Cockerel that crowed 90 times in hour-and-a-half period is ‘torture’, neighbours complain

A cockerel that crowed 90 times in an hour-and-a-half period has been described as "torture" by neighbours living nearby, a court heard.

Harold Brown's "nuisance" bird was recorded repeatedly crowing by environmental health officials after residents complained of the continual "cock-a-doodle-doo" sound coming from his garden.

The 80-year-old claimed in court that the noise was more of a "croak" than a traditional cockerel's crow.

But six of his neighbours from the residential cul-de-sac on the edge of Hampshire's New Forest where he lives appeared in court to argue otherwise.

They told Southampton Magistrates Court that they have had to avoid parts of their house to get away from the "discernible" and "significant" squawking which would occur almost every morning.

Mr Brown, who represented himself during the proceedings, disputed the evidence and said there was a "conspiracy" from both residents and the New Forest District Council (NFDC) against him.

Now, the pensioner has been handed a £200 fine after a District Judge found him guilty of failing to comply with an abatement notice to keep the noise down.

Opening the case, prosecutor Syan Ventom said the "nuisance" occurred at Mr Brown's home address in Calmore.

It was heard that in October 2022, NFDC received complaints from a number of "different sources" who alleged the cockerel kept by Mr Brown was "crowing regularly".

The prosecutor said the council felt this "amounted to a statutory nuisance" and served an abatement notice in December 2022.

It was heard Mr Brown did not abide by this notice but soon after, his pet cockerel died, which allowed for a "brief period of respite for neighbours", the prosecutor said.

However, Mr Ventom said that soon afterwards, Mr Brown obtained another cockerel and "the nuisance reoccurred".

The court heard evidence from two Environmental Health officers who visited Mr Brown's address in August of last year.

They recorded hearing the cockerel crow some 90 times in an hour-and-a-half period.

Environmental health officer Arran Harmer said he served the abatement notice to Mr Brown, who told him the cockerel was kept in a coop until 7am and wore a restrictive collar.

Six neighbours of Mr Brown, who all live on the same cul-de-sac where the average house price is £330,000, appeared in court to give evidence against him.

Barbara Cron said she is repeatedly woken up in her sleep by the noisy bird.

"I often suffer migraine attack and often if you're suffering migraine attack, and you're listening to a cockerel crowing, it's just a form of torture," she said.

Neighbour Sharon Lucas also reported hearing a "continuous cock-a-doodle-doo" in the mornings.

"It wakes us up early in the morning then you're tired because you've been woken early," she said.

"I work from home occasionally, sometimes I have had to leave the house when it's been continually cockereling. It's just a constant nuisance."

Claire Palmer said she has to "avoid" the south side of her house to escape the noise.

Pauline Grinham said her daughter works full-time and has had to go to the doctors to "get help"' for sleep after being repeatedly woken by the bird.

Mr Brown pleaded not guilty to one count of failing to comply with abatement notice.

In his submissions, he told the court there is a "conspiracy" from the local authority against him.

He refused to give evidence and while cross-examining witnesses, he alleged that the first bird was "killed" by the council.

On the noise allegations, he said: "It doesn't cock-a-doodle-doo, it croaks."

Prosecutor Mr Ventom told District Judge Timothy Pattinson that the case cost the local council an "eye-watering" £5,500 to bring to court.

Judge Pattinson found Mr Brown, who stormed out of court whilst hearing his verdict, guilty of the charge.

Sentencing him, he said: "The offence was failure to comply with the notice without reasonable excuse.

"The witnesses described disruption of sleep, constant noise, being woken every morning, medical help being required, restriction on the use of parts of the house.

"There was no question of the source of the nuisance, which was Mr Brown's cockerel."

Referring to the evidence from Environmental Health, the judge said: "They described, and again, I summarise, significant noise, very discernible, unreasonable interference capable of disrupting sleep.

"Mr Brown decided not to give evidence and he's not even bothered to stay and hear any reasoning.

"We can only assume that he accepts everything that the prosecution witnesses said, otherwise he would have gone into the witness box and told me where they had given inaccurate evidence."

The judge refers to Mr Brown's "conspiracy theories" surrounding the case, and said he finds "no evidence of corruption or conspiracy".

In addition to the fine he was ordered to pay £300 in legal costs and an £80 surcharge.