THE council is being urged to reclaim one of Plymouth’s most historic buildings, amid revelations that some of the public money intended to restore it has been used for other purposes.

The Herald has learned that the owner of 16th Century Hooe Barn was given thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ cash by Plymouth City Council.

Locals have spent years campaigning for the Grade II-listed building – one of only three remaining Elizabethan threshing barns in the country – to be restored.

Property developer Graham Truscott paid just £1 for Hooe Barn in January 2010 – and was given £10,853 by Plymouth City Council as part of the deal, on the condition the barn was put into community use.

That was despite the authority, which had been trying to offload the crumbling barn since 2006, rejecting a rival bid totalling over £100,000, citing the bidder’s plan to use it as a canoe store did not constitute community use.

Mr Truscott was given the money to spend solely on making it “wind and watertight” within six months – and was obliged to show the council how he spent it. However, according to documents revealed under the Freedom of Information Act, he has lodged only a single invoice with the council showing £2,300 of spending on repairs.

Mr Truscott, from Wembury, wrote to a council lawyer saying he spent an unspecified amount of the money on attending meetings about the barn and replying to council officers’ legal warnings.

And, in the same letter, he said: “I will not be harassed into putting it right until I can, when your money will be used.”

The council would not comment on whether any action would be taken in light of Mr Truscott’s failure to produce proof he has used the money solely on repairing the roof.

The local authority has the legal right to buy the building back for £1 if they deem Mr Truscott to be in breach of the original transfer agreement.

Local residents have complained that the barn is still in a state of disrepair two years on and The Turnchapel and Mount Batten Residents’ Association is demanding it reclaims the building and the balance of cash not spent on repairing the roof, plus interest.

“There are a multitude of unanswered questions,” said chairman John Wheeler.

Mr Wheeler is calling for an inquiry into the original sale, the details of which have never been made public by the council.

When questioned by The Herald, Mr Truscott insisted he had secured the barn’s roof by the original July 2010 deadline. But bad weather often caused fresh damage – and he was not prepared to use the money for a long-term solution until being allowed to demolish adjoining buildings, currently leased to a family-run garage.

“[The cash] was given to me and I’m not doing anything to the barn until I get planning permission next door,” he said. “It is in a watertight condition.”

Mr Truscott submitted plans to restore the barn last September, but they were swiftly withdrawn.

However, he said a new application would be made by the end of this month, with ideas including a cafe, a gallery or a dentists’ surgery.

“It’s been a longer process than we imaged,” he added. “It has to pay for itself. The worst thing that happened was [the barn] became listed.”

His plans were backed by Plym Valley Heritage president Robin Blythe-Lord, who led the former Friends of Hooe Barn group.

“We want to see the barn restored and put to use,” he said. “But it is all a question of funds. Mr Truscott has done quite a bit to the roof and his plans are as good as anything.”

The barn, which was mentioned in the Domesday Book, fell into disrepair after being bought by the council in 1982, and needs an estimated £60,000 of repairs.

It was sold to Mr Truscott on the advice of Plymstock Radford Cllr Michael Leaves, council papers show, as he was “insistent” it be put back into leisure or community use – a condition of the deal with Mr Truscott. Cllr Leaves was unavailable for comment.

A council spokeswoman said the barn was sold to preserve it and to enable “a restoration that would benefit the community.”

It had been offered at no cost to community groups, she added, but there were no takers.