Application for LDC after towing caravan kept on site for more than 10 years.

[Brix]

I have a caravan in a field in Wales which I visit it for short breaks (although less so recently because I have built a cabin nearby which is more comfortable and the caravan is starting to deteriorate). Now that I have a youngster, I'd like to tow it back to a workshop and restore it for towing and replace it on site with a larger structure which meets the planning definition of caravan.

 

I bought the caravan in 2006/7 to use as a site office for a development which for various reasons has not started. Initially the caravan was in a field immediately adjacent to the barn intended for development but soon after I moved it into another field. I can't recall the exact date when I did this but aerial imagery shows that I moved it to its current position at least ten years ago.

 

The only physical works I carried out were a trench for the wheels on one side to compensate for sloping land, and a widened gate (done by the farmer) to make it easier to maneuver. Apart from two short trips to festivals the caravan has not moved.

 

The caravan is not connected - I fill water from a nearby spring, use solar power and gas. The toilet goes to a tank which we empty into a mobile carrier and then into a neighbour's cesspit.

 

In terms of evidence - I have some dated photos, dated aerial photography at various intervals going back at least ten years and hope to be able to get a statement from the farmer I rent the fields to. I have some email correspondence about repairs on site dating back to 2007/08, and restoration receipts prior to moving it on site. I have never paid council tax on the site. I am a little concerned as to whether this will constitute enough evidence.

 

I'm assuming that I need ten years history. I'm intending to replace it with something larger but I have come across a planning decision by this council in which the council granted a LDC but restricted it to the size of the caravan in respect of which the LDC was applied for? Is that allowed - or is the LDC not simply permission to keep a caravan? They also restricted that particular one to holiday use (it had been used as a second home / holiday home by the owners)?

 

Might a new caravan need to be located in exactly the same spot or just anywhere in that particular field?

 

Any other thoughts?

 

Thanks.

 

 

[Temp]

9 hours ago, Brix said:

I bought the caravan in 2006/7 to use as a site office for a development which for various reasons has not started. Initially the caravan was in a field immediately adjacent to the barn intended for development but soon after I moved it into another field.

 

Is the current location also adjacent to the original proposed development? I ask because I believe you are allowed to keep a site workers van on a building plot _or_ on adjacent land without planning permission. In which case there wouldn't have been a planning breech.

 

If it's not adjacent I suspect the planners will argue the breech is only one of parking a caravan on agricultural land. They may argue your short stays dont amount to a continuous breech. You are allowed 28 days a year without PP. 

 

https://www.planningresource.co.uk/article/1209031/enforcement-q---dcp-section-45

 

Howlong does a mobile home have to be in situ before it will be considered immune from enforcement action?

The ten year rule applies to residentially occupied mobile homes that comply with the statutory definition of a caravan. The four year rule would only operate if the mobile home were considered to be an operational development i.e. if size or degree of attachment to the land gave it the characteristics of permanency.

 

I think they also have 10 years in cases where planning permission would be needed for a change of use (eg Agricultural to Residential or caravan park).

 

I agree with @Sensus comment about seeking professional advice. Ideally before posting identifying information on internet forums.

[Brix]

9 hours ago, Sensus said:

The evidence you have sounds adequate, to me.

 

I would need to see the decision that you refer to, but a caravan within the definition of the Caravan Act is not 'development' in itself, and from what you have yourself described there has been no associated development of significance, so the CLUED application is not actually seeking a Lawful Development Certificate - it's seeking a Certificate of Lawful Use.

 

It would normally be for the lawfulness of siting a single caravan, within the definition given in the Caravan Act (which does include maximum sizes) anywhere within the red line on the application site.

 

Note, however, that it still wouldn't give you permission/lawfulness for any ancillary development, so you'd still need to tread very carefully on that score.

 

It may be that the other application you refer to included ancillary development, and that the there were other constraints imposed on the Certificate to reflect that.

 

Note also that the use has to remain continuous for the lawfulness to be maintained... technically, if you moved the caravan off for a few weeks (or even a few days), it could be argued that the continuity of use had been allowed to lapse, and you'd be back to square one. Even the two short trips to festivals might be argued to breach that continuity, so you need to be very careful what you tell the LPA on that score. Similarly, the statement that you want to tow it off site and replace it rings alarm bells, and would need to be managed in such a way as to maintain continuity. The LPA may not care, over much, of course, but it's best to play things on the safe side.

 

As always, I know that there's a tendency on this forum to think that it's clever to try to save a few quid by avoiding the use of professionals, but I would always urge that the risks outweigh the benefits in this respect... it's only clever until you f**k something up completely.

 

 

 

 

Thanks for your reply - this is really helpful.

 

You are absolutely correct about the certificate at the other site - it was a CLUED. There was in fact some significant development (a large concrete base) which may have affected my recollection - although this is not mentioned in the certificate. Whilst looking for a copy of the certificate I answered my own question about the size limitations -  the planning department wrote to me confirming that they would not take enforcement against anything which exceeded the dimensions stated in the certificate, so long as it met the definition of caravan (it was along time ago!). I presume that this means they accept that the site specific caravan size restrictions were not enforceable. They confirmed that any changes to the concrete slab would need permission.

 

They also said that the holiday use restriction might be enforced. In that case the owners has submitted an affadavit stating that they used it regularly between March and October with maintenance visits only between Nov and Feb and so usage was restricted to those months. I'm keen to avoid a holiday restriction on mine.

 

As regards my site:

I suspected that moving the caravan even for a few days might cause the clock to be re-set if they were being particularly strict. Although 10yrs might well have passed since it was last moved, there is nothing to be gained by mentioning it so I guess it is safest if that is simply left out of any application.

 

You refer to the red line of the application site. What would govern where the red line is in this case? The registered title is for a plot of 25 acres. This is split into fenced fields - the field in which the  caravan is currently located measures about 2 acres. 

 

I presume that where you reference ancillary development, this might include any foundations for a more substantial caravan and that, because the existing one has no foundations, any proposed replacement would need to be designed to sit on the land without any foundations?

 

 

I take your point about DIY applications. I have quite a long history of doing my own - the only two rejections I have had have been submitted by architects and both of those I successfully appealed by myself. That said, I'm also fairly realistic about where my considerable blind-spots are and like to run things past people. I might well use a consultant on this one. I read your website and your approach sounded interesting to me as one of my problems has always been finding the balance between what I feel is needed in terms of drawings and detail at each stage, and what an architect wants to provide.

 

 

 

 

[Brix]

18 hours ago, Temp said:

 

I agree with @Sensus comment about seeking professional advice. Ideally before posting identifying information on internet forums.

 

Yes, I hope I have been fairly careful not to give too many clues to exact location ... ?.