Personal Advertiser Seeks Partner Who Understands Why Neighbour's Pergola Had To Be Reported
A retired homeowner has placed a lonely-hearts advertisement seeking a companion who will accept, without needing it explained twice, that a garden pergola 28cm over the permitted height left him no alternative but to contact the council.
News Intro
A retired homeowner has placed a personal advertisement in the classified section of a regional weekly newspaper seeking a companion who will "understand, without needing it explained twice," why he reported his neighbour's garden pergola to the local planning authority.
The advertisement ran to most of a column. Entries in the section typically run to around thirty words. At the paper's standard per-word rate, it cost its author £86.40, which he paid in full at the front counter.
The advertiser, who asked not to be named, lives in a semi-detached house on a residential cul-de-sac in the south Midlands. He has lived there for 22 years.
The Advertisement
Reproduced as submitted. Abbreviations are the advertiser's own.
M, 63, NS, own home, seeks someone who understands
Retired (35 yrs contracts administration, water sector). Own home, semi, south-facing garden. Never married. Enjoy walking, local history, quiz nights, keeping things in order. GSOH. Looking for a kind, sensible lady 55–68 for companionship and possibly more.
I think it is only fair to be honest from the start, because it is the first thing people in my road will tell you about me.
In April my neighbour put up a timber pergola about a metre from our shared fence. Before it went up she showed me a drawing over the fence. The drawing said 2.4 metres. I said it seemed fine. Nobody has disputed that.
When it was finished I measured it, from my side, with a laser measure and a stepladder. It was 2.78 metres. Within two metres of a boundary the limit is 2.5. That is 28cm over. I measured it three times.
I did not want a row. I have seen what happens on other roads when people argue over fences. So I did not argue. I filled in the council's online form, which is what it is there for, and I let the people whose job it is decide. I would have been just as happy for them to tell me I was wrong. They didn't.
People have said I should have spoken to her first. I had already spoken to her. I was shown 2.4.
After that it went to a retrospective application and I put in an objection, eleven pages, with photographs and a log of the shade on my patio, which comes to about forty minutes on a summer evening from around twenty past seven. That is when I sit out. It was approved anyway. I accept that. The pergola is still there and it is still 2.78.
I am no longer on the road's group chat. I did not leave it.
I was invited to the event the pergola was built for. I didn't feel it would be right to attend under the circumstances, and I said so in writing, politely. The timing of the council's visit was the council's, not mine.
I am not a difficult person. I just think if there are rules then they are the rules for everybody, otherwise what is the point of having them. If you feel the same, I would very much like to hear from you. Box 4417.
What The Planning File Shows
Records held by the local authority confirm the measurements in the advertisement. A planning enforcement officer attended the property and found the structure to be 2.78 metres at its highest point, exceeding permitted development limits by 28cm, and advised the owner to regularise it through a retrospective application.
The officer's site visit took place on Friday June 12 2026.
According to the supporting statement submitted with the application, the pergola was constructed by the owner's brother-in-law over two weekends in April "to provide a covered area for our daughter's wedding reception, to be held in the garden on June 13." The statement apologises for the error in height, which it attributes to the posts being set on a raised patio that the original drawing did not account for.
The online complaint form that prompted the visit was submitted on May 4.
The application attracted one objection and letters of support from nine households on the same road. One supporting letter notes that the pergola "was finished with fairy lights and was very much enjoyed by everyone on the day." It was approved under delegated powers in September without conditions.
The advertiser's objection, which is publicly viewable, includes a hand-drawn diagram of his patio, a table recording shade between May 18 and June 30, and a covering paragraph stating that he "bears no personal ill will" towards his neighbour, "whose parcels I have taken in for many years without complaint."
The neighbour declined to comment for this article. A relative said the family had "nothing to add" and that the pergola "is staying."
Neighbour Relations
He is right that formal channels exist to stop disputes becoming personal. The officer arrived the day before a wedding, although the complaint had been filed more than a month earlier. The difficulty is that he was shown a drawing over the fence, so the fence was already working as a channel, and he chose the one that does not let the other person explain. In my experience, the 28cm is rarely the part people remember.
Disclosure
For practical purposes the most significant document here is not the objection but the property information form he will complete if he ever sells. It asks whether there have been any disputes or complaints with neighbours. The honest answer is now yes, with a council reference number, an eleven-page attachment and nine letters of support for the other side. Buyers tend to discount for that rather more than for forty minutes of shade.
Readers Respond
Lorraine B. · Reader · 412 reactions · Commented online
"I was invited to the event the pergola was built for." Read that line, then read the bit from the planning file. Then read it again.
Keith · Retired surveyor · 287 reactions · Commented online
For what it's worth he's correct on the rule. 2.5m within 2m of the boundary. Raised patios catch people out all the time. It's measured from ground level, not from the top of the slab.
Sandra M. · Reader · 203 reactions · Replying to Keith
Nobody is saying he's wrong about the rule, Keith.
J. Parfitt · Reader · 164 reactions · Commented online
She showed him the drawing. He said it seemed fine. It came out higher. I'd have been annoyed too, honestly. I just wouldn't have filed it in May.
Anon · Lives on a similar road · 98 reactions · Commented online
Forty minutes of shade on a summer evening sounds quite nice to me.
Bev · Reader · 71 reactions · Commented online
Is Box 4417 still taking replies? Asking for my sister, who has a neighbour with a hot tub.
Graham W. · Reader · 52 reactions · Commented online
£86.40. He could have had a very nice dinner for that.
Reader Poll
Community Poll
Latest reader breakdown
What should he have done about the extra 28cm?
Replies
The newspaper can confirm that Box 4417 has so far received four replies.
Three were from residents of the advertiser's road. The classifieds desk has not passed these on, in line with its policy on correspondence that does not relate to companionship.
The fourth was from a woman in a neighbouring district who is in the second year of an objection to a conservatory. The advertiser said he had found her letter "very well organised" and that they have arranged to meet for coffee.
Topics