Neighbour moving. Workshop

[GT03ROB]

dmsims said:

ColinM50 said:

Speaking as a district councillor that sits on a planning committee my advice would be to contact your district or county planning department and speak with the Planning Enforcement team. Just make them aware of the issue and they'll take it from there. They shouldn't even tell your neighbour who complained, especially if you ask them not to divulge your details. Our enforcement team, if relevant, would ask him to apply for retrospective planning permission and if he does apply, you have a right to object at the hearing.

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=207&t=1789875

We do get some crackers from time-to-time!

[Equus]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

I can't speak for the OP's LPA, but recent experience has shown our one to be supine at best, and not understanding the rules at worst.

Of course Planning (and enforcement in particular) has to take a balanced view. There are, of course, two sides to every story.

Fermit: numerous people, including myself, have suggested to you before that it perhaps isn't a good idea to expose yourself so emotionally and personally on these forums. You may wish to reflect on everything you've just wrote, and consider how much of it is relevant to Planning law and policy.

OP: If you want a more rational overview of the enforcement process and the options available to it, read this.

...But in particular, remember that while they have a legal obligation to investigate enforcement issues that are drawn to their attention, quite literally top of their list of options is 'no formal action', where they feel that there has either been no breach of planning or that the harm is so insignificant that further enforcement is not in the public interest (and this can include where they know damned well that if they insisted on an application, it would be approved without hesitation).

The Planners are always wrong to the people who don't agree with their decisions....

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

Equus said:

You may wish to reflect on everything you've just wrote, and consider how much of it is relevant to Planning law and policy.

The Planners are always wrong to the people who don't agree with their decisions....

What is relevant to planning law is that in our instance he has covered more than 50% of his land with structures, it has a veranda, which is not permitted, and has a platform higher than permitted.

If it's a decision that they are OK with it then that is one thing, but to tell us it has always been permitted is simply wrong.

[Julia121]

LoL! Thank you JulianPH and Equus, I get the 50% policy directive. Equus thank you for the link and will look through this evening.

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

I can't speak for the OP's LPA, but recent experience has shown our one to be supine at best, and not understanding the rules at worst.

Fermit, I loathe appearing harsh but surely this approach isn't worth the distress you're both experiencing. In my situation I understand that the worst that can happen is I lose. And, as long as there's nothing blatantly wrong i.e. they inspected the wrong property, I won't be taking it further. Especially if the planning people appear inept. It is what it is.

It's a setback to be sure but I can take it in my stride because I have a plan B which affords me roughly the same outcome as if I'd have won. You don't appear to have a plan B to achieve what you want other than returning to plan A and shouting 'foul'.

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

Julia121 said:

Fermit, I loathe appearing harsh but surely this approach isn't worth the distress you're both experiencing. In my situation I understand that the worst that can happen is I lose. And, as long as there's nothing blatantly wrong i.e. they inspected the wrong property, I won't be taking it further. Especially if the planning people appear inept. It is what it is.

It's a setback to be sure but I can take it in my stride because I have a plan B which affords me roughly the same outcome as if I'd have won. You don't appear to have a plan B to achieve what you want other than returning to plan A and shouting 'foul'.

What will be will be, and it won't take over. It's just frustrating for us, having had to jump through hoops for them meeting the neighbourhood consultation end date - which they then extended anyway. On the flip side the neighbour's seemingly built outside of permitted regs, and the planning departments attitude seems to be 'meh....'

The easiest answer is to now just ignore him. His loss, we've taken many a package in for him, and provided many an airport run.

[Equus]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

It's just frustrating for us, having had to jump through hoops for them meeting the neighbourhood consultation end date - which they then extended anyway.

You seem to be under the impression that they're in some way acting randomly or incompetently.

In fact, the whole 'consultation period' thing is set out in legislation (in The Town and Country (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, if you care). Consultation periods are set, and where necessary extended, in accordance with strict rules over which the individual Authority has no control themselves... in fact the legislation places far more onerous restrictions on the Local Authority than it does on you as a member of the public, so if anyone has the right to get frustrated, it's them.

The key thing that you need to be aware of is that the consultation end date is almost meaningless to you, the public, because the LPA has a legal duty to take account of any representations received from any consultee, right up until the point that the decision notice is issued.

Its only real relevance is that they're not allowed to make a decision until that date has passed, whereas in theory they could take a decision at any time following it (and if your objection reaches them after the decision has been issued, then it really is too late). In practice, it is almost unheard of for an LPA to issue a decision notice until within a couple of working days of the statutory expiry date, so in practice, you have almost the full 8/12 week application period in which to make your representations.

TL:DR version: it's only frustrating because you don't understand it.

[Julia121]

Hi and just a quick update and thanks to all for taking the time to post and share their knowledge.

We won, workshop has to come down. Bemused about the length of time given to do this (4 months before revisit) but as long as it definitely comes down then we're happy.

Thanks again everyone!!!

xx

[AlmostUseful]

Julia121 said:

Hi and just a quick update and thanks to all for taking the time to post and share their knowledge.

We won, workshop has to come down. Bemused about the length of time given to do this (4 months before revisit) but as long as it definitely comes down then we're happy.

Thanks again everyone!!!

xx

I don’t know where you’re from, but round these parts we don’t take well to resolution or updates, we like to speculate on outstanding matters. You’ve taken our fun away.

Please don’t update this in 4 months time to let us know that it’s come down, much love.
Xx

[Escort3500]

Julia121 said:

Hi and just a quick update and thanks to all for taking the time to post and share their knowledge.

We won, workshop has to come down. Bemused about the length of time given to do this (4 months before revisit) but as long as it definitely comes down then we're happy.

Thanks again everyone!!!

xx

Good to hear; progress at last. Has the council served an enforcement notice on him requiring its removal within 4 months, or have they given him a stay of execution of 4 months to demolish it? I’d expect (and hope) it’s a EN, though bear in mind he has a right of appeal against the notice which could drag the matter out for months and he could be successful, in which case it could stay. However, from your description of the monstrosity it sounds unlikely an appeal would succeed. Keep us updated

[dhutch]

Escort3500 said:

Good to hear .... Keep us updated

Absolutely.

[Julia121]

Well an update was requested so here goes.....


1) Next door neighbour was given six months to take shed down,

2) Next door neighbour moves in with rich divorcee and decides to sell and run,

3) Rightmove showed property a wreck; probably needs demolishing,

4) House sold cheap to travelers,

5) Shed still there.



So, how is everyone else's Sunday

[Lagom]

Julia121 said:

4) House sold cheap to travelers,

5) Shed still there.

[abzmike]

6) new owners hear about enforcement notice on workshop

7) new owners visit neighbours to see who reported it...

Sorry to hear OP, good luck, you may need it

[dublove]

Oh man what a sorry outcome.

Original post should have read: Neighbour build massive workshop whilst i was away - how can i convince him to let me use it now & again and all the tools.

[Julia121]

Thanks guys for your words of support. Not the best outcome to be sure. Fortunately we had plans B,C, and D just in case although never thought we'd go straight to plan D. Plan D's coming tomorrow to look at the house. They won't be moving in for a couple of weeks anyway so plenty of time to get things sorted.

[robinessex]

Not to put a downer on it, but my experience of planning is if you follow the rules you can get screwed. If you say sod it, I'll build what I want, then the planners quite often can't be arsed to make you demolish it, they just get a permitted development certificate issued.

[CubanPete]

Who owns / is responsible for the footpath? Would they take up the fight?

[anonymous-user]

robinessex said:

Not to put a downer on it, but my experience of planning is if you follow the rules you can get screwed. If you say sod it, I'll build what I want, then the planners quite often can't be arsed to make you demolish it, they just get a permitted development certificate issued.

I know a very large company who have that attitude.
They're getting more twitchy now as they have had to demolish one development, have one where they can't get access and another about to fall thorough due to trying to 'bypass' planning/dev/access regs etc each one well into the millions to develop.

Heyho you win some you lose some I suppose.

[steve2]

speedyguy said:

robinessex said:

Not to put a downer on it, but my experience of planning is if you follow the rules you can get screwed. If you say sod it, I'll build what I want, then the planners quite often can't be arsed to make you demolish it, they just get a permitted development certificate issued.

I know a very large company who have that attitude.
They're getting more twitchy now as they have had to demolish one development, have one where they can't get access and another about to fall thorough due to trying to 'bypass' planning/dev/access regs etc each one well into the millions to develop.

Heyho you win some you lose some I suppose.

Not down in Kent by any chance ?

[dhutch]

speedyguy said:

I know a very large company who have that attitude.
They're getting more twitchy now as they have had to demolish one development, have one where they can't get access and another about to fall thorough due to trying to 'bypass' planning/dev/access regs etc each one well into the millions to develop.

Heyho you win some you lose some I suppose.

Always. But if they are tightening down on it places, that is great news.

This a small development of five large houses outside Bolton, which has now stood as roof-on windows-missing shells for around two years following a planning dispute as the planning permission was for two story buildings which would have been much more in keeping. If this basically a compact out of town rural develop. If they dont make them lower the roof, the are spineless aholes.