Storm in a Thermos flask! A more genteel sight you couldn’t imagine than this row of beach huts. But behind the pastel-painted walls, tempers are at boiling point amid a row over vacation orders, writes TOM RAWSTORNE

• A Weymouth chalet was used by Cate Steel and her family for over 50 years  
• Cate, now 55, along with her two sisters was born and bred in the Dorset town
• The chalets were a ‘slice of heaven’ until the council let a huts’ user group run it
• The idea was to ensure they were preserved for future generations to enjoy
• But existing occupants fell fall foul of new management after the 2019 change

For more than half a century, ­chalet No.14 provided the backdrop to the lives of Cate Steel and her family. 

A single-room beach hut on the esplanade at Weymouth, to them it represented a ‘slice of heaven’ by the seaside. 

In a charming series of photos, Cate and her sister, Suzy, are captured as the years pass. 

While their swimsuits and hairstyles alter, there in the background stands the chalet, barely changed, apart from a lick of paint. 

‘Our family was privileged to rent one for many years,’ says Cate, now 55, who along with her two sisters was born and bred in the Dorset town. 

‘We grew up down there and when we married and had our children, our children did the same. It was fantastic, somewhere to escape to.’ 

But not any more. In 2019, in a bid to save money, the local council handed over the running of the chalets to a group set up by the huts’ users. 

The idea was to ensure they were preserved for future generations to enjoy.­ 

But few could have foreseen just how quickly some of the existing occupants would fall foul of the changed management.

For more than half a century, ­chalet No.14 provided the backdrop to the lives of Cate Steel and her family. A single-room beach hut on the esplanade at Weymouth, to them it represented a ‘slice of heaven’ by the seaside

Chalet users who had rented the huts from the council for years — or, as in the case of the Steels, for decades — found themselves suddenly being told to vacate by the newly established Greenhill Community Trust (GCT). 

First to find itself embroiled in a war of words with them was a local group of sea swimmers who claimed to have been ‘unlawfully evicted’ from their changing facilities. 

Then, in 2020, Cate and her family had their licence terminated after requesting a rent refund when the lockdown restrictions prevented anyone from using their hut.

Now, half a dozen other chalet users — some of whom pay more than £2,000 a year in rent — have been told they must pack up and leave for good by the end of March.

All say they have been given no explanation as to how or why they have been selected to go, and complain that their communications with the trust have been curt to the point of rudeness. 

Susan Bray, 71, is understood to have been using her chalet for 35 years

They also point out that while others have been told to leave, the three directors of the trust — Susan Bray, 71, Janis Chalker, 73, and 78-year-old Janet Cridland — all continue to enjoy the use of their own rented chalets. 

Indeed, Mrs Bray is understood to have been using her chalet for 35 years. 

‘In the summer I can be here at 6am and I might not leave until 10 at night,’ she once said of it. 

‘You’ve got everything you need.’ 

While to some, the dispute may sound like a storm in a Thermos frask, the Mail can today reveal the full background to the disputes — including a complaint to police, alleging misconduct in public office and a formal investigation by the council. 

The Steel family enjoy the beach hut in 2010 at Greenhill Gardens in Weymouth

It probed claims that the tendering process by which the trust was handed control of the huts was flawed. 

It was also alleged that there had been a ‘conflict of interest’ after it emerged Mrs Chalker had previously been employed by the council — in a role that included managing the chalets’ waiting list. 

Another of the GCT’s original ­directors, who has since died, was also a councillor. 

While an internal investigation concluded that there had been no wrongdoing by either the council or any individuals, its findings have done nothing to quell the growing sense of anger, with one local resident accusing the trust of acting like a ‘cartel’. 

‘Cartels do what they want when they want — they make their own rules,’ he said. 

Another added: ‘If they don’t like the cut of your jib, you are getting the hoof. They are ruthless.’ 

In a charming series of photos, Cate Steel, right, and her sister, Suzy Compton, left, are captured as the years pass

Greenhill Gardens, where the ­chalets are located, was gifted to the people of Weymouth at the start of the 20th century. 

It is located on the seafront, half a mile from the town’s main beach and is a magnet for visitors attracted by its cafes, bowling green, lawns and flower beds. 

The 100 or so beach chalets include wooden huts set in the gardens, as well as a two-storey terrace of more substantial concrete and metalwork chalets overlooking the sea. 

These were constructed 100 years ago at a cost of £11,000 and in 2008 were given Grade II listing, a report into them observing: ‘The beach huts reflect the popularity of the English seaside as a holiday resort and the culmination of the belief in the benefits of fresh air and outdoors activity espoused in the inter-war period.’ 

Of course, our love affair with the seaside has continued to this day, with the chalets fully occupied and lengthy waiting lists to boot. 

But while they brought in rents of about £100,000 a year for Weymouth and Portland Borough Council ( W&PBC), as the years have passed so the cost of maintaining the structures has risen. 

With no commercial organisation wishing to take them on, five years ago a decision was taken to grant the chalets on a ‘peppercorn’ 30-year lease to a group set up by their users. In 2018, the Greenhill Community Trust was duly established

With no commercial organisation wishing to take them on, five years ago a decision was taken to grant the chalets on a ‘peppercorn’ 30-year lease to a group set up by their users. In 2018, the Greenhill Community Trust was duly established.

It is what is known as a community interest company (or CIC), a noncharitable limited company, which exists to benefit a community rather than to make a profit. But it wasn’t long before the first issues arose.

In 2019, the Weymouth Bay Sea Swimmers found themselves locked out of their changing hut when they complained that the GCT had only offered them a six-month extension on their licence. 

In the ensuing war of words, the directors hit back, accusing the swimming club of fuelling ‘frenzied’ online attacks against them and showing a ‘total lack of respect’ to the trust. 

In the wake of that disagreement, a complaint was lodged with Dorset Police by Jason West, one of the directors of the swimming group, alleging misconduct in a public office and fraud by false representation in relation to the lease agreement for the chalets. 

A spokesman for the force told the Mail: ‘Officers carried out a number of inquiries into the matter and, following a review of the evidence, no criminal offences were identified. 

‘The force also liaised with the local authority, which confirmed the matter was the subject of an internal investigation and the police investigation was concluded.’ 

In the wake of that disagreement, a complaint was lodged with Dorset Police by Jason West, one of the directors of the swimming group, alleging misconduct in a public office and fraud by false representation in relation to the lease agreement for the chalets

The ensuing council investigation was completed in late 2020. 

In a report by independent auditors, it was confirmed that up until 2013, Mrs Chalker, one of the GCT’s directors, had indeed been employed by the council in its property team and that as part of her role she had responsibility for managing the chalet’s waiting list.

But it found that having left before the lease was awarded she ‘would not have had any direct influence in the award of the lease and there is no suggestion of a conflict of interest’. 

But that was far from the last complaint directed at the trust and its directors. 

Cate Steel and her family first crossed swords with them in March 2020 when they requested a reduction in their £1,035 annual bill after they were not allowed to use their chalet because of Covid. 

The trust refused point blank. When, that June, the family raised the matter again, they were told they had until the 12th to pay their rent.

On the following day the trust terminated the licence agreement, giving them a week to clear the chalet. 

‘Our pleas fell on deaf ears,’ says Cate. ‘It was heartbreaking at the time. That summer was the last time that my mother, who had Alzheimer’s, could have visited it. She ended up going into a home and passed away in July 2021. It was a difficult time for us all and this just made it so much worse.’

Within days of the licence being terminated, the chalet was handed to someone on the waiting list. 

‘Now I can’t even walk past, I just find it too painful,’ says Cate. ‘We felt we were being forced out, but now with the stories coming out, we are asking what is going on?

Three generations. Gill Steel (holding tea) and husband Colin Steel (right) with daughters and grandchildren. Catherine Steel (second left) and Suzy Compton (third right) enjoy the beach hut

Vicky Winslow is looking for answers to the same questions. After more than a decade on the waiting list, her parents, Mike and Gay Huggins, were given a chalet nine years ago. 

Her mother was raised in Weymouth and although she and her husband now live in Bristol, they would travel back every year, spending eight weeks there. 

Then, in January this year, they received a letter saying their licence was not going to be renewed and they had to be out by the end of March. 

‘My parents got in contact and were told there had been a renewal letter back in December,’ says Mrs Winslow. 

‘So my mum got in touch saying: ‘Oh my goodness, really sorry if I have missed this renewal letter, of course we want it, we love it, it’s so precious for us’.’ 

The email they received in reply pulled no punches. ‘The GCT are under NO OBLIGATION to renew any licence agreement once it expires,’ it began. 

‘We don’t believe people understand that the directors are unpaid volunteers doing their best to appease all stakeholders and circumstances… many people wouldn’t give a passing thought to the 365 days a year that has to be managed by them.’ 

It concluded: ‘We are sorry to say that the Board of Directors have made their decision collectively and under no circumstances will that decision be reversed.’

‘The tone really upset my mum,’ said Mrs Winslow.

‘My parents thought they must have done something wrong. But they just wouldn’t give us a reason. To have no consultation or engagement totally makes it feel like a personal attack.’ 

A similar sense of outrage and anger is felt by Maureen Smethurst, a retired teacher from Weymouth, who has had a chalet for five years, paying more than £1,500 a year

Mrs Smethurst, a mother of three, accepts that when signing up for the chalet, everyone has to accept a condition that they can be asked to give up the chalet at the end of the licence period. ‘But what seems unfair is that they are invoking this clause and applying it as a termination notice to just half a dozen families,’ she says

A similar sense of outrage and anger is felt by Maureen Smethurst, a retired teacher from Weymouth, who has had a chalet for five years, paying more than £1,500 a year. 

She also received a letter in January telling her she had until the end of March to move out. 

Requests for clarification were met with an email that read, in capitals: ‘For the avoidance of doubt, the Greenhill Community Trust informs you this is the final communication on this subject.’ 

Mrs Smethurst, a mother of three, accepts that when signing up for the chalet, everyone has to accept a condition that they can be asked to give up the chalet at the end of the licence period. 

‘But what seems unfair is that they are invoking this clause and applying it as a termination notice to just half a dozen families,’ she says.

‘I am not accusing them of anything I am just wondering why they are so secretive about how they are going about things.’

Approached by the Mail the directors said the GCT could not comment on any individual case.

Source: Read Full Article