented, in their sentencing note:
"I am satisfied so that I am sure that Ms Chan, a professional woman with experience in property development and experience in working with professionals both instructed by her and within Local Authorities, was reckless in failing to ask the relevant question – ‘do I need permission."
This case sends a clear message: We will not tolerate unlawful works, that damage our borough’s heritage.
Listed buildings are protected for a reason—they are part of our shared history. Anyone considering alterations must seek proper consent. We will take robust enforcement action against those who disregard these rules and remain committed to preserving the borough’s historic environment, taking enforcement action where necessary.
- 111 Frognal is part of a terrace of houses built around the 1750s and is listed Grade II*, a designation applied to only 5.8% of listed buildings, recognising them as buildings of “more than special interest”.
- The works were undertaken without listed building consent and included lining the cellar with concrete, dry-lining, and installing modern services – removing historic features.
- An appeal to the Planning Inspectorate was unsuccessful, with the Planning Inspector finding that less intrusive measures were available.