AN elderly couple have been found guilty of failing to remove thousands of tons of waste from their land.

But a judge yesterday slammed Blackburn with Darwen Council for the way the case was handled.

Peter Shorrock, 69, and Patricia Shorrock, 68, were fined £600 between them for breaching two legal orders to remove the dumped rubbish from the land, at Lowerhalgh Farm, Brokenstone Road, Feniscowles.

Preston Crown Court heard how it would have cost more than half-a-million-pounds to move the waste from the land and the couple could not afford it.

A jury was told that the couple, who have lived on the farm for 40 years, did not do enough to attempt to comply with the enforcement notices.

But Judge Gilbart QC said some of the blame was to lie with the council. The authority had also been criticised by the Local Government Ombudsman in April 2003 for the way a golf course planning application for the land was dealt with.

The Ombudsman found that the failure of council planning officers to get exact details of the work to take place on the land made it harder for the council to act, and meant local residents suffered longer.

The golf course never became a reality, and instead 70,000 cubic metres of waste was dumped on the site from 1999-2000. Blackburn with Darwen Council now has the power to enter the site, remove the waste, and charge the couple for the work.

Judge Gilbart said: "I express the very firm view that the borough council should not prosecute again for the same failure. It's quite plain that the the officer of the borough council was at fault and indeed the Ombudsman has been critical of the council, but not all the fault lies at their door."

The waste was dumped on the site by a firm known as Griffin Bio, run by David Chambers, who died in early 2000. Enforcement notices were served on the couple to remove the waste in July 2000.

But yesterday the court heard how, instead of removing the waste, Mr and Mrs Shorrock entered into negotiations with Blackburn Golf Developments Ltd, a firm hoping to build a golf course on the site in 2002. The plan included a scheme to bring more waste onto the site.

The court was told how Mr and Mrs Shorrock removed a large number of tyres from the land, but did not seek to employ an outside contractor to finish the work, and did not look at what the waste exactly was, or if they could raise the money to do the work.

Mr Shorrock was fined £500, and his wife £100. After the verdict they declined to comment.