THE British Horse Society and another objector at a public inquiry into a bridleway issue near Bedale have been severely criticised by a Government inspector and landed with a bill for thousands of pounds in costs.

Graham Laslett, who conducted a five-day inquiry earlier this year into the status of Jack Lane, a public right of way at Hunton, has awarded costs to North Yorkshire County Council, which claimed that unreasonable behaviour by the objectors led to the hearing.

In a strongly-worded report, Mr Laslett made the order against Alan Kind, of Newcastle, who described himself as an expert on rights of way issues, and the BHS, based at Stoneleigh, Warwickshire.

And in a further unusual step, Mr Laslett ordered that Mr Kind and the BHS should also pay the costs of the farmer who applied for Jack Lane to be downgraded from a bridleway to a footpath.

County council costs are expected to be between £4,000 and £5,000 but it is understood that those of the farmer, who engaged a QC to fight his case, are likely to be three times as much.

After reading an article on law the farming family successfully claimed that Jack Lane was wrongly included as a bridleway on the definitive rights of way map for Richmondshire, but objections by Mr Kind and the BHS resulted in an appeal and an inquiry.

Mr Laslett, who opened the inquiry at Newton-le-Willows and continued it at Bedale, said the BHS had used the hearing to lodge an objection which was only a cover for its favouring an alternative route. The society needed to consider being a more cohesive organisation.

He also criticised the BHS for failing to produce evidence which it claimed existed. As a result of that claim the county council had twice deferred making a decision to give the BHS the opportunity to produce that evidence. Mr Laslett said the evidence did not exist.

Mr Kind was criticised by Mr Laslett for pursuing a case "which had no reasonable prospect of success". Mr Laslett said Mr Kind should have recognised that as the inquiry progressed. The award of costs was split, with 60pc to be paid by Mr Kind and 40pc by the BHS.

Mr Laslett concluded: "The objectors might have given the impression of well-meaning and concerned amateurs (and on this performance the inspector might agree to that description) but what they are not is novices.

"They hold themselves up as having expertise in public rights of way matters. They knew this appeal was never going to succeed on the arguments they produced in evidence."

Mr Laslett said North Yorkshire council tax payers should not have to fund any part of the proceedings.

He added: "The objectors have done the organisations they represent a great disservice by pursuing this appeal. Their evidence was not flimsy, it was non-existent."

A county council spokesman said: "We acknowledge the right to appeal against rights of way orders. That right, however, must be exercised reasonably.

"In this case it patently was not and that is why on this occasion the county council took the unusual step of applying for costs.

BHS spokeswoman Wendy Packham said: "The BHS is very disappointed that the Government has seen fit to uphold the decision to grant costs against the society in this case.

"An incredible amount of hard work by our representatives went into the inquiry in an attempt to retain Jack Lane as a link bridleway."

Mr Kind, who has been a consultant on public rights of way issues for 16 years and edits the journal of the Byways and Bridleways Trust, could not be contacted for comment