An entire estate of 35 ‘ghost’ homes – 27 houses and eight flats – has stood empty for more than a year because of a planning dispute which has chalked up more than £1 million in lost rent.

Swale councillors ordered the homes in Seager Road, Sheerness, to be pulled down after residents complained the £6.2 million development had been built 1.7m too high and 1.5m nearer to neighbouring properties than allowed.

Developers Moat Homes appealed against the demolition order and for three days at Swale House, Sittingbourne, last week tried to convince planning inspector Chris Preston to reverse the decision.

MP Gordon Henderson waded into the row on Wednesday.

He told the inspector: “As an MP I try to avoid development issues like the plague because I don’t have a lot of influence over them.

“But I took a particular interest in this case. The way it has been dealt with throughout has been an affront to the residents.

“Yes, we do need social housing, but not at any price.

“It was drawn to Moat Homes’ attention as far back as January last year that the houses did not comply with the original planning application. Yet they ploughed on regardless.

“Moat Homes are normally a very good housing association providing homes for vulnerable people.

“But they have to obey the rules the same as everyone else.”

Susan Holmes, of Barnsley Close, said: “Residents were told roof heights would be similar to existing homes and not readily visible from any public vantage points. So we were astonished to watch these building getting taller and taller.

“These new plans breach planning consent in 10 different ways. All the buildings are six feet taller than they should be.

“The whole site is overbearing and oppressive. The buildings give a feeling of intimidation, intrusion, claustrophobia and foreboding. No one wants to use their gardens any more. It is a blot on the landscape.

“If Moat wins this appeal it will be the green light for developers to ignore local authority planning completely and no one will be able to do anything about it.”

Moat commissioned McCullock Homes to design and build the estate of affordable properties off Marine Parade opposite the Isle of Sheppey Sailing Club.

But the original plans were altered when it was discovered the site was on a flood-plain.

The three-storey homes grew into four-storeys as garages were added to the ground floor.

Swale council has demanded that blocks B and C be pulled down because of their “over-bearing impact” on numbers 15, 17 and 19 Seager Road.

Ross McCardle, the council’s senior planner, warned that as the development breached planning control, it did not conform to a Section 106 agreement which guaranteed a contribution of £138,389 to the community.

He said satisfactory headroom in the top-floor bedrooms could have been created by raising a small section of roof cross-ways within the roof valley instead of raising the ridges and eaves.”

Wayne Featherstone, who lives at 19 Seager Road, said he had been unable to sell his house when prospective buyers saw the new homes overlooking his back garden.

He added: “It feels like a football stadium. We are overlooked by these homes which tower above us.”

He has since added a loft conversion but said: “We had many visits from building control officers who made us fit a non-opening obscured window which overlooked roofs.

“I work for plaster-board makers Knauf and have seen sites come to a stop because of alterations far more minor than the changes which have taken place to these buildings. It is very frustrating.”

He said he raised objections as soon as he saw floating concrete rafts being laid instead of normal foundations.

He said: “I tried to contact Moat Homes but I was ignored, even when I wrote a letter of complaint. When Moat Homes was told to stop, it continued to lay roads.

“I can’t understand why they continued to work after getting a Stop Notice. The only thing Moat Homes has done right is turn up at the right site and build the right number of properties. Everything else is wrong.”

Tim Bell, of Barnsley Close, said: “I am amazed a body like Moat Homes could have made such a disastrous mistake.

“If they had done the job properly we would not be here now. We all agree we need affordable housing – but with planning permission.

“It is like going to a car dealer and asking for a Ford Focus but getting a Ford Transit. The dealer may argue that both have four wheels and an engine but a Transit would be totally unacceptable.” - Tim Bell

Simon Bird, QC, for Moat Homes, said: “This hugely worthwhile development has been stopped in its tracks by the council alleging an overbearing impact on three Seager Road properties.

“This is not a reasonable position to take. The allegation fails to take a balanced approach to the practical realities of developing this site in terms of its constraints and housing need.

“The council’s refusal has already denied 157 people in genuine housing need access to affordable homes on the site for a year.”

This was valued at £1 million in lost rents.

Mr Bird said: “It is important to stress his inquiry is not about how the site came to be developed, who might be responsible for that or whether things should have been done differently. It is concerned solely with the acceptability of the as-built development.

“A series of changes, minor in themselves and all made for laudable reasons, gave rise to a material deviation from the approved plans.

“It is that deviation which was regrettably not first discussed with the council.

“Moat has gained no financial benefit from the breach. Indeed, it continues to suffer substantial financial losses.”

Award-winning architect John Pardey, for Moat Homes, admitted: “All design is a question of balance and can be a minefield.

“But this is well done.”

He said there was no way the height of the roofs could be reduced and warned that as the walls were made of custom-built timber frames any changes could involve demolishing the buildings to the brick course.

He said overlooking neighbouring homes was acceptable and added: “Perhaps replacing the windows with opaque glass would be a kind thing to do but most people will use nets, curtains or blinds.”

He suggested demolishing the buildings would use up as much carbon dioxide as driving a family car 300 times around the Earth or destroying a forest the same size of Sheppey.

Neighbour Dawn Franklyn said: “The whole thing is a complete farce. If the houses were built correctly the first time there would be no issue about the carbon footprint.”

Mr Preston is expected to announce his decision within eight weeks.

2010 – Planning permission granted for 35 homes. Developers to contribute £138,389 to the community including: £26,950 for play equipment, £68,434 for secondary schools, £7,945 to libraries and £23,983 for youth and community.

2013 September – Moat Homes acquires 0.87 hectare site.

2013 October – New plans drawn up but not approved.

2014 February – Building begins.

2015 April – Cllr Andy Booth (Con, Minster Cliffs) is vice-chairman of the council’s planning committee. He told the inspector he had asked for a stop notice to be issued on April 2 last year when residents raised alarms that the buildings were too tall and too near neighbouring homes.

The request was turned down by officers on legal advice. Cllr Booth said: “This was very disappointing. I believe it could have saved an awful lot of time, consideration and financial outlay from both the council and the applicant.”

On April 23 the planning committee rejected a retrospective application despite advice from officers to approve it.

2015 May – The decision was called in by the head of planning and then put before the committee again on May 21. Once, again councillors vetoed the new plans and demanded that the existing buildings be torn down.

Cllr Booth said: “We have heard from the applicant how it has built up a considerable relationship with the council over more than 30 years. But this does not allow it to drive a coach and horses through our policies.

“Should the applicant choose to build something it has not received prior approval for, it runs the risk of the ultimate sanction – demolition – for a blatant and flagrant abuse of the planning system.

“Let this send a clear signal that this authority will not succumb to avoidable pressures and simply roll over to inconsiderate developers.”

2015 July – Enforcement Notice served demanding homes be pulled down within six months of August 26.

2015 August – Moat Homes lodges an appeal.