Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
|
What are you talking about?
Do you mean you can build something illegal and if you get away with it for this lenth of time the relavent LA departments can do anything about it. This is news to me.
|
| |
|
|
Yes IB. After these periods have elapsed, the local authority cannot initiate enforcement action. However, if any structure is unsafe, the LA can order you to take remedial action (including demolition if necessary) at any time regardless of the above.
|
| |
|
|
Aha, so hide your new extension behind a load of trellis and climbers for 10 years and bob's your uncle?
|
| |
|
|
Sadly not. Remember the man with the castle and the hay bales? (I think it must be the other way round - 4 years for PP.)
-------------------
A man who tried to dodge planning laws by covering a castle he built in straw bales, has lost his appeal to keep his home.
The castle faces demolition. Robert Fidler hid the house which has ramparts and cannon, behind a massive wall of straw for four years.
Despite not applying for planning permission, when he unveiled the property in Salfords in Surrey, he claimed it was a legal structure because no one had complained during the period it was hidden.
But his local council disagreed. Planners said the four year rule didn't count because the building had been concealed.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by velvet:
But his local council disagreed. Planners said the four year rule didn't count because the building had been concealed.
I agree with velvet any reckonable period starts from when the council first became aware of the building\extension whatever and not from when it was started\completed |
| |
|
|
I wasn't sure that was what was meant NEJ? My interpretation would be that if you do an extension (and don't conceal it with haybales  ) but the council doesn't realise, and your neighbours don't notice/care... once 4 years has passed the council can't make you take it down (unless it is unsafe). It was the deliberate concealment that made the difference here to Mr Hidden Castle (I think). |
| |
|
|
Hi Velvet,
The way it was explained to me was that the deliberate concealment was immaterial. What was material was when it came to the authorities notice and as their is an obligation to apply in the first instance you can't rely on the fact that you "didn't know" their was an obligation to apply
|
| |
|
|
I hadn't heard of the concealed castle! I just had a look back through my old house buying stuff. I had a problem with a house I was buying due to no building regs on an extension. Here's what I was told by my solicitor at the time (not Dick, the one before)
A section 36 enforcement notice cannot be served on you after the expiration of 12 months from the date of completion of the building work, but this does not affect a local authority’s (or any other person’s) right to apply to the Courts for an injunction for the same purpose. A local authority also cannot take enforcement action under sections 35 and 36 if the work which you have carried out is in accordance with your plans which the authority approved or failed to reject within the statutory time of five weeks (or two months with your agreement) from deposit of the plans (see paragraph 5.6).
Notwithstanding the possibility of enforcement action, you should bear in mind that if the local authority considers that building work carried out does not comply with the Building Regulations and it is not rectified, the authority will not issue you with a completion certificate (see paragraph 5.22) and the contravention may come to light through a local land search enquiry when you wish to sell your property.
So it be 1 year for BR and 4 years for PP. Within that time the council can DIY enforcement after that they can apply to the courts it seems.
|
| |
|
|
Also found this:
Is there a period after which development becomes immune from enforcement action?
Yes, The period within which planning enforcement action can be taken is limited to:
1. 4 years for operational development and change of use to any building for use as a single dwelling house
2. 10 years for all other changes of use and breaches of conditions
If you wish to confirm that development is immune from planning enforcement action, you are advised to make an application for a Certificate of Lawfulness. (by doing so you cannot then apply for an indemnity policy - beware)
I guess the castle came in under the 10 yr rule really.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Yes, The period within which planning enforcement action can be taken is limited to:
1. 4 years for operational development and change of use to any building for use as a single dwelling house
2. 10 years for all other changes of use and breaches of conditions
Yes but they all presume that you actually applied for the correct permisssions in the first place |
| |
|
|
quote: Yes but they all presume that you actually applied for the correct permisssions in the first place
Are you sure? |
| |
|
|
quote: Are you sure?
As sure as the person who explained it to me was (btw she works in a council planning department, so no doubt there will now be cries of well she would say that wouldn't she  ) |
| |
|
|
So if that's the case, what is the point of the four year/ten years (whatever) rule? The only time it would ever apply was if the Planners forgot to object to it for four years.  I am sure there have been cases stated on here in the past where someone buying a house which didn't have the required PP for works was told not to worry because it had timed out. These were cases where the original owner just hadn't applied. |
| |
|
|
quote: So if that's the case, what is the point of the four year/ten years (whatever) rule? The only time it would ever apply was if the Planners forgot to object to it for four years.
The point is if the homeowner had properly applied and then the council hadn't done their bit then the 4 an 10 year rules apply |
| |
|
|
Its not unsafe - here's the story. Longest post ever alert.
There was a building attached to our house, it was used as a greenhouse/conservatory/gym by the previous previous owner. The previous owner (on the same foot print.. almost) had building work done to make it into a proper room with double skinned walls, double glazing, proper roof, the lot. This was 2002. They didn't apply for BC or PP as they were told by the builder as it was contiguous they didn't need it. They did actually make it a tiny bit bigger in length but hey ho.
We bought off them in 2005 knowing all the facts. Now we want to put a conservatory on the other side of the house - well away from the extension but we were worried that if the planners come out to have a look at the conservatory plans they will look and go 'what's that??' So we wanted to know if there was a time frame that we could say 'its outside 4 years so you can't touch us' or not.
Now I must stress once again the building work is a high standard and the building is not unsafe.
|
| |
|
|
Also the neighbours were pleased with the building they said it looks a lot better than what was there before. So no one's complaining.
|
| |
|
|
I undestood that the chap who hid his castle couldn't prove that it had been there for 4 years and that is why the council refused permission.
When I sold my last house 2 yrs ago after living there for 25yrs I had to provide proof of planning permission for my extension built over 20yrs ago, it cost me £12 for a copy from the council.
I read that the government is doing an aerial survey of the whole of Britain for Council Tax and planning purposes, so no hiding place.
|
| |
|
|
Every seems to have a slightly different view of this, so I feel none the wiser Just to confuse things further - I didn't think you needed PP for a conservatory? |
| |
|
|
Hi Velvet, I know what you mean. I do know that you need PP for a conservatory if you have used up your PD rights or you are in a conservation area. |
| |
|
|
Its a conservation area.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Irate bob:
Its not unsafe - here's the story. Longest post ever alert.
There was a building attached to our house, it was used as a greenhouse/conservatory/gym by the previous previous owner. The previous owner (on the same foot print.. almost) had building work done to make it into a proper room with double skinned walls, double glazing, proper roof, the lot. This was 2002. They didn't apply for BC or PP as they were told by the builder as it was contiguous they didn't need it. They did actually make it a tiny bit bigger in length but hey ho.
We bought off them in 2005 knowing all the facts. Now we want to put a conservatory on the other side of the house - well away from the extension but we were worried that if the planners come out to have a look at the conservatory plans they will look and go 'what's that??' So we wanted to know if there was a time frame that we could say 'its outside 4 years so you can't touch us' or not.
Now I must stress once again the building work is a high standard and the building is not unsafe.
I believe can get indemnity insurance to protect you against the council enforcing building regs and planning issues. Although I think you must go through your solicitor and the authorities mustn't know about the changes before you get the insurance. If you are buying and haven't got the usual permissions your solicitor will normally request this insurance mortgage lenders are usually happy with this arrangement |
| |
|
|
I think the Planners might say "what's that?" when they do a site visit. Slightly different, but when we were having our loft done (under PD), two days into the work someone from Planning came round to take pics and make sure we didn't have any other extensions. So they do take an interest into what is already there.
|
| |
|
|
We do already have indemnity insurance against it.
Really it was just if someone knew the rules in a nutshell.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Irate bob:
We do already have indemnity insurance against it.
Really it was just if someone knew the rules in a nutshell.
Hey Bob, If you ever need to use your indemnity insurance, let us know on here, please. I for one would be really interested to know what happens. SM |
| |
| |
