A town could be left with a cordoned off main street pub after demolition efforts hit stalemate.

The news came after the owner of the derelict Red Lion in Egremont appeared at West Cumbria Magistrates’ Court seeking more than £34,000 from Copeland Council, which had ordered him to improve the look of the building.

Property developer David Cox, who owns the former pub and the neighbouring former Tommy Kelly’s and The Nile properties on Market Place, had been in talks with the council about replacing them with a new hotel since 2016.

But the council later issued legal notices on two of the buildings, ordering him to improve their appearance.

Mr Cox told magistrates this week that the council had acted unreasonably, and that its officers knew the buildings needed to be knocked down.

The notices, he said, were served after talks about him taking control of a council car park broke down, which he said meant the authority losing £72,000.

The building could not be painted, nor cracks repaired, without undermining it further, he said.

Mr Cox added that Councillor Mike McVeigh, who chaired the planning committee, had made inappropriate comments about him on social media in relation to his “confidential planning consultation” with the council.

And he accused other councillors of publicly stating that they were “approaching Sellafield to have my properties taken off me”.

He said: “They paraded themselves in front of my building...and advised that my properties should be taken off me and given to Sellafield to make offices. They have no right to do that.

“I have been abused, I have been threatened to take my properties off me, all because I was right.”

RELATED: Call for offices to be built on town pub site

RELATED: Egremont shop forced to close as pub is to be demolished

RELATED: Hotel plans shelved as pub cordoned off for safety

Magistrates heard that Mr Cox was asked by the court to provide a structural engineer’s report after appealing the notices. That deemed that the Red Lion's front wall was structurally unstable.

The council then withdrew the legal notices as unworkable.

But Mr Cox said that, by taking 56 days to withdraw them after receiving the report, it had increased his costs, which stood at about £34,000 but were rising by nearly £100 a day due to ongoing cordoning off of the site.

Brynmor Adams, representing the council, said the bench did not have the jurisdiction to award costs in this case.

He added: “Issuing of the notices was a sound administrative decision, it was made in the public interest and therefore the public purse should not be exposed to financial prejudice by way of a costs award.

“Statements from councillors don’t mean the council itself has acted inappropriately.

“There’s still a building standing on the site that’s not only damaging the amenity of the area but is at risk of falling down.”

He said the cost of cordoning off the buildings related to their condition, not the court case, and added that 56 days was not an excessive time.

Mr Adams added there was no evidence of the council agreeing to the need for demolition before serving the notices.

Mr Cox said he was prepared to arrange demolition of all the buildings but did not have the consent of the owner of the former Which Craft shop, within the confines of the Red Lion, which needed to be levelled. He added: “I’m prepared to pay to knock it down but the council must get her permission.”

Magistrates formally dismissed the appeal as there were no longer notices to appeal, and presiding magistrate Kevin Wilderspin said the court had no jurisdiction to award costs.

He added: “Both parties will have incurred costs. It may be for the parties to pursue the matter directly through the county court.”

After the case, Mr Cox said he was considering going to the county court.

He added that he did not believe he could successfully gain demolition consent from the craft shop owner and was relying on the council to issue a legal notice requiring it to be knocked down.

However, a spokesman said the council had no authority to issue such a notice unless it deemed the building to be unsafe. Because of the measures Mr Cox had taken to cordon off the site, he added, there was no perceived danger to the public, and seeking necessary consents for demolition was a matter for the owners.