An East Lancs businessman and pub owner had to be forcibly removed from a million-pound farmhouse through court action after squatting there for more than a year.

The owner of the property had been tasked with selling the home following the breakdown of her marriage when she received interest from Nicholas White, who owns the Freemasons at Wiswell.

The house had been rented out while divorce proceedings went on, and both parties agreed it was to be sold.

After making an offer on Acrelands Farm, Grindleton, in September last year, White paid off the previous tenants, to the sum of £45,000 and moved his family in, without consultation with the homeowner.

Informing her he intended to buy the £1.2 million property within the next three weeks and he “just needed somewhere to be”, she tolerated it until the sale had been completed, with White providing proof of funds. 

With little knowledge of squatter’s rights, she permitted it.

Landowners have a 28-day deadline to apply for an interim possession order to remove squatters from their property, and if the deadline is missed eviction is then passed through the courts.

Questioned on his squatting, White said: “I agreed to buy the farm at £1.2m. Both parties instructed solicitors.

“The farm was in a very poor and run-down state. It was still occupied by a tenant at the time.

“I paid personally paid £45,000 to the previous tenant to assist them to move.”

After a conversation with the homeowner, she said Nick asked her to send her bank details claiming he needed a place to live and that if she agreed for it go ahead, he would transfer the money – a sum of £10,000.

The homeowner said: “I made a mistake and gave him my details.

“I should have said no there and then, but he was forceful on the phone trying to put me under pressure and I wanted time to consider the implications.

“I took some advice and emailed him the next morning stating I wouldn't give him a tenancy and that he couldn’t stay at the house whilst we waited for it to go through.

“He completely ignored me and transferred the £10,000 anyway and moved in.

“He was trying to create an informal tenancy and as soon as I realised, I requested the bank transfer the money straight back to him.

“What he was doing was trying to use that as leverage against me. He was so rude to me on the phone I ended up doing it.

“He used that as me saying I agreed to the tenancy, and he said I had agreed to take payment from him, but I never did. He used it to muddy the waters.”

Shortly after this interaction, the homeowner went to the house for a regular check and found White moving his furniture in.

She added: “I had never considered he might just move in, given how clear I had been telling him his family couldn’t.

“He was aggressive, it was quite a scary moment as I was on my own and he was intimidating and threatening me.”

Dragging the situation out, it soon became clear White had no intention of buying the property, the homeowner said, while presenting himself to neighbours as the property’s rightful owner.

White began treating it like his own home, cutting down trees, carrying out expensive renovations, building horse's stables and opening a registered livery business at the property, all without the owner’s permission.

White said: “The property condition has been vastly improved inside and out by myself on the back of my efforts and hard work with others and substantial funds to improve the farm.”

Facebook posts by White’s wife show parties at the house and a Shetland pony entertaining guests in the garden.  

The homeowner said: “We had issued proceedings against him after he moved his family in. 

“They were hosting parties there, the Shetland pony was pictured in the kitchen. But he hadn’t bought it, it is my house.” 

When legal proceedings began, White claimed he had an informal tenancy with the homeowner and then argued they had made a deal that when he bought a property the rent would be paid within a month.

The homeowner said: “He keeps saying I will exchange now, I am going to buy it, and we are honourable people.” 

Eventually, a possession order was granted by the court, and he was given 28 days to leave the property.

Nick stated in court that “your problems are only just starting” and is still yet to pay the fees for the court case, equating to just under £18,000, the homeowner claimed. 

On this, White said: “My reference to my comment, regarding her troubles, which have only just started, was [referring] to my intention to consider further court action, such as an appeal and some claim to all the effort and money that I have expended on the farm. 

“This matter is not at an end.”

In a summary of court proceedings, Elisabeth Tythcott, acting for homeowner, said: “They (White) have taken possession of the property without the consent of the claimants (homeowner) and are now living there, pretending they have the right to do so as demonstrated by the defence they have filed in support of their claim and by their refusal to vacate.  

“This is an egregious abuse not only of the claimants’ private rights but also of the public interest in ensuring the court’s processes are not abused. 

“It is clear from the contemporaneous documents and the First Claimant’s (homeowner) witness statement that the First Defendant (White) is a bully who seeks to intimidate others in order to get his own way.  

“The court should express its clearest condemnation of this kind of behaviour by making the possession order sought. 

“There is no evidence they have spent any money with the claimant’s permission or on any basis that could entitle them to acquire any rights in the property.  

“Further, the defendants allege their occupation was secured by the payment of £10,000. That sum was repaid immediately by the First Claimant and does not constitute a payment of rent.  

“Instead, the defendants have been living at the property rent-free causing untold damage to the land for almost a year.” 

White claimed he agreed to a circa £2,500 per month tenancy agreement, but the homeowner scrupulously denies this figure was ever proposed to her.

In court, he used an email from the homeowner’s solicitor, which requested this figure for the time spent at the property as a claim of a tenancy agreement.

However, it was just the homeowner trying to recoup the money from his time there.

She added: “It is the most ridiculous situation I have been in. 

“I am still incredibly nervous about my name being linked but I am so sick of him, he is threatening me and is making sure no one wants to purchase my house.  

“I am still very nervous at home in my own personal space.

“I am not wealthy, I have been paying the mortgage the whole time, which has nearly bankrupted me, it has taken me to the limit.

"All my savings have gone and I have ended up in a really terrible situation.” 

After the 28 days White had to leave the premises, he was still there. It took High Court enforcement to get White out of the property, but he has still not removed half of his family’s belongings.  

Police struggled to remove him from the site and were called back on Monday, October 21, after he had allegedly broken the locks. 

White added he and his family “are the real victims” and said the homeowner will “potentially profit from our hard work and from their failure to be reasonable and complete the sale”.