BENTLEY residents fear they may have a lengthy fight on their hands to evict a group of travellers who bought land in their village and have now moved onto it.

Last Friday, numerous vans, a large mobile home, portable toilets and a digger were spotted on a two-acre plot adjacent to the sewage works and overlooking the slip road to the village, off the southbound carriageway of the A31.

A large fence, shielding the camp from the road, and two large mobile homes of a type that have to be transported on flat-bed trucks, are now in evidence on the site.

It is thought the digger has dug a system of trenches for what could be sanitation or water purposes.

Brian Dickinson, district councillor for Binsted and Bentley, said that residents are "extremely anxious at this unauthorised occupation".

"Apparently, the position is that they own the land, but are now willy-nilly putting things on site, like water mains pipes.

"There is a strong sentiment in the village that something has to be done," he continued, revealing that some "hot heads" are already considering rectifying the problem themselves.

Similar sentiments were echoed by David Asher, chairman for Bentley Parish Council, who said: "The parish council is as concerned as everyone in Bentley, in light of recent events covered in the national news."

"As far as I'm concerned, East Hampshire District Council has got it in hand, and we are awaiting the outcome."

It appears the district council has already taken decisive action.

Tom Pollock, a member of EHDC's legal services team, in a statement to The Herald  said that the council became aware of the mobile homes and associated earthwork development last Friday morning.

"The council obtained an injunction without notice to the defendants on the same day. The injunction order prohibits the development," he said. 

At a hearing today (Friday), there will be further legal argument and the court will decide whether or not to uphold the injunction. 

Mr Pollock said that in normal circumstances a notice would have to be given to travellers, formally telling them that an injunction was to be obtained. The situation in Bentley, however, was deemed "so urgent" that this process has been bypassed.

"The situation is being closely monitored by the council's planning enforcement team," he continued. "If the injunction is breached, committal proceedings may be brought against the defendants. This could lead to their imprisonment for contempt of court."

Mr Pollock confirmed that members of the council's enforcement team have already visited the site and that documents have been served to those camping there.

The Herald has learned that the plot being developed was once owned by a property developer from the Farnham area.

David Rumsey, who owns Pelhams, the estate agency which acted on behalf of the landowner, said: "I never met the person who bought it. Everything like this is done at arm's length, so you can't discriminate. We didn't show the people, all we did was say, 'there's the land, have a look at it'."

An offer in excess of £30,000 was received for the land, a substantial figure considering that it is approximately only two acres, is crossed by a footpath and is strewn with rubble dating back to the construction of the Bentley by-pass.

"The owner had no idea he was selling to travellers," Mr Rumsey concluded. "I imagine he'd go ballistic at this."

Derek Gilbert, a Bentley resident of 44 years, said that villagers are "disgusted" by the situation and feared the effect on local house prices.

The scene in Bentley has been replicating itself across the country in recent months, as travellers buy and for inflated prices and move in overnight, with the knowledge that it can take years for councils to evict them.

Only this week, 40 residents in a village in Kent raised £147,000 between them to buy a seven-acre plot to stop travellers buying up the space and then moving in.

As with the plot in Bentley, the land, which was only worth around £30,000, was within the Green Belt and designated as "grazing land" only, meaning that development of any kind was illegal.