ToughButterCup

Time to several the ties? But it is time to pick your fight. And because most don't choose that , he gets away with it.

I have come to expect laziness within the building sector as standard. The first thing that suffers as a result of laziness is attention to detail. My ecologists lack of attention to detail resulted in a 6 month delay. I paid half his bill. That resulted in instant attention. When, as we agreed -in writing - , he resubmits an invoice for the balance, I'll pay it. 3 years later, no invoice. My ecologist will be aware of his character trait. And so will your architect. Withhold an appropriate amount: wait for the fuss to die down, and then don't pay it until you see a change in behaviour. Why should unprofessional behaviour cost the same as the opposite?

fun evening.

First of all welcome. Now for the hard part. Read this. : And this : The answer is yes. But not for me. There is only one word at issue, here 'legally' For those of you who don't have time to read the links above, here's the abbreviated version. Man buys field with planning permission to build stables, next door to me. Man moves caravan onto site. Man moves in with family (thats the important bit). Man applies for PP for a house. Man asks for permission to stay in caravan Is given permission to stay in caravan pending outcome of PP application PP is refused, at Committee and at Appeal. Man continues to live with family pending completion of stables In 9 years, 30 blocks have been laid to the stables. Here, verbatim is the email response by the Head of Planning to the question: why is the owner of the land allowed to stay in his caravan? '... The case remains open and is monitored occasionally, but at the last visit the stable block was under construction and therefore during those works the caravan may be lived in without permission. ...' and later, a more detailed explanation, also copied direct from an email to me: '... We appreciate that this is not a satisfactory situation, however, the developer is making use of permitted development rights which we believe provide a loophole for someone wishing to live on a site, but one which we cannot easily deal with. We tried a few years ago to take enforcement action on a very similar case elsewhere in the borough and lost. We are therefore reluctant to go down the same road unless we have a strong case. It is probably a matter on which we will need to get specialist (and expensive!) legal advice. ...' Here is a link to the source documentation Here is the Google Maps reference : look at the Satellite version and look at the Street View version. The look at the dates of both: the Street View image shows the PP Application notice pinned to the gate : date ? 2009. Because I live next door - just to the North of the applicants land-, (you can see the build in progress on the Google Map) it is inappropriate for me to comment further. I wish you every good fortune in your quest to self build. Ian

What a pair of self-indulgent, narcissistic twerps.

Depends. If I can get her to put the underfloor heating on, .....

Somebody pllllleeeaaaase give them a leek each , before they all start singing. Greetings from Germany.

@Construction Channel and @PeterStarck: I'm right handed. My left hip and right knee are shot. So, I'm after a safe perch for my botticelli. Somewhere to rest for a bit, and maybe put the odd tool safely. Nulok has metal battens , Ed.

I work non-stop, the weather's too good to 'waste' But you are right

Damn. I was right....

25....

I am now deep into the full-on DIY self-build process, and it looks like I'll be using NuLok roofing. Because I can DIY that, I hope. To make things a bit more tasty, I have a slightly annoying hip, a pretty annoying knee, and less than optimal hands. But I'm not going to let that stop me. Researching the issue of how to perch my fat @rse as comfortably as I can while on the roof, I bumped into these . But they're Murcan. And I can't find any made in the UK. Well, if Trump wants a trade war, he's got one. I'm buying nowt from the Yankees. That'll teach him. I've asked around and the roofers I know (drink with) all think I'm soft: they never use them - indeed most had never heard of them. But we will have, won't we? Apart from @Construction Channel who has prolly made his own, does anyone know where I can lay my hand on one (some)?

Got it in one. See a job which needs a bit more thought when there are 5 easy jobs, which would you (we) do? Come the Revolution Citizens we will overcome : Long Live the Republic. Death to the Aristos. Death to the Middle Classes. (Citizen Academic)

Your experience is yet another snapshot in the Too Much Work So Stuff You album. On a good day, the kindest thing I manage to say about them is that many trades folk are just that, trades people. Some are even good at their job. Communicators they are not. Emotionally intelligent they are not.

In later life, I found it professionally politic to try to hide the fact that I went there. I came to detest the incestuous bitching and awful politicking that went on in our department. (post-grad at The Department of Educational Studies)

My hip, hopefully @newhome. If I sit down for any length of time, and then stand up quickly, there's a widely audible click and an cheeky level of pain in my left hip. I need some medical WD40 . Recommendations ?

Shaaaaadup you ....... Got some left-over painkillers from my little amputation(s) . God send.

Hoselock Kwikstage Dursiol (pushing it a bit that one: the blocks do have a male and female 'end') Click flooring Cladding SDS Nulok roofing HeP 2O 'Taint warit yoused ter b is it?

And here, in his usual elegant prose, is Martin Goodhall's summary of a recent judgement in relation to Isolated House(s) in the Countryside ( @JSHarris's point above). Indeed, had this judgement been available at the time of the application for the land in question, Planning Permission might well have been given. However, the decision would still turn on the Delegated Officer's interpretation of national policy. The point at issue is that over-interpretation of policy is not a good idea. ' ... Excessive legalism in the planning system is always to be deprecated. The Court therefore agreed with the respondents’ submission that its task is to construe the words of the policy itself, reading them sensibly in their context. This is not a sophisticated exercise, and it need not be difficult. It is, in fact, quite straightforward. Planning policies, whether in the development plan or in the NPPF, ought never to be over-interpreted. As this case showed, over-interpretation of a policy can distort its true meaning – which is misinterpretation. ...'Goodhall April 2018 Accessed June 2018 For the sake of completeness, here's the source documentation. I believe the ramifications of this decision could very well have a significant bearing on the outcome of planning applications submitted by self-builders. In brief, the NPPF and associated planning documentation should not be over-interpreted. My choice quotation from the documentation; Excessive legalism in the planning system is always to be deprecated. (Martin Goodhall April 2108 accessed June 2018) and IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT PLANNING COURT MRS JUSTICE LANG DBE Accessed June 2018 http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2018/610.html

I have had a few very civilised chats with the local Enforcement Officer. We are on first name terms. So my preference is for careful preparation based on a thorough review of the particular documentation in this case, and generally understanding what the global issues are. Going in harder is for later: much later. As for squeaky cleanness - there are some advantages in the plodding Germanic approach I tend to use (without realising that that's what people (Debbie) calls it) @daiking PMSL. You have a point, up to a point. There is local concern - the LPC have talked to me about it and it is a standing matter for discussion every time I show my face anywhere near a local councillor. I never raise the matter with them. It was the County councillor who emailed me to ask about progress. You are right to raise it though; I'll think about it. It's not doing me any good because it diverts effort and attention from the build, but I'm watching that As for my therapist: she (Debbie) would say ' .... pick your fight... ' and ' .... get the bloody roof finished....' Want something done? Ask a busy person. @newhome, I follow his blog assiduously: skim the irrelevant stuff and enjoy his beautifully crafted sentences for those bits in which I might have some interest.

Yes, yes and yes. Widening the net is a good idea. Doing that will be a bit hit and miss, but.... The ' ... It's up to them argument ...' The quick answer - because the Planners won't. And I am not enforcing anything: I can't. But I can point to Injustice (or what I see as that). I may be wrong, in which case I will just have to suck it up. But I'm not into the ' ..... but it's too hard for me ..... ' argument presented by someone whose salary we all pay. I have asked myself : what would my reaction be if the person in question (the person pushing the planning legislation to it's limit) were my very best mate. What would I do then? I would talk to him and work it through. But, in this case, despite lots of good will and effort on my part, that hasn't worked. Detail isn't appropriate here. No, @ProDave, that's the other side. Maybe what is driving this is my misguided sense of having to follow rule. The evidence - at least locally - is that some people do what they please. And get away with it because of the ' .... That's up to them .... ' approach. In which case, what's the point? Stuff it, I'll build a shed on my land and then use it as an office, ignore our GCNs, kill them at will if they are in the wrong place, tap into the local water supply and tell nobody, lie to the planners for as long as I can get away with it. When judgements go against me, I'll Appeal, when that fails, I'll just do it anyway.

Here's the full text of the HoPs email to my local councillor and sent to me.... We appreciate that this is not a satisfactory situation, however, the developer is making use of permitted development rights which we believe provide a loophole for someone wishing to live on a site, but one which we cannot easily deal with. We tried a few years ago to take enforcement action on a very similar case elsewhere in the borough and lost. We are therefore reluctant to go down the same road unless we have a strong case. It is probably a matter on which we will need to get specialist (and expensive!) legal advice. My fear is that, through false analogy, the HoP is kicking this can down the road. This case may well be stronger than the one to which he refers. Even Google Maps documents the ludicrous state of affairs thus; Click this link It takes you to Google Maps. Look at the date on the bottom of the image. It shows that the satellite image was taken in 2018. You can see our build at the top (roofless house) and the plot of land -the one of concern here- directly to the south Now click on the street view link for that map (or click here) It takes you to an image taken at street level. Look at the date of the image : it's 2009. As luck would have it on that day, the Street View image shows a yellow notice of Application for Planning Permission (for a house) was fixed to the gate of the Old Quarry. The Street View image has not been updated for nine years, but the map has been. The foundation you can see is for a stables, NOT for a house PP for the house was refused at Appeal long ago (March last year). The owner is dragging out the build for the stables as long as he can. So far about 30 blocks have been laid in 9 years. The HoP defines that as ' ... [a situation] we cannot easily deal with... ' My attitude to that is - you are paid very high salary - dealing with difficult stuff is your job So, I need to get stuck into this one (not at the expense of my own build). The first step is some thorough research. Hence the question - to which decision is the HoP referring when he says We tried a few years ago to take enforcement action on a very similar case elsewhere in the borough and lost. (?) My bet is that he makes a false analogy. Let's see if my 'nose' is right

We all know one of those. A nod and a wink lives near Preston ?

Trawled through that a few times : but I'm beginning to think about phone call is what is needed.

Wyre Borough...