ToughButterCup Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 Dom strikes again. If this report is accurate, I'll do something about it, I really will.... I'll get @Russell griffiths to cut down everyone of his trees, @the_r_sole to find a way to Appeal the decision, @Brickie, to sabotage his cement mixer, @Ferdinand to write eloquent but rude letters to everyone , @pocster, to smash every pane of his glass, @Onoff to isolate his consumer units, @SteamyTea to rouse a Cornish whirlwind of pasties, @Temp to winkle out the smallest chink in his armour, @joe90 to block the entrance with his digger. That'll teach him not to build without planning permission or pay his rates. So there! Ya couldn't make it up could ya ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daiking Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 4 minutes ago, ToughButterCup said: Dom strikes again. If this report is accurate, I'll do something about it, I really will.... I'll get @Russell griffiths to cut down everyone of his trees, @the_r_sole to find a way to Appeal the decision, @Brickie, to sabotage his cement mixer, @Ferdinand to write eloquent but rude letters to everyone , @pocster, to smash every pane of his glass, @Onoff to isolate his consumer units, @SteamyTea to rouse a Cornish whirlwind of pasties, @Temp to winkle out the smallest chink in his armour, @joe90 to block the entrance with his digger. That'll teach him not to build without planning permission or pay his rates. So there! Ya couldn't make it up could ya ? I hadn’t realised you’d lost an eye as well as the fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Punter Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 The council did say " they have made their assessment in line with the relevant legislation and custom and practice in terms of such changes in accordance with Article 3 of the Council Tax (Chargeable Dwellings) Order 1993. " I assume that is the relevant law and that is why no arrears are due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterW Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 19 minutes ago, Mr Punter said: The council did say " they have made their assessment in line with the relevant legislation and custom and practice in terms of such changes in accordance with Article 3 of the Council Tax (Chargeable Dwellings) Order 1993. " I assume that is the relevant law and that is why no arrears are due. So the law is clear on this and the arrears would be payable. However the key words in the line are in bold above, where the Council have not previously followed the law to the letter and have let the arrears lie on file and not chased as ultimately it usually costs them more to recover than it is worth to the Council. This creates the legal precedence of custom and practice where it can be used as a defence in law (this is civil not criminal law) which is therefore the reason why they won’t pursue this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daiking Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, PeterW said: So the law is clear on this and the arrears would be payable. However the key words in the line are in bold above, where the Council have not previously followed the law to the letter and have let the arrears lie on file and not chased as ultimately it usually costs them more to recover than it is worth to the Council. This creates the legal precedence of custom and practice where it can be used as a defence in law (this is civil not criminal law) which is therefore the reason why they won’t pursue this. Man benefits from bad law/loophole/grey area is not such an emotive headline is it? Edited October 14, 2020 by daiking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted October 14, 2020 Author Share Posted October 14, 2020 Its the build without planning permission that got to me. Not one, but two .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted October 14, 2020 Author Share Posted October 14, 2020 1 hour ago, daiking said: I hadn't realised you’d lost an eye as well as the fingers. There's a longer list than that: Fingers Teeth Septum Cartilage Hair Innocence Good will Patience Trust Humour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 There is about £180 million worth of PPE contracts that have been handed to individuals with some sort of link to the tory party. It seems if your sister is a tory lord or you're a mate of Cummings you can restart a dormant company with no trading record in anything and win millions worth of contracts to make PPE. You don't even have to deliver anything. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted October 14, 2020 Author Share Posted October 14, 2020 1 hour ago, daiking said: Man benefits from bad law/loophole/grey area is not such an emotive headline is it? It's when injustice doesn't persist in our consciousness that we'll have lost it. Building two houses without planning permission , to me at least, is unjust. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_r_sole Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 tbf - given my recent experiences of the sh!t show that is local authority planning - I applaud anyone that can afford to take the risk of building something without planning permission!! A favourite quote of mine (which is never the advice I'd give formally to a client...) "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" maybe doesn't apply to everything right enough ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamyTea Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 I really don't care much for people getting away with a few quid. What gets me is how we seem to have two laws covering everything. One says you must do it, the other says you must not do it. If only we were like Switzerland, if it is not compulsory, then it is illegal. Or just have one law "Don't be an arse." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToughButterCup Posted October 14, 2020 Author Share Posted October 14, 2020 6 minutes ago, the_r_sole said: ... I applaud anyone that can afford to take the risk of building something without planning permission!! ... One day I hope to be as kind and forgiving as you are are. In the meantime sneering will have to do. And politicians wonder or continue to wonder why trust has been lost. Maybe I am wrong. They know that trust has been lost. And continue not to do anything about it. Democracy dies in darkness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daiking Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 37 minutes ago, ToughButterCup said: It's when injustice doesn't persist in our consciousness that we'll have lost it. Building two houses without planning permission , to me at least, is unjust. How many times do you read on here of someone building an outbuilding with intent of turning it into accommodation eventually through this same thing? It should be an injustice whenever anyone does it not just ETBs. Nevermind that most people would do exactly the same thing if they were given a chance. It may be 'law' but those people see it as a victimless crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_r_sole Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, ToughButterCup said: One day I hope to be as kind and forgiving as you are are. In the meantime sneering will have to do. And politicians wonder or continue to wonder why trust has been lost. Maybe I am wrong. They know that trust has been lost. And continue not to do anything about it. Democracy dies in darkness. If they make the system better then it would stop people ignoring it! I don't think people should as a rule ignore planning but I've just had a young family be refused planning for a site which has had planning approved twice (in error apparently, even though the site selection was done by the planning officer on site!) If they'd just bashed on and built it they'd have a house but now they've got a legal battle to try and recover the money they've sunk on the incorrect guidance of a planner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 I need to see the investigation report before I really comment on this. It was leaked and redacted, according to the Northern Echo, and the author of the report commented that there was no evidence of concealment or deception. That apparently knocks the "two sets of laws" narrative thing on the head. https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/18560751.planning-report-breaches-dominic-cummings-cottage/ Aspects that interest me: - The second extra dwelling. That's new to me. - Why does Council Tax apply? - Why did it need Planning - the detail, and it what circs it would not need PP? - Is there a Right of Appeal? - Who actually did this report - VOA or Council? - Different aspects between what the VOA, Planning and Building Regs did. If it needed Buildings Regs, then signoff would have told the Council. Ignoring that on a dwelling is more important than Council Tax, as it is safety affecting. - How was it leaked, and by whom? Is this someone breaching professional confidence? I am also interested in Council Tax as an LL, which is far more grey at the margins than generally known. eg Up and down the Country random Councils randomly impose Band A Council Tax on individual rooms in HMOs. AIUI they have the power but most don't ask the VOA for what I assume are pragmatic reasons ie can't afford to lose all the HMOs - at a cost of £500-1000 per tenant (tenant liable) on varied grounds. Some do, others don't. Ferdinand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brickie Posted October 18, 2020 Share Posted October 18, 2020 On 14/10/2020 at 10:21, ToughButterCup said: Its the build without planning permission that got to me. Not one, but two .... I think we’re jumping to conclusions here. It’s highly likely that there’s a perfectly innocent explanation for this. He probably just innocently happened to mention it in idle conversation with Robert Jenryck at a Tory fundraiser. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now