The demolition of a Ramsgate building was botched after the owners hired someone to carry out the dangerous task who was incompetent, a court heard.

Panther AL (VAT) wanted to flatten 81 High Street and other houses and printworks to make way for the building of 20 new flats in November 2013.

But now a judge has heard Thanet District Council claim the company did not have permission to bring down the house.

Canterbury Crown Court heard how, as debris fell from the tall building, shopkeepers were warned to evacuate their premises, shoppers ran for cover and cars had to turn round.

Prosecutor Claire Harden-Frost said: “Members of the public were put at serious risk to their health and safety.”

And after a row with local councillors, directors of security firm Panther - which owns the building - published an article in the Thanet Gazette - which a judge and a prosecutor revealed contained lies.

Now the company has admitted breaching health and safety regulations in failing to take “reasonable steps” to hire a competent demolition company.

“It would seem Mr Elmes was selected because he was available and provided a quote which Panther was willing to pay,” said the prosecutor.

Judge James O’Mahony heard how Martin Elmes was hired after Panther staff talked with “jobbing builders” who recommended him – but they didn’t make any checks on his experience in demolition or his qualifications.

Elmes, from Hemel Hempstead, has also admitted a charge of failing to take adequate steps to prevent or reduce danger during the demolition.

The prosecutor added: “The demolition was undertaken by a 'JCB-type' machine with a bucket attached to the front and no protection screen and no specialist demolition equipment on site.

“No permission was sought about a temporary road closure – instead workmen on site used cones and red tape to put an exclusion zone around the property, which according to witnesses, happened as the demolition was taking place.”

Judge O’Mahony added: “Which they absolutely had no right to do.”

The prosecutor added: “It was the most primitive form of demolition and witnesses reported seeing young people running across the exclusion zone as part of a game.”

The company said the building had been in imminent danger of collapsing but the council expert rejected this claim.

The prosecutor added that it was “a matter of fortune” that no one was injured as debris fell in the street.

She said that after the demolition, complaints were made about the incident by councillors.

“As a result, Panther PLC – the parent company - published their own full page article in the Thanet Gazette aimed at the residents.

“It contained a number of untruths. It said the demolition was planned and carefully thought out. The company said it had discussed the matter with local police – that was untrue.

“They had also carefully planned the road closure and had ensured the site was secured with up to five workmen to ensure safety of the public.

“We don’t know how many people were on site but the rest of that statement was untrue, as in fact there was no liaison with local police," added the prosecutor.

The court heard that the action plan Elmes drew up for the demolition was inadequate, it wasn't followed and he wasn’t even on site that day.

The hearing was adjourned until May.