The recent eviction of caravan dwellers near Totnes, carried out by South Hams District Council (SHDC) under Sections 77 and 78 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act, was presented by authorities as a ‘procedural necessity’.

However, testimony from those displaced, paints a starkly different picture - one of ‘systemic exclusion’, ‘questionable legal maneuvers’, and a ‘targeted attack’ on alternative lifestyle choices.

While the council say that they "carefully followed steps," including providing welfare assessment forms, the reality on the ground suggests a lack of meaningful engagement, according to those affected.

William Holland, one of the evicted residents and a professional tradesman, was not in the country to receive notice or defend himself in court.

He described the legal paperwork as being "full of holes," suggesting that, had the residents presented a defense, the eviction might not have proceeded.

Residents dispute the council's claims of offering "alternative housing solutions".

"No suitable alternatives were offered," Holland stated, noting that he had not spoken to a single official during his entire stay at the site.

The council justified the action by citing "numerous complaints", regarding “antisocial and intimidating behavior.”

Yet, residents like ∞just-rob-of-earth©; a “freeman”, who lived at the site for seven years, insist the community was peaceful.

“During the eviction process we proceeded with peace,” ∞just-rob-of-earth© said. “But I was treated as less than human.”

Holland echoes this, saying that he cannot think of a single event that would constitute being a nuisance.

There is a suspicion among the community that these complaints stem from a singular, ‘influential source’, citing a "rich neighbor" rather than a broad public outcry.

According to a spokesperson from SHDC, they had received, ”numerous complaints from different individuals and groups.”

Without criminal convictions to back the allegations of anti-social behaviour and intimidation, the residents feel the claims are ‘unsubstantiated and biased’.

Following the actions taken, many within the community voiced a belief that the eviction highlights a deep-seated tension between bureaucratic systems and those who choose to live outside them.

At the time of eviction, Cllr David Hancock, Lead Member for Planning, said: “People living in caravans is not uncommon in the South Hams and this action is not about a particular way of life.”

A former resident, who left the site six months ago, pointed out the irony of the council claiming to ‘support alternative living’ while actively dismantling it during a national housing and cost-of-living crisis.

He also challenged the common "taxpayer" argument, arguing they contribute through indirect taxation and would willingly pay for services like bin collection if those resources were provided.

During the eviction process, the council reportedly "trashed" the site, leaving the residents to clear up the mess after the fact - despite accusations that they had been the ones to tarnish the area.

For Holland, the eviction has caused significant personal and professional damage. Having spent years rebuilding his life after a previous vehicle impoundment, he is once again left in a "fragile situation" without a secure place to park or work.

When asked what message he would like to send to SHDC, Holland responded: “They lied about us. It's defamatory and could have damaged my reputation which is vital as a tradesman.”

“The public are paying you to serve them and all you do is the opposite.”