A millionaire businessman have angered his neighbours by erecting an electric fence around his £44.5 million Notting Hill mansion.
David Walsh claims the fence around his four-storey townhouse was put up to stop foxes entering his garden.
But his neighbours have accused him of making the heritage area look like a “POW camp” and causing a “public safety risk”.
Mr Walsh, founder of insurance company CFC, bought the property in 2023.
In retrospective planning documents he argued that the inclusion of the fence was “intended for fox prevention purposes”, according to the Daily Mail.
The fence runs the length of the boundary wall between Mr Walsh’s property and the next.
A warning sign along the fence states that the equipment is designed to keep pigs, horses, sheep, cows and deer in pens.
When questioned about its purpose by the Mail, Mr Walsh said: “It's none of your business. I've got a wife who is very, very scared of foxes - you got a problem with that?
“The council has got very confused, they've looked at the wrong photos. We actually have a much better plan that is much more discreet, but they looked at the wrong photos.”
His neighbours were less convinced, with one describing the structure as “a bit silly” and likening it to those used in prisoner of war (POW) camps.
Another said: “Foxes can be a problem around here - but that's the same for everyone in London.”
The fencing covers the boundary wall shared with the direct next-door neighbours, who said they agreed with Mr Walsh's stance.
They told the Mail: “We want him to keep it. The foxes dig up our trash too.”
In official enforcement papers, the council said the structures design would “read as an unwelcome addition”, resulting in the “fortification of the site and failing to preserve the character and appearance of the building, street scene and wider conservation area.”
Ladbroke Association, a community group aimed at protecting the architectural heritage of the neighbourhood objected to the application.
A spokesman said: “In our original objection, we expressed concern about the public safety aspects of this scheme and suggested that there should be conditions requiring a minimum strength of current and adequate public liability insurance.
“We were surprised that, in the officers’ report, this was considered outside the scope of the planning assessment.
“We understand that planning officers believe that this paragraph is about large developments, but again there is nothing in the paragraph that indicates that small developments are excluded.
“We hope, therefore, that this matter can be reconsidered, as we believe that public safety should be seen as a material planning consideration in this case.”
A Kensington and Chelsea council spokesman said: “The Council received a retrospective planning application for an electric fence which was refused. The applicant has the right to appeal the decision. We are considering any necessary enforcement proceedings.”
The Standard has approached David Walsh for comment.
