A COUPLE ordered to remove a wooden canopy built on their roof terrace say it was built to protect them from neighbours throwing objects at them.

The owners of a flat on Haddington High Street have lodged an appeal after they were refused permission for the pergola on their roof terrace and told to remove it.

In their appeal statement to East Lothian Council’s local review body, they claim that it is needed for their own protection when using the terrace.

They say that, as well as risks from crumbling masonry and falling slates from the roof above, objects have been thrown from the property above.

They say: “The installation of the pergola was undertaken as a measure to safeguard our health and wellbeing from potential hazards such as falling gutters, stones or slates, or objects thrown by neighbours.

“It serves as a protective mechanism against falling hazards. This mitigation was implemented subsequent to the refusal of essential roof repairs.

'Objects hurled'

“We have been subjected to harassment on multiple instances. Objects have been hurled from an elevated position.

"These incidents, along with other instances of physical and verbal harassment and aggression, have been duly reported to the police.”

Photographs of slates which have fallen onto the terrace, along with crumbling masonry, guttering and other debris, have been submitted by the owners as part of the appeal.

East Lothian planners were asked to approve a retrospective planning application for the roof terrace, which is on top of a commercial premises below, and the pergola.

But while they approved the terrace, they ruled that the pergola would need to be removed, describing it as a permanent structure which the owners were using to store electrical equipment.

Planners said: “The pergola, which is a covered, permanent structure, allows for the intensification of use of this external terrace.

“Such an intensification of use includes storage of electrical equipment, including the washing machine beneath it, which would otherwise be stored and used within the flat.

“Such an intensification of use is harmful to the residential amenity of the occupants of other flats within the flatted building .”

The review body meets later this month to hear the appeal.