Permitted Development

[Tony Davis]

"curtilage", favourite word with the planning officer of East Dorset District Council!!!!

Described him to me as the boundary made by my garden fence, which seperates the grounds of our dwelling, and the equastrian yard that we have.

I'm told that a horse box that we keep in the yard is contravening the planning rules, as although it's for the transportation of horses, it's actual use is for the pleasure and enjoyment of the occupants of the dwelling, and so it's sposed to be kept on our front drive.

I mentioned this to our local crime prevention officer, and he just shook his head and said "how ridiculous, park it there and it'll be stolen by the weekend"!

[biffer]

Originally Posted by hunton69

Thanks for the replies

The council have been on this case for a couple of years and they were only built approx 3 years ago so the 4 year rule does not apply.

Now spoken to the council lawyer and they define curtilage as a small piece of land around the property but case law doesn't always agree.

How do you define small?

you want to ask him for that in writing and to clarify small, never take a spoken word from a council officer, he will never admit to saying it in court

[Jon Holmes]

I have recently had a similar battle with the New Forest National Park Authority Tony over my boat and trailer being stored on the half acre field that i own at the bottom of my garden. Had to remove it because they started legal procedures against me.

[hunton69]

Lies Lies Lies

Got them hook line and sinker

Just spent 2 days trawling through case law and now begining to understand that curtilage can be small but not necassary it is very difficult to define.

But we just found a letter from the Bank who repossed the property asking for info on the investigation about these buildings and the council admits to them that the buildings are in our residential curtilage.

Now that proves there liars

So how do i let them now i know.

I would like them to dig a bigger hole before i arrange a meet and produce the evidence.

How would you go about this

Also will they with draw the enforment notice as the info is now incorrect.

[Jon Holmes]

The question is, were these buildings erected without planning permission and/or building control? If they were and the Authority has contacted the owner at the time within four years then they have the power to have the buildings removed regardless of whether they are in your curtilage or not.

Permitted Development only relates to non habitable buildings ie. sheds, garages pool house etc.

What exactly are you after here? Try not to get embroiled in arguments with the the Planning Officers over who said what etc. unless you are chancing your arm into gaining something for nothing in which case good luck (I have spent thousands over the years trying to create loopholes in Planning issues but to no avail), in my experience you would be better off concentrating your efforts on the things you can do (like extending the original property to the maximum permitted by your Authority in your location).

I take it you purchased this property at Auction, if you had done your homework you would have known that the "additional" buildings were illegal and therefor would have taken this into account when budgeting for the re-development.

The bottom line is that if these buildings were illegally constructed and the Authority have been aware of this within four years of them being built then they can and will issue an enforcement notice requesting the buildings to be demolished if they feel that it is expedient to do so. Once they have issued an enforcement notice if it is not complied with within the stipulated time frame the case will go to a Magistrates Court. The Magistrates Court will have no interest whatsoever in the why's, what's and maybe's of the case, they will only be interested in administering a suitable punishment for not complying with the Authorities request. Then after you have been hung drawn and quartered by them you have the right to take the case to a higher Authority if you still have the stomach and cash left to do so.

Then once you have given everybody the run around and wasted time and money and then removed the illegal buildings you will no doubt submit a planning application in order to improve the existing property to a scale that will earn you back some of what you have lost. This application is unlikely to win favour of the Planning officers you had befriended earlier!

Think it through carefully before heading off down the well worn path. . . .

Best of Luck.

[hunton69]

Thanks Jon for the info

When we purchased the property we knew there were issues regarding the buildings however we felt there was some compromise and so we contacted the council even before we took the keys. We wanted to demolish certain buildings and retain others and work with them.
However i will summarise whats happened

When ever i contact them they reply when ever it suits them
When they write to me i have to reply mostly within 7 days.
There letters are bullish
I have allowed 3 visits to the site and wanted a 4th so i refused and then they quoted how much power they had.
They have quoted case law supporting there case and yet i have asked 3 times for it but they wont supply this info.

Regarding the enforcement notice
Point 1 is there outside the curtilage so deemed illegal
Point 2 that there not buildunder PD even if they were in the curtilage of the house as they are too big and not insidential to the enjoyment of the house
Point 3 We have never even discussed a wall but they have thrown that in now.

Point 1 we can prove there wrong
Point 2 I have said we will demolish some ( we even started knocking one down in Oct last year against the advice from my legal team ) but i wanted to show willing to the council that we only wish to tetain the building incidental to our life style
Whats left was going to House a Gym, Snooker room, Pool and table tennis rooom and a bar area to entertain as any one knows on here we like a beer.

I have now spent 3 days of my life trawling the internet for case law and inspecorate decisions from bristol.

What has come to life is the Swimming pool room is exceptable even by its size
( Pools are actually quoted within Class E some times size is an issue)

And i have found a case where some one has been granted permission under PD for a snooker / games room with bar almost identical size to ours and the inspecter has said that even though it looks like a bungelow and could be converted in living accomadation he has still passed it on all the other merritts under class E
He went on to say that at any time if it was converted to living acc.the council had the right to serve an enforcment notice.

[biffer]

i would send them your new found information through a solicitor and CC it to as many a council officer as you can name, as you have found that someone is lying the more people you send it too the more likely it will be that they will withdraw there harassment.
i can site a farmers case where he was trying to do up and convert an old barn into small offices, they buggered him about like they have with you for about 3years, cost him a fortune in revised plans etc, we advised him to seek the help of the NFU land agent, who found as you have that they lie, when confronted with the cases they just past the plans.
the farmer tried to go down the road of getting some of his money back for plans and allpications but no one has been that successful, they seem to look and some people and think that we could use this chap as a cash machine.
remember, you can tell when a council officer is lying,,,, his lips move

just thought also the other reason to send so many copies is that will "lose them" if you send them just to one person, if they're CC'd there is less likelyhood of someone binning it

[biffer]

Originally Posted by Jon Holmes

The question is, were these buildings erected without planning permission and/or building control? If they were and the Authority has contacted the owner at the time within four years then they have the power to have the buildings removed regardless of whether they are in your curtilage or not.

Permitted Development only relates to non habitable buildings ie. sheds, garages pool house etc.

What exactly are you after here? Try not to get embroiled in arguments with the the Planning Officers over who said what etc. unless you are chancing your arm into gaining something for nothing in which case good luck (I have spent thousands over the years trying to create loopholes in Planning issues but to no avail), in my experience you would be better off concentrating your efforts on the things you can do (like extending the original property to the maximum permitted by your Authority in your location).

I take it you purchased this property at Auction, if you had done your homework you would have known that the "additional" buildings were illegal and therefor would have taken this into account when budgeting for the re-development.

The bottom line is that if these buildings were illegally constructed and the Authority have been aware of this within four years of them being built then they can and will issue an enforcement notice requesting the buildings to be demolished if they feel that it is expedient to do so. Once they have issued an enforcement notice if it is not complied with within the stipulated time frame the case will go to a Magistrates Court. The Magistrates Court will have no interest whatsoever in the why's, what's and maybe's of the case, they will only be interested in administering a suitable punishment for not complying with the Authorities request. Then after you have been hung drawn and quartered by them you have the right to take the case to a higher Authority if you still have the stomach and cash left to do so.

Then once you have given everybody the run around and wasted time and money and then removed the illegal buildings you will no doubt submit a planning application in order to improve the existing property to a scale that will earn you back some of what you have lost. This application is unlikely to win favour of the Planning officers you had befriended earlier!

Think it through carefully before heading off down the well worn path. . . .

Best of Luck.

that's not strictly true about the courts and the enforcement notice, if you can prove that it was served illegally, they will overturn it.
we all know that the council can go on and on spending our money but they are relunctant to go to court if something that puts them in a bad light can be presented

[hunton69]

Originally Posted by biffer

i would send them your new found information through a solicitor and CC it to as many a council officer as you can name, as you have found that someone is lying the more people you send it too the more likely it will be that they will withdraw there harassment.
i can site a farmers case where he was trying to do up and convert an old barn into small offices, they buggered him about like they have with you for about 3years, cost him a fortune in revised plans etc, we advised him to seek the help of the NFU land agent, who found as you have that they lie, when confronted with the cases they just past the plans.
the farmer tried to go down the road of getting some of his money back for plans and allpications but no one has been that successful, they seem to look and some people and think that we could use this chap as a cash machine.
remember, you can tell when a council officer is lying,,,, his lips move

just thought also the other reason to send so many copies is that will "lose them" if you send them just to one person, if they're CC'd there is less likelyhood of someone binning it

Your so right about sending them plans

On one of the site meetings we had they told us to submit everything we want to do with all of the buildings and extension to main house but won't give us any indication of what might be a compromise. You get them drawn up at great expense and then they kick them out again with out any reason and again never tell you what might be a compromise.

A lawer today said they may of forgotten what they had written in the past so it may be a mistake on there part.

Not good on your stress levels when they do this.

[daren]

I really feel your frustration with your local council, I have had quite a few clients who feel unfairly treated and pick upon by the planners.

Its all well and good looking at past cases but experience has taught me that no matter what has been passed or allowed elsewhere or even right next door, it doesn't mean you will get the same. Even if you get a court decision in your favour the planners may not accept it and may appeal or try and get you on something else.

You are trying to be logical and sensible in applying your thinking to the matter but council planners are neither, and as I mentioned before planners can take steps to stop development even if it is clearly PD if they think it is not a suitable development.

I would make sure you comply with the following on the buildings you want to keep -

- Only build on 50% of the plot of land surrounding the original house (if older house then the house as it was on of 1st July 1948), that includes extensions/buildings built with planning permission and under PD rights

- Eaves no more than of 2.5m above ground level for a double pitched roof
- Eaves no more than 3m above ground level for a mono pitch roof
- Ridge no more than 4m above ground level
- Walls/roof 2m or more away from the boundary

Anything outside these rules will require planning permission.

If you feel the letter confirming the curtilage is irrefutable and a cast iron judgement then use that as your plot size. The council should have a hard time taking you to court and probably wont bother as they cant afford too.

But be carefull as letters from the council usually say at the bottom "the information or guideance given here is that of the individual officer and not necessarilly the view of the council" or words to that effect so they always have a get out clause.

Any other building you dont really want - demolish it, it is not worth the hassle and they could tip the balance and give the council enough reason to take you to court. If you want to keep them then be repared to spend some money to defend yourself in court but remember no logical or sensible thinking, that will just cause you trouble and the only guarantee is sleepless nights and an ever diminishing bank balance.


The information and guideance given above is that of the individual who is clearly thinking in a logical and sensible manner so should be totally disregarded. It is not, and does not represent the policies or view of the council who clearly know whats best for you and you should therefore bend over and accept their decision gladly and without further question.

[Jon Holmes]

Excellent post Daren.

[Jon Holmes]

Ok hows this then?

I have recently submitted two different planning applications for one of my properties (after the previous application was rejected), one a single storey extension and the other a two storey extension.

The Authority requested that I either:

A: Enter into a Section 106 Agreement with the Authority effectively preventing me from building part of one of the Applications and part of the other Application (thereby ending up with an increase in excess of the permitted 30%) in the event that the Authority should Grant Permission for both applications.

B: Withdraw one of the Applications.

The Planning Officer would not give me an indication of the Authority's view of either Application despite my repeated requests. This lead me to instruct my Solicitors to draw up a Section 106 Agreement with the Authority at a cost of around £600 plus the Authorities legal costs at £180.00/hour. The consultation period for both Applications has now passed with no registered objections from the public or other bodies so i called the Planning Officer again to ask for an indication of the likely outcome only to be told that she could not say at this time because the files were with their Solictor for the drawing up of the Section 106 agreement and therefor she would have to wait for the file to return before she could tell me the outcome!

Now I felt that it was reasonable to assume that the Authority were going to Grant both applications or they would not of insisted on the Section 106 agreement, however, I await the outcome in the next week or so and wont be counting my chickens until they hatch.

It can be a stressful business if you let it.

[hunton69]

Thanks For the replies

I have now had time to check every email and letter from the council and one in september they confirm that these buildings are within the curtilage. the first was an email to the bank who repossed the property.

I have just spoken to the planning officer and he had forgotten about these emails. He then replied; That it was an informal opinion of a planning officer
and that the legal section had taken a different view. So i replied then thats good you are of the same opinion as ourselves so you must now be on our side.
A little silence passed and then he argued that he wasn't.

I gave him untill Thursday morning to give me a reply as to the council with drawing the enforcement notice as i have a site meeting with some expensive
guys in suits coming round.

Also as this case has been ongoing since 2009 ( he took over dec 2009 ) i told him that the most powerfull argument that they had to demolish these buildings was to prove they were outside the residential curtilage and then beyond the scope of PD. If he was doing his job correctly.


While writing these just had a call from them they are still going ahead with the enforcement notice.

[daren]

What have I told you about being logical and sensible in these matters?

Originally Posted by Jon Holmes

Ok hows this then?

I have recently submitted two different planning applications for one of my properties (after the previous application was rejected), one a single storey extension and the other a two storey extension.

The Authority requested that I either:

A: Enter into a Section 106 Agreement with the Authority effectively preventing me from building part of one of the Applications and part of the other Application (thereby ending up with an increase in excess of the permitted 30%) in the event that the Authority should Grant Permission for both applications.

B: Withdraw one of the Applications.

The Planning Officer would not give me an indication of the Authority's view of either Application despite my repeated requests. This lead me to instruct my Solicitors to draw up a Section 106 Agreement with the Authority at a cost of around £600 plus the Authorities legal costs at £180.00/hour. The consultation period for both Applications has now passed with no registered objections from the public or other bodies so i called the Planning Officer again to ask for an indication of the likely outcome only to be told that she could not say at this time because the files were with their Solictor for the drawing up of the Section 106 agreement and therefor she would have to wait for the file to return before she could tell me the outcome!

Now I felt that it was reasonable to assume that the Authority were going to Grant both applications or they would not of insisted on the Section 106 agreement, however, I await the outcome in the next week or so and wont be counting my chickens until they hatch.

It can be a stressful business if you let it.

[hunton69]

So to summaries what has now happened

The legal department of the council are still pursuing the enforcement notice to demolish 7 outbuildings that they sayare built outside the curtilage
and yet in May 2010 the acting head of planning writes to the bank that owned the property (at that time) stating that the enforcement case regarding some of the buildings are within the residential curtilage but built outside of PD class E
We buy the property Aug 2010
September 2010 he writes to us and repeats what was told to the bank regarding curtilage.
He has had 3 visits bringing with him other planning offices on each occasion.
From September 2010 untill last week none of the planning officers who have visited have never questioned the curtilage.
From October 2010 untill Feb 2011 he keeps on threatening me that there legal department were prepared to serve an enforcment notice on these buildings but if we submited pre planning they would reframe from this action.
We did submit plans but they rejected them
They then wanted a fourth visit and we refused on the basis that they were abusing there powers ( i guess that pissed them off )
So the legal team now get involved and there main case is there outside the curtilage.

So the question is. What is the point of planning officers if the legal department don't listen to them

[daren]

Are the legal team looking at older historical maps that show a different boundary line to the site?

Have you looked at older maps (Promap.co.uk) to see if and how the boundary has changed and when?

Originally Posted by hunton69

So to summaries what has now happened

The legal department of the council are still pursuing the enforcement notice to demolish 7 outbuildings that they sayare built outside the curtilage
and yet in May 2010 the acting head of planning writes to the bank that owned the property (at that time) stating that the enforcement case regarding some of the buildings are within the residential curtilage but built outside of PD class E
We buy the property Aug 2010
September 2010 he writes to us and repeats what was told to the bank regarding curtilage.
He has had 3 visits bringing with him other planning offices on each occasion.
From September 2010 untill last week none of the planning officers who have visited have never questioned the curtilage.
From October 2010 untill Feb 2011 he keeps on threatening me that there legal department were prepared to serve an enforcment notice on these buildings but if we submited pre planning they would reframe from this action.
We did submit plans but they rejected them
They then wanted a fourth visit and we refused on the basis that they were abusing there powers ( i guess that pissed them off )
So the legal team now get involved and there main case is there outside the curtilage.

So the question is. What is the point of planning officers if the legal department don't listen to them

[hunton69]

We have only seen pictures on google earth back to the year 2000
The house was surrounded by lots and lots of trees and there is a line where the trees stop and the grassland starts which is about half of the 4 acres.
That is the line were we believe the curtilage ends.

If you google earth HP3 8RY and zoom in its the property in the one oclock position to were postcode is written

[Jon Holmes]

Originally Posted by hunton69

So the question is. What is the point of planning officers

Planning Officers are just Civil Servants, they are not Planning Professionals, there purpose is to administer Planning applications, enquiries and complaints. Most Local Authorities will have a couple of Planning Professionals at the top of the tree with many Planning Officers under their wings. It is the Authorities Planning Professionals that decide the course of action, not the Planning officers. They just carry out their orders.

And just because your taxes pay their wages, do not expect them to advise you on your applications in order to gain permission because in my experience they will not.

It would appear to me that their sole purpose is to inform you as to what you cannot do on your land or to your property and that they seem to derive a great deal of pleasure in carrying out their duties. (I would imagine that the Planning Profession within the Local Authority's would have the lowest recorded incidence's of suicide).

[daren]

I have had a look at the historical maps, which are low res images unless they are purchased, but they show woodland there from 1830 onwards with the house visible on a 1938 - 1939. It is not very clear but the plot size does not look as big as it is today.

A 1965 map shows the land parceled up and these apparent boundaries stay the same on various maps up to 1989 and the current street map. I quickly overlaid these lines on the aerial picture and even though it is very rough and only approximate without seeing other supporting info or documents backing your case it seems to support the councils view and shows the "curtilage" as a rectangle around the house.

I would assume then that the rest maybe classed as agricultural for its use and possibly green belt and that's what the buildings are built on.

Dont seem to be able to PM some of these maps to you so I have attached them here, hope thats ok.

Not sure if this info helps your case at all but I suppose its all usefull info that'll help you decide if you are going to fight the council.

Originally Posted by hunton69

We have only seen pictures on google earth back to the year 2000
The house was surrounded by lots and lots of trees and there is a line where the trees stop and the grassland starts which is about half of the 4 acres.
That is the line were we believe the curtilage ends.

If you google earth HP3 8RY and zoom in its the property in the one oclock position to were postcode is written

[hunton69]

Thanks again Daren

We believe they bought 3 lots of land in 1924 as we have some paper work regarding this and it is the land down to the railway line. It is mentions that some houses were to be bought.
No good to us if those buildings are outside the curtilage.