Forced Demolition Of Barn "Conversion"
Forced Demolition Of Barn "Conversion"
Author
Discussion

KTMsm

Original Poster:

28,977 posts

279 months

Sunday 15th December 2024
quotequote all
This just popped up on my feed and seems harsh

https://www.derbyshiretimes.co.uk/news/people/ps1m...

A barn was supposed to have been converted but instead was essentially demolished and rebuilt in 20/21

The developer sold the property and the new owner has had enforcement action taken against him and has now been told to demolish it

I presume he could sue the developer but at best a massive amount of stress for the poor home owner who it seems, has done nothing wrong

Hoofy

78,725 posts

298 months

Sunday 15th December 2024
quotequote all
That's bad luck.

Should a conveyancer have picked up on this?

Will the developer liquidate and the directors create a new company, "Fenix Barn Conversions"?

Chrisgr31

14,079 posts

271 months

Sunday 15th December 2024
quotequote all
Not sure how a conveyancer is going to know it was demolished and rebuilt rather than converted.

However I would assume there is a question in searches that seeks confirmation that the property was built in accordance with the planning consent. If there was and it wasnt answered "Buyer to make own enquiries" and did instead confirm it was the built according to planning the old owner will have to explain themselves.


smifffymoto

5,114 posts

221 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
Yes,there has been unauthorised work but what will the council or the public gain from a family being ordered to demolish their home.

Sometimes it seems councils want to punish just for the sake of it and to make an example.

ConnectionError

2,108 posts

85 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
This is very local to me, from what I can gather there is much more to the story than what has been published so far

Tango13

9,586 posts

192 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
smifffymoto said:
Yes,there has been unauthorised work but what will the council or the public gain from a family being ordered to demolish their home.

Sometimes it seems councils want to punish just for the sake of it and to make an example.
A better deterrent would be to go after the developer that did the knock down & rebuild and lock them up for a couple of years.

Sounds extreme but fining them or their company would just result in them declaring bankruptcy but a couple of years inside would make others sit up and take notice.

essayer

10,220 posts

210 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
completely unnavigable site and on the 4th reload I got


Local news is not in a good place frown

smokey mow

1,287 posts

216 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
Tango13 said:
A better deterrent would be to go after the developer that did the knock down & rebuild and lock them up for a couple of years.
Yes it would but as the article explains, that’s not how uk law works.

The contravention is with the building and its owner. The current owner can however counter sue the developer they bought it from.

Jeremy-75qq8

1,428 posts

108 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
Daft. I bet the new one was also more energy efficient.

The solicitor should have noticed something as the building regs ( which they would have required to see given the conversion and hence also building refs must have attended) simply can't have been titled conversion as it would have been obvious to the surveyor.

The last but one ( high value ) house I sold the buyers solicitor required a surveyor to attend to confirm the house had been built ( it was gutted and made twice the size ) in accordance with planning permission. The guy was there for several hours. I thought it over the top at the time. Maybe the lawyer had been caught in the past ?

wisbech

3,813 posts

137 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
smifffymoto said:
Yes,there has been unauthorised work but what will the council or the public gain from a family being ordered to demolish their home.

Sometimes it seems councils want to punish just for the sake of it and to make an example.
If they don't though, then it is an obvious loophole - that if you buy a home that doesn't meet PP - you are OK because the council won't enforce as you 'didn't know'. So build a massive extension without PP, sell the house, and the extension stays.

gangzoom

7,443 posts

231 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
ConnectionError said:
This is very local to me, from what I can gather there is much more to the story than what has been published so far
Planning portal shows a rejected garage build that went to appeal but was still rejected, but cannot see any enforcement action notices. Original planning permission was from 2012 and talks about limited demolition etc. It’s also in the middle of no where interms of public walk arounds, so some stakeholders have got a very engaged interest.

If it’s this house on Rightmove, than it also didn’t sell for £1million, but the media will almost want the biggest possible headline.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/150597572

smokey mow

1,287 posts

216 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
Jeremy-75qq8 said:
The solicitor should have noticed something as the building regs ( which they would have required to see given the conversion and hence also building refs must have attended) simply can't have been titled conversion as it would have been obvious to the surveyor.
Building control for the “conversion” was administered by an approved inspector rather than the council.

A look at the local register shows this to be Assent Building Control (who since April this year have not been registered as a Building Control Approver) and the description of works on their notice is for the conversion of existing barn to form a two storey dwelling house.

smokey mow

1,287 posts

216 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
gangzoom said:
If it’s this house on Rightmove, than it also didn’t sell for £1million, but the media will almost want the biggest possible headline.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/150597572
Different building. That’s the original farmhouse which was/is attached to the long barn.


KTMsm

Original Poster:

28,977 posts

279 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
I know plenty of farmers have done the same

They've got a barn, it's not going to be knocked down unless they get permission to convert it. However, once conversion permission has been given, it's far better for everyone involved to knock it down and start again

Who does it harm?

I've built houses and moved window positions, internal walls etc because when building it's become obvious something's in the wrong place / could be in a better place.

I never went back for change of planning and in fairness I was quite surprised it wasn't picked up by the council inspector, the neighbours or the buyer


andy43

11,774 posts

270 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
smokey mow said:
Jeremy-75qq8 said:
The solicitor should have noticed something as the building regs ( which they would have required to see given the conversion and hence also building refs must have attended) simply can't have been titled conversion as it would have been obvious to the surveyor.
Building control for the “conversion” was administered by an approved inspector rather than the council.

A look at the local register shows this to be Assent Building Control (who since April this year have not been registered as a Building Control Approver) and the description of works on their notice is for the conversion of existing barn to form a two storey dwelling house.
Conveyancers use information provided to them by experts, like the council and BC. Sounds like it was signed off. You wouldn’t advise a buyer to purchase something that didn’t have PP or B Regs.
A barn conversion can suddenly become a renovation with the replacement of one extra part of its structure eg a wall, roof, floor etc. Top tip - get a barn ‘repaired’ even to the point of a new insulated floor slab before applying for conversion PP under part Q.

DonkeyApple

63,327 posts

185 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
ConnectionError said:
This is very local to me, from what I can gather there is much more to the story than what has been published so far
Is it just coincidence that the 'new' owner is also a local property developer?

Riley Blue

22,439 posts

242 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
I think it's this one, the building with the pale roof and five Velux windows:


Tindersticks

2,698 posts

16 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
Councils often work on the basis of 'pour encourager les autres'

Hard to see how this was harming anyone but once it's known and allowed then it's open-season. I doubt anyone within 50 miles of that will be trying the same thing with this as an outcome now.

ConnectionError

2,108 posts

85 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
DonkeyApple said:
ConnectionError said:
This is very local to me, from what I can gather there is much more to the story than what has been published so far
Is it just coincidence that the 'new' owner is also a local property developer?
There is more to the story than what has been published!

POIDH

1,938 posts

81 months

Monday 16th December 2024
quotequote all
ConnectionError said:
There is more to the story than what has been published!
Do tell.