As Alice may well have said this story now gets “curiouser and curiouser”.

The SCC were now in a dilemma. The Rights of Way Department badly wanted to remove the gates wholesale yet they could not sue the Herricks again under the Highways Act (s 143) as they had already done so: they needed Mr Kidner on their side, yet he could not continually foot the bill for ever mounting costs.

So the Council had a secret meeting at a restaurant in Taunton, on September 14th 2006 where minutes were not recorded. Present were Rights of Way Officers, District and County Councillors, Planning Enforcement Officers and others. The same day as the meeting Mr.Kidner served SCC with another s130 Form 1 for the same obstruction. (Now there’s a coincidence). The Council needed Mr. Kidner to prosecute them as they could not prosecute the Herricks again.

In February 2007 Mr Barry James from County Hall (Environment Management) telephoned the Herricks’ housesitters (they were away) and said that he was “fed up with the situation and would be coming over with contractors to take the gates down.” The contractors were uncertain and left the gates but three stiles were installed at below normal height to replace one disabled friendly gate and stock wire was destroyed allowing stock to escape. The wire was replaced by Brian Herrick but SCC obtained an injunction to stop him retaining stock. The Herricks’ solicitors threatened legal action if the gates were removed as it would be contrary to the Yeovil court order.

One glimmer was that in March 2007 the SCC gave legal authority for the gates “preferably locked open” but this upset Mr Kidner, who started proceedings against Somerset County Council (an addiction to the law cannot be healthy).

The hearing Kidner v SCC in Yeovil Magistrates Court was in October 2007 and took two days. Despite the foregoing SCC chose not to defend the action, by prior arrangement, so it came as little surprise that the judgement was reversed.

Mr Kidner won requiring the Council to remove all pillars and gates three metres either side of a centre line. The SCC were ordered to pay their and Kidner’s costs amounting to thousands of pounds.

The Herricks lodged an appeal as the requirements were unsustainable (amongst other things the pedestrian gate would have to be cut in half: SCC refused a site meeting).

In order to make more mischief SCC then ordered a survey of all the footpaths on Brian’s land at a cost to the ratepayer of £7500.

In the meantime to help matters Brian then locked the gates permanently open and erected his own finger post as the Council refused to install their own.