The owners of a 'multi-million pound' house who were forced to give access to villagers along an ancient bridleway have installed metal barriers and 'no trespassing's signs.

David and Dawn Moore lost a six-year legal battle that has cost them up to £400,000 to stop ramblers, horse riders and dog walkers entering their 1.75-acre grounds.

But the couple – who claimed the path ran between two nearby cottages – have now put up ugly metal fencing which prevents people from strolling through their paddock.

Instead, visitors are forced along the perimeter of the land, where they are met by signs which warn: 'PRIVATE PROPERTY. No trespassers.'

Locals in Little Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire, also claim a beehive has been placed next to the route to deter people by raising the risk of them getting stung.

One, who asked not to be identified, said: 'The correct bridleway runs across the paddock, effectively dividing it into two. By doing this, this gives them [the Moores] the whole of the paddock.

'I was hoping they had come to the conclusion they should accept it [losing the legal battle] and move on but the situation is escalating the whole time.'

Parish council chairman Wayne Morris said the Moores could be prosecuted for committing a criminal offence under the Highways Act.

This states blocking or making it difficult to use a bridleway can attract jail terms of up to 51 weeks and a heavy fine.

He added: 'They're forcing people off the legal route with that fence and making them trespass on their own land because they don't want people walking in the field.

'This has gone on for six-and-a-half years, all the way to the High Court. They've lost the plot.'

Mr Morris also accused the Moores of 'doing a Clarkson' – a reference to claims Jeremy Clarkson 'strategically' installed beehives next to a public footpath at his Diddly Squat farm to keep walkers away.

The Grand Tour star has firmly denied the allegation, which he dismissed as 'hilarious'.

Workers from Hertfordshire County Council arrived on June 8 to reopen the to the public after the Moores had failed to do so under the terms of an enforcement order.

Three barriers were removed and dense brambles that had been allowed to grow across the route was uprooted on the path that furious villagers said had been in use for more than a century.

It followed a High Court ruling that backed the local authority and the Planning Inspectorate after they confirmed the path on land beside the Moore's house was a public right of way.

Locals cheered as the gates were taken down – although the work was temporarily halted twice for an ambulance to attend as Mrs Moore was apparently taken ill during the furore.

At one point, Mr Moore marched towards onlookers who were filming the scene, with one telling him: 'I'm cheering because the bridleway is now open.'

He replied: 'Oh. Open at the expense of my wife collapsing, yeah? You happy with that?'

The villagers' joy was short-lived, however, as they later reported that at least one of the gates had been rehung and the Moores were warning anyone trying to use the bridleway that they were 'trespassing'.

There were also claims the couple had prevented council workers from putting up a new bridleway sign on public land across the road from their house on June 9 by remonstrating with them.

One resident told the Mail: 'I have just been through, with Mr Moore telling me I was trespassing. When I continued walking he closed the gates behind me.

'I have notified the council and sent them photos.'

Another said: 'Dawn Moore was the first to approach [someone trying to use the bridleway] and tell him he was on the wrong path.

'Then David came out and shouted that he was trespassing - so both of them [were doing it].'

Someone else commented: 'Both Mr Moore and his wife were out remonstrating with the people trying to put the direction sign up, who gave up after a sob story.

'They keep replacing a gate that is propped up and not safe and telling people to get off their land as they are trespassing.

'They had already been warned by the council, so looks like they will be prosecuted.

'Funny she [Mrs Moore] made a miraculous recovery to have a go at users of the bridleway.'

The Moores are also potentially at risk of being prosecuted for breaching a local authority enforcement order.

The case would be dealt with by magistrates, who have the power to impose unlimited fines.

Alternatively, the council could demolish or remove unauthorised features and recover the costs from the owner.

Injunctions can also be obtained from the county court or High Court to halt persistent or severe unauthorised activity.

The Mail has contacted the county council about the latest apparent breach but its last statement on the situation was on Friday, when a spokesman said: 'We are still considering our options.'

The long-running dispute involves six-bedroom Breach House, parts of which date back to the 17th century, which the Moores bought for £1.2million in 2015.

They subsequently spent a small fortune renovating the dilapidated building, which they said had turned it into a 'multi-million pound' property.

In 2019, locals discovered the public right of way which runs through the grounds was closed off with signs and locked gates – with the Moores claiming the bridleway actually ran between the two neighbouring cottages.

Hertfordshire County Council passed an order stating the bridleway did cross the couple's land, leading the Moores to take their case to the Planning Inspectorate.

During a four-day hearing, senior definitive map officer Gavin Harbour-Cooper said the council had investigated the matter in 1956 and concluded the path ran through Breach House.

But when the first 'Definitive Map' was drawn up three years later, it showed the 'wrong route' between the cottages - although the Definitive Statement gave the correct information.

Nigel Adams, the founder of online estate agents BigBlackHen.com and whose parents owned Breach House from 1973 to 1985, said he handled the sale of the property to Mr Moore and his wife in 2015.

He added: 'During this process, I repeatedly discussed with the Moores the existing bridleway and its route through the Breach House land.'

William Marques, who lived in the house in the 1960s, also recalled the bridleway passing through it.

He described how he used it to get to his grandparents' home because the only other route, by road, was 'too dangerous'.

But Mr Moore, who runs an oncology business with his wife, told the inquiry the council had admitted in 2020 the bridleway signs by his home were wrong, so they were removed.

He insisted: 'When I purchased the property, I was not made aware of the existence of a bridleway crossing the property.'

When the planning inspector ruled against the Moores, they went to the High Court where the judge again backed the villagers and noted the 'inherent implausibility to the Claimants' argument'.

They were refused the right to go to the Court of Appeal last year but in an interview last month Mr Moore said he was looking at taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights

Explaining he would be 'pursuing the Article 8 human rights argument and also Article 1, Schedule 1 of the ECHR', he added: 'This all revolves around the decision to change my defined 2015 purchase parameter, as now enshrined in the High Court.

'You are entitled to what you purchased after carrying out all due diligence.'

Discussing the six-figure sum he and his wife had ploughed into their unsuccessful legal battle, Mr Moore told the Mail earlier this year: 'The cost doesn't really come into it at this point in time. It's whether you think you're right or wrong.'

He added his wife supported him '100 per cent' in the ongoing legal battle, as both believe the council is at fault for providing inaccurate documents when they bought their home.

'This is not me going off on some expedition into the wilderness and putting my tin hat on and saying "Whatever happens, happens",' he said.

'This is two logical people looking at the position given in 2015 and knowing they're correct.'

The bad blood the dispute has caused in the community saw Mr Moore – whose wife works at University College Hospital in London – complaining of criminal damage, including scratches on his cars, and harassment.

Meanwhile, the owners of the two neighbouring cottages - including parish council chairman Mr Morris - ploughed tens of thousands into their own legal costs.

The Moores were approached for a comment.