Restaurant owners hit out at council amid claims it is pursuing £2.5m confiscation order over planning breach

A fundraising campaign has been set up by The Big Retort on behalf of brothers Ahmet and Sahin Gok, who own the Meze Mangal restaurant, have  to gain “the means to fight an absurd case in court”.

The dispute began when the brothers responded to a neighbour’s complaint about smoke and odours from the restaurant by installing a new extraction fan system.

Lewisham said this was done without seeking planning permission and with continued complaints about smoke and smells disturbing surrounding homes.

According to the Goks because the restaurant is in a conservation area, they applied for planning permission but their application was refused.

They decided to leave the extractor in place as they thought it was more important to maintain good relations with neighbours “than to follow what felt like an unreasonable decision”.

Their fundraising page stated: “Instead of working with them, Lewisham Council escalated matters in the most extreme way possible. What should have been a simple planning issue has now been turned into a criminal prosecution under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) – a law created to target serious organised crime.”

The Goks said the restaurant is popular with councillors and officers but “that same council is demanding an unbelievable £2.5 million confiscation order in so-called ‘criminal profits’. For an extractor fan”.

A Lewisham spokesperson said: “We always try to resolve cases informally, and prosecution is an absolute last resort. The vast majority of the hundreds of planning enforcement cases are dealt with by us in this way. 

“This has been a long running case since neighbours complained about the smoke, noise and smells from the restaurant before 2018.

“In 2019 the restaurant owners said they would remove the extraction system once their planning appeal had been dismissed. However, the restaurant continues to operate with the illegal extractor eight years after this case was opened.  

“Had the extraction system been removed at any point during that time then no further action would have been necessary.”

Lewisham said the Proceeds of Crime Act had arisen because they were found guilty of a criminal offence.

The court ordered confiscation of passports because they did not turn up at court hearings and the council said it had no involvement this.

“Similarly, the financial investigation and penalties are guided by the rules set out in the Proceeds of Crime Act and the decisions of the court,” Lewisham’s statement said.

Mark Smulian