Informal Planning Advice prior to Complaint?

[youngsyr]

Lazermilk said:

Sorry to hear they got away with it, I didn't think they would!

Does this mean they now have to declare a dispute with their neighbour when selling also?

Thanks, I suppose it did take them 3 attempts at the planning to get away with it and the last one was very underhand (basically a closed door meeting between the planning officer and the neighbours to decide what would be permitted).

I'm assuming that now they have (conditional) planning approval, there is no dispute to declare re the platform.

[anonymous-user]

youngsyr said:

Thanks, I suppose it did take them 3 attempts at the planning to get away with it and the last one was very underhand (basically a closed door meeting between the planning officer and the neighbours to decide what would be permitted).

I'm assuming that now they have (conditional) planning approval, there is no dispute to declare re the platform.

Judging by your other threads there are loads of disputes to declare.
As the main battle has been lost you may as well retreat and try and get off to a good start with your new neighbours. Or move.

These things can consume you.

[Pheo]

We’ve just had planning for a raised terrace. We did not submit any screening, and it came back with a 1.8m obscure fence (details to be submitted, which reminds me I need to do the drawings and submit for approval) as a condition. So I suspect this is what happened rather than them change it. This then means the loss of privacy is delt with. Not great I know given they’ve clearly been very objectionable but I can see how from a planning point of view it’s resolved.

Hopefully at least it’s not as bad.

[youngsyr]

desolate said:

youngsyr said:

Thanks, I suppose it did take them 3 attempts at the planning to get away with it and the last one was very underhand (basically a closed door meeting between the planning officer and the neighbours to decide what would be permitted).

I'm assuming that now they have (conditional) planning approval, there is no dispute to declare re the platform.

Judging by your other threads there are loads of disputes to declare.
As the main battle has been lost you may as well retreat and try and get off to a good start with your new neighbours. Or move.

These things can consume you.

I think that's probably the best route - I could try and drag this out, but ultimately the end result is likely to be the same.

Just incredibly frustrating that they won't even have to live with what they've done, whereas we will.

[youngsyr]

Today is the 20th December and as expected no work has yet begun on installing the partition. The wording of the planning approval is as follows:

Planning Decision Notice said:

...permission is granted, subject to compliance with the following conditions:...


2. Within one month of the date of this permission [23 November 2018], the privacy screen as identified on the approved drawing [REF] shall be erected along the perimeter boundary of the raised decking area with [MY ADDRESS] and shall be retained as approved in perpetuity

So, clearly the neighbours are unlikely to meet that condition. My guess is that they'll be lucky to get the glass ordered and in place by mid January.

Not really sure how that helps anything, but I would like to be able to document that the partition wasn't in place by the date required by the permission (this Sunday) in case I need it in the future.

What's the best way to do this?

Best idea I can come up with at the moment is to buy 3 disposable cameras and take photos of the Times newspaper front page clearly showing the date (after the deadline) first, then take pictures of the deck clearly showing no partition.

Am I right in thinking that it would be extremely difficult to fake that process so that the pictures of non-compliant deck could be taken before the date on the newspaper?

Is there an easier or better way?

[Equus]

youngsyr said:

Not really sure how that helps anything, but I would like to be able to document that the partition wasn't in place by the date required by the permission (this Sunday) in case I need it in the future.

What's the best way to do this?

They are now in breach of the Planning consent. Report it to the Planning Department as an enforcement issue, simple as that. The Case Officer (probably - most LPA's now make it the Officers' responsibility to enforce their own consents, rather than passing it to a specific Enforcement Officer) will take it from there.

Edited by Equus on Thursday 20th December 19:51

[youngsyr]

Equus said:

youngsyr said:

Not really sure how that helps anything, but I would like to be able to document that the partition wasn't in place by the date required by the permission (this Sunday) in case I need it in the future.

What's the best way to do this?

They are now in breach of the Planning consent. Report it to the Planning Department as an enforcement issue, simple as that. The Case Officer (probably - most LPA's now make it the Officer's responsibility to enforce their own consents, rather than passing it to a specific Enforcement Officer) will take it from there.

Thanks for the info. Any insight into what the enforcement officer might do - my suspiciions is: simply give them another month to put it up?

The situation is slightly complex as the neighbours have the house on the market.

Thinking about it rationally, if my options for getting the platform lowered are exhausted, then it probably serves me best not to report it and just sit on my hands in the hope that they sell and move on as soon as possible.

Making a fuss about them breaching the permission is likely to slow that process down, so my thinking is if I'm not going to get anything out of it, then I might as well not do it.

Would you agree?

[Equus]

youngsyr said:

Thanks for the info. Any insight into what the enforcement officer will do - simply give them another month to put it up?

Essentially, probably yes.

But wheels will be put in motion to take further action, if they fail to respond, and once an enforcement case has been triggered (and especially if you keep on the LPA's back), it won't generally go away.

Read this if you want a better understanding of how the system works, and the options that are available to the LPA's.

[youngsyr]

Equus said:

youngsyr said:

Thanks for the info. Any insight into what the enforcement officer will do - simply give them another month to put it up?

Essentially, probably yes.

But wheels will be put in motion to take further action, if they fail to respond, and once an enforcement case has been triggered (and especially if you keep on the LPA's back), it won't generally go away.

Read this if you want a better understanding of how the system works, and the options that are available to the LPA's.

Thanks Equus, that immediately gets my back up though, the following phrases in particular:

Government Guidelines said:

...although a local planning authority may invite an application, it cannot be assumed that permission will be granted, and the local planning authority should take care not to fetter its discretion prior to the determination of any application for planning permission__ – such an application __must be considered in the normal way;

Government Guidelines said:

A person who has undertaken unauthorised development has only one opportunity to obtain planning permission after the event.

Given that the neighbours submitted an application for a 1.5m partition, this wasn't acceptable and the planning department then allowed them to alter their application to a 1.8m partition, without notifying any neighbours or people who had objected to the first application, extended the deadline by a week and then granted permission. I would say neither of the above two policies were followed.

I'll try to read on with the rest when I've calmed down a bit!

Edited by youngsyr on Thursday 20th December 20:07

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

You have my sympathies. I have some experience of a neighbour being a dhead, thinking they can do whatever they want.

When the new neighbour arrives have a 'welcome' bottle of wine for them, as on-side they'll work with you better.

[Equus]

youngsyr said:

Thanks Equus, that immediately gets my back up though...

I'll try to read on with the rest when I've calmed down a bit!

That's just the way it is, I'm afraid.

We get to represent people on both sides of the fence, so we have to be able to sympathise with both perspectives, but in any case it's about what is applicable and enforceable under Planning Law, which is probably a lot more limited than you think.

One basic point that most people can't - or won't - grasp is that development which lacks Planning Permission is not in and of itself illegal: it is unauthorized, but it doesn't become illegal until it has both been assessed as being unacceptable in nature and some form of legal Notice or Order has been served against it.

The Law has to be seen to be fair, equitable and even-handed to all, and yes, unfortunately that means that 'offenders' must be given every opportunity to defend themselves.

[blueg33]

Planning gets my back up on a daily basis. Thats why I use planning consultants.

Even then, if you ever hear of a maniac running into a planning department armed to the teeth and blowing away all and sundry - its probably me.









Note to GCHQ, Police, FBI etc - I'm not serious, well not totally.

[youngsyr]

Equus said:

youngsyr said:

Thanks Equus, that immediately gets my back up though...

I'll try to read on with the rest when I've calmed down a bit!

That's just the way it is, I'm afraid.

We get to represent people on both sides of the fence, so we have to be able to sympathise with both perspectives, but in any case it's about what is applicable and enforceable under Planning Law, which is probably a lot more limited than you think.

One basic point that most people can't - or won't - grasp is that development which lacks Planning Permission is not in and of itself illegal: it is unauthorized, but it doesn't become illegal until it has both been assessed as being unacceptable in nature and some form of legal Notice or Order has been served against it.

The Law has to be seen to be fair, equitable and even-handed to all, and yes, unfortunately that means that 'offenders' must be given every opportunity to defend themselves.

I can understand that, but what makes it hard for me to take is that a couple of years ago we decided to have a loft extension, so we spoke to architects and builders to understand what would and wouldn't be allowed under permitted development, drew up some plans and then voluntarily submitted them for a lawful development certificate.

As you know, for permitted development you don't need planning permission - it is simply permitted.

When we submitted our plans, they were rejected for the certificate, much to our surprise. On speaking to the the planning officer, the proposed drawing had the existing chimney shown slightly shorter than the existing drawing and they inferred from this that we were looking to raise the roof line, which we had no intention of doing as we knew it wouldn't be allowed under permitted development.

There were no measurements for the roof line or chimney and no indication anywhere that we were looking to raise the roof line and even if you took the drawing at litreral face value, it made it look like the roof line would only be raised a matter of inches.

However, purely on that basis, our plans were rejected. No consultation, no would you like to amend and resubmit, simply rejected - start the whole process again and resumbmit an entire new application.

We obviously sucked it up - by the letter of the rules, they were right - our architect had made a mistake that could be interpreted to break the rules, even though we had no intention of doing so and the infraction would be negligble. We resubmitted, waited out the delay and got on with it.

So hopefully that gives you some context - we tried to do everything right with our extension, going above and beyond what was required and were held to the absolute letter of the rules.

Next door didn't even consider the planning rules, went ahead and built an eyesore despite our objections and us pointing out to them that planning permission was required. They only submitted retrospectively when told they had to by the planning officer, cocked up the first application, submitted an unacceptable second application and then changed it without resubmitting or notifying their neighbours and objectors.

I totally agree that everyone should be treated fairly, but can't help but feel aggrieved at how this has played out.

Anyway, sorry for the rant and thanks for your insight - I appreciate it.

[FiF]

So to follow up from an earlier post of mine, citing the case where retrospective planning permission was refused, as was an appeal to the planning inspectorate, a question to Equus if I may.

I understand in general terms the comment "One basic point that most people can't - or won't - grasp is that development which lacks Planning Permission is not in and of itself illegal: it is unauthorized, but it doesn't become illegal until it has both been assessed as being unacceptable in nature and some form of legal Notice or Order has been served against it."

At what stage does a construction lacking permission exactly become illegal. Is it in the case above the refusal of the appeal, or does the council have to issue a specific demolition order?

If it's the latter then I can understand the OP's irritation if the specific condition is not met, yet no further action follows.

Before anyone accuses me of being a stirrer in the case I've mentioned, when it all kicked off years back various folks who lived nearby denounced the culprits in very unkind terms. My response was more measured along the lines of going to judge folks as I find them, and had no personal experience with these two to go on. Since then have had to admit I was wrong and the offered description that they were a pair of obnoxious c***s has turned out to be surprisingly mild in light of further evidence.

[Equus]

FiF said:

At what stage does a construction lacking permission exactly become illegal. Is it in the case above the refusal of the appeal, or does the council have to issue a specific demolition order?

As I said, no offence has been committed until one of the various Notices or Orders relating to relevant legislation has been served (by the Council, under exceptional circumstances, by others) and the person it has been served upon has failed to either:
a) Act as required by the notice or order, within the period of time it specifies or;
b) Lodged an Appeal against the notice or order within a permitted period of time.

If the appeal is refused, the Appeals Inspector will stipulate a reasonable period of time for compliance, and there is again the right of appeal to the High Court. Repeat (a) and (b) above, and again, no actual offence has been committed until these two stages are exhausted.

As I said - an I know it might sound like splitting hairs, but - development in and of itself cannot be 'illegal'.

In simple terms: the unauthorised development isn't the offence; the offence is the failure to act on the legal order or notice requiring that it be removed.

[youngsyr]

I wrote to the planning department on the 1st (I live a very exciting life!) and they responded by email that the deadline on the planning permission had been deemed impractical and that deadline has been extended to the end of this month.

It's now the 14th of the month and no work has started. If we get to the end of the month and they haven't started on the partition, what should I do - just write another letter?

[Equus]

youngsyr said:

If we get to the end of the month and they haven't started on the partition, what should I do - just write another letter?

Yes.

And take a chill pill. Planning enforcement takes its own sweet time.

[youngsyr]

Equus said:

youngsyr said:

If we get to the end of the month and they haven't started on the partition, what should I do - just write another letter?

Yes.

And take a chill pill. Planning enforcement takes its own sweet time.

It's the afternoon of 31 Jan and still no sign of work starting on the partition. It's now 6 weeks from the original deadline and more than one week after the extended deadline.

I've sent an email to the planning department, any idea what the next steps will be - another month's grace to get it sorted?

[anonymous-user]

youngsyr said:

It's the afternoon of 31 Jan and still no sign of work starting on the partition. It's now 6 weeks from the original deadline and more than one week after the extended deadline.

I've sent an email to the planning department, any idea what the next steps will be - another month's grace to get it sorted?

I really think you are pissing in the wind now it's been approved.

[youngsyr]

desolate said:

youngsyr said:

It's the afternoon of 31 Jan and still no sign of work starting on the partition. It's now 6 weeks from the original deadline and more than one week after the extended deadline.

I've sent an email to the planning department, any idea what the next steps will be - another month's grace to get it sorted?

I really think you are pissing in the wind now it's been approved.

I know I can't stop them putting it up now, I just want them to get on and do it.