Living in "illegal" building and affect on future planning

[Ted_86]

Someone in our village owns a plot of land next to their house which was formerly a farmer's field.  Recently they applied for permission to build a garden office on it (even though the land is not part of their residential property).  Permission was refused, but they've built anyway, and someone is now living in the building (they also put in services, a driveway etc.).

 

My question is, if the building goes un-noticed and someone lives in the building for a period of time, will this allow them to then apply to build permanent houses on the land?  

[joe90]

4 minutes ago, Ted_86 said:

if the building goes un-noticed and someone lives in the building for a period of time, will this allow them to then apply to build permanent houses on the land?  

but you have noticed! The council/planners need notifying, simple!!,!. Whilst I agree that swathes of agricultural land should not be swallowed up by houses I do feel the housing shortage is not helped by planners apposing planning on so much. We have a small piece of agricultural land near me, next to a road, terrible soil so will never produce much agriculturally but planning has been refused. Frankly it’s perfect fir a small cottage and there are so many young families who work locally who can’t afford most houses and don’t want to have to travel miles to a town to live. I think planners need to get real. Locals here complained when the local infants school closed due to diminishing numbers, if more new houses were allowed and young family’s stayed on the area, the school, shop and pub may well survive.

 

rant over?‍♂️

[PeterW]

32 minutes ago, Ted_86 said:

My question is, if the building goes un-noticed and someone lives in the building for a period of time, will this allow them to then apply to build permanent houses on the land?  

4 years is the rule but a quick call to your local planning enforcement team will see it sorted. 

[Ted_86]

1 minute ago, PeterW said:

4 years is the rule but a quick call to your local planning enforcement team will see it sorted. 

 

I know people will disagree, but I really don't feel it's any of my business to go to the council.  If my land adjoined theirs then maybe, but I live at the other end of the village so it won't impact me at all.  The landowner applied so the council should probably check no work has commenced.

 

So after 4 years, they could apply to build a few houses and the council would have to grant permission?  Even though they refused permission for the current building and anyway, they building they've constructed is supposed to be an office, not a dwelling?

[nod]

If no one reports this 

It’s likely that no one really cares what happens there 

[PeterW]

3 minutes ago, Ted_86 said:

So after 4 years, they could apply to build a few houses and the council would have to grant permission? 

 No. All planning is on its own merits. 

[Ferdinand]

34 minutes ago, Ted_86 said:

 

I know people will disagree, but I really don't feel it's any of my business to go to the council.  If my land adjoined theirs then maybe, but I live at the other end of the village so it won't impact me at all.  The landowner applied so the council should probably check no work has commenced.

 

So after 4 years, they could apply to build a few houses and the council would have to grant permission?  Even though they refused permission for the current building and anyway, they building they've constructed is supposed to be an office, not a dwelling?

 

They can apply to build a few houses whenever they want. The only way to guarantee to be able to do it later, is to get PP now and start the development (eg foundations for one house and rebury them) after meeting the starting planning conditions.

 

Speaking as a LL myself, imo the accommodation it is precisely your business (and imo perhaps your responsibility - depends on your views) to take an interest, because somebody renting like that, or living like that, is in a building which is not known or shown to be safe. Has it got an electrical safety certicate? What about gas? Is it suitable to be a dwelling? Or is it one of the well-known "beds in sheds"? Is the 'tenant' being exploited etc?

 

I'm basing that view on the welfare of the person living there, rather than whether neighbours are being disturbed. If it is for eg a family member or granny, that is not particularly frowned upon.

 

I am not sure ( @PeterW ?) whether a right to use it as accommodation can be obtained by someone living there for x years without enforcement.

 

F

[Ted_86]

30 minutes ago, nod said:

If no one reports this 

It’s likely that no one really cares what happens there 

That's a fair point.  I guess it's up to the neighbours to complain if they have a problem.  I was just intrigued.

 

And I'm also surprised people are allowed to build a building that's been refused and then allow someone to rent it without any comeback from the authorities.  Makes me wonder why I've bothered with planning permission and building control in the past.  I should've just shoved a shed in my garden, rented it out and counted my tax-free cash.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Ted_86

[Ferdinand]

1 minute ago, Ted_86 said:

That's a fair point.  I guess it's up to the neighbours to complain if they have a problem.  I was just intrigued.

 

And I'm also surprised people are allowed to build a building that's been refused and then allow someone to rent it without any comeback from the authorities.  Makes me wonder why I've bothered with planning permission and building control in the past.  I should've just shoved a shed in my garden.

 

They aren't.

 

They haven't noticed and no one has told them.

[Ted_86]

So if someone tells the council, what can the council do?  Tell them to take it down?  Surely that'll have as much impact as telling them not to build it in the first place.

 

And I can't believe the council will take legal action.  Councils don't seem to have the money or the manpower.

[joe90]

19 minutes ago, Ted_86 said:

Makes me wonder why I've bothered with planning permission and building control in the past.  I should've just shoved a shed in my garden, rented it out and counted my tax-free cash.

you assume these “people” will not be challenged. I wonder why you bothered posting, especially in Covid times when many restrictions apply and councils are always overstretched anyway. Someone needs to inform the enforcement officer. Our neighbour called in the enforcement officer early on in our build when I was told I could start my garage under permitted development till my planning application came through. Despite my earlier post about allowing building I think anyone who builds without permission should be ordered to demolish it.

[joe90]

3 minutes ago, Ted_86 said:

So if someone tells the council, what can the council do?  Tell them to take it down?  Surely that'll have as much impact as telling them not to build it in the first place.

 

And I can't believe the council will take legal action.  Councils don't seem to have the money or the manpower.

No, they have powers to make them demolish it, and if they don’t they can arrange its demolition and bill the owners. This has happened elsewhere.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1034923/cornwall-news-dream-home-demolished-planning-permission-cornwall-council

[PeterW]

13 minutes ago, Ted_86 said:

So if someone tells the council, what can the council do?  Tell them to take it down?  Surely that'll have as much impact as telling them not to build it in the first place.

 

And I can't believe the council will take legal action.  Councils don't seem to have the money or the manpower.

you will be surprised !!! They will take action and it can result in the property being removed at the householders cost by the council. 

[ToughButterCup]

1 hour ago, Ted_86 said:

...

My question is, if the building goes un-noticed and someone lives in the building for a period of time, will this allow them to then apply to build permanent houses on the land?  

 

I don't know what happens long term, but this , as written, is a clear breach of Planning Law.  One phone call is all it needs - locally anyway. Ring the Council Enforcement Officer. The wheels will grind - they maybe slow, but they will grind.

[IanR]

Once it's been inhabited continuously for 4 years, the owner can apply for a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development

 

The Owner has to prove the breach is ongoing and has been continuous for 4 years. If they can the LPA has no choice but to issue the CLEUD.

 

But, that's not the same as having planning, it just allows the existing breach to continue. If the breach is discontinued, ie it's empty for a while (at least 3 months seems to be the threshold) then the CLEUD is no longer in place and the 4 year clock starts ticking again.

 

I don't believe Banks will lend Mortgages against such a property as it doesn't have planning permission.

 

If the LPA become aware of it before a CLEUD is applied for they would likely give the Owner the opportunity to normalise the breach by applying for retrospective planning. If they do so and it's rejected, or they fail to apply then the LPA will issue and enforcement notice. Enforcement notices do seem to go very very slowly. It would be years before it got to the point of the Council demolishing the build and charging the owner for it.

[Ferdinand]

49 minutes ago, joe90 said:

No, they have powers to make them demolish it, and if they don’t they can arrange its demolition and bill the owners. This has happened elsewhere.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1034923/cornwall-news-dream-home-demolished-planning-permission-cornwall-council

 

The revealing bit of that is that there is no photo of the Dream Home pre-demolitiion.

 

I expect it was a renovated jerry-build.

[joe90]

Another example, (not Gerry built by the look of it. ). https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2425348/Man-ordered-demolish-2m-home-doubling-size-WITHOUT-planning-permission.html

[Vijay]

I genuinely think it's all our responsibility to report these things. The problem if we don't is what does someone do next and before you know it people are thinking well they did it so can I. Living in London, I have seen to many sheds/garages turned into rentals and I believe that's because no one bothered reporting it and now it's so out of hand, that councils are just not bothering with it, saying as long as they are built properly. What I suspect is it's another council tax income............

[Ted_86]

9 minutes ago, Vijay said:

I genuinely think it's all our responsibility to report these things. 

I agree but I would be concerned that the landowner would find out it was me.  I like going to my village pub and don't want there to be an atmosphere!

 

Normally I wouldn't mind but the properties around the building are all beautiful listed houses and the "office" they've built is very ugly.  Plus, reading the report where the planning was refused, it mentions that the building would be (has been) built on open countryside as it's not actually part of their residential property.  Seems like they really shouldn't be able to get away with this.

 

But I just see it as I walk my kids to school.  Maybe the people who live near it have reported it.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Ted_86

[Onoff]

It's amazing how some councillors themselves play the system. There's an alleged local district one that did a barn conversion that sailed through then applied to do a second on the same (their) land. The application was miraculously "lost" then reappeared by some quirk. Such time had passed that he got it by default. 

[saveasteading]

Planning rules are there for a reason. Also, what about building regulations? Presumably not applied either, and could be dangerous.

There are plenty of 'something should be done about it'  complainers and too few, like you, who do something for society.

 

I'm pretty sure you can retain anonymity. I guess, if nervous, you could send an old fashioned letter with no details.

It is perfectly possible that planners could routinely look at sites of refused permissions, just to make sure....I know I would if passing.

 

[Onoff]

17 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

It is perfectly possible that planners could routinely look at sites of refused permissions, just to make sure....I know I would if passing.

 

There's drone technology, Google earth etc if they were serious about enforcement. The tools are there, a bit like with our police force, border controls etc. I've not seen a ticket inspector on my daily train in over a year.

Had two police walk through a train once in over 12 months. 

 

Rumour has it here that many years ago, the then (different) borough council got so fed up with illegal buildings they fired up some bulldozers and drove the length of the valley. 

[Onoff]

Tbh I don't think it pays to adhere by the rules when every other f***er doesn't and gets away with it. You get to the "if you can't beat them" point. 

[Onoff]

2 hours ago, IanR said:

The Owner has to prove the breach is ongoing and has been continuous for 4 years. If they can the LPA has no choice but to issue the CLEUD.

 

Don't they have to pay back council tax? Also if it's been deliberately concealed by say straw bales, fast growing hedge etc isn't the CLEUD null and void?

[joe90]

1 minute ago, Onoff said:

Tbh I don't think it pays to adhere by the rules when every other f***er doesn't and gets away with it.

But that’s the problem, if we allow some to get away with it that becomes the norm. I would report it anonymously and consider it everyone’s civic duty to do likewise.