54 replies to this topic

[PaulCP]

A little more than naughty Matt, it is a serious breach of planning rules and something that should give you more ammunition.

To summarise, the applicant is on the planning committee & didn’t declare a conflict of interest, the barn has build 8m away from its intended location and it is an agricultural building on non agricultural land.

It’s a shame it’s just you and not a few of you. We, along with 12 others in our village contested the granting of planning permission to build a battery energy storage unit, an industrial development in a prime rural location. We all clubbed together to pay for a Barrister to write to the planning authority pointing out how they did not follow the correct procedure in reviewing and granting the application. As soon as they received the Barrister’s letter identifying the next steps they immediately withdrew the planning consent.

[vocky]

you need to take this further, not sure how, but don't let them get away with it

[The Batman]

[CocoPops]

Would it be more acceptable in its original position?
Could you argue that you would let it go in original place but not now?

[FLD]

Ideally I'd like it gone but further away would be a good start. I need to get to the bottom of the application debacle!

[CocoPops]

Might be worth spending some money, planning consultant for example?
Really cause a shitstorm and that unless they stop you’ll sue the council for not upholding hidden interests?

[C8RKH]

Might be worth doing some investigation, arming yourself with some ammunition and firing in an official looking letter that states you are seeking formal legal advice. Should be enough highlighted below to build a simple case for action or to demand a review and formal response, especially when also copied to local newspaper editors.......

 

The present framework includes a duty on the authority to promote and maintain high standards of conduct by authority members and also to adopt a code dealing with the conduct expected of members acting in that capacity which must be consistent with Nolan principles (ss 27 and 28). The code must include provision considered appropriate by the authority in respect of registration and disclosure of pecuniary and other interests (s 28(2)). By s 29 local authority monitoring officers must establish and retain a register of member interests. Authorities (other than parishes, for which their principal authority (per s 29(9)) will have relevant responsibilities) must also under s 28 have arrangements under which written allegations can be investigated and determined with the involvement of specified “independent persons” to give views to the determining body and to be available for consultation by both authority and subject member.

If a member is found to have breached the code the authority may take this into account in deciding whether to take action in relation to that member and if so the nature of such action (s 28(11)). However, authorities under the present regime have only limited scope to impose sanctions on members in breach. Hickinbottom J remarked on this on 15 May 2014 in Heesom v Public Services Ombudman for Wales [2014] EWHC 1504 (Admin), [2014] 4 All ER 269, noting it was uncontentious that: “There being no common law right for an authority to impose sanctions that interfere with local democracy, upon the abolition of these sanctions and…[with certain statutory exceptions]…a councillor in England can no longer be disqualified or suspended, sanctions being limited to (for example) a formal finding that he has breached the code, formal censure, press or other appropriate publicity, and removal by the authority from executive and committee roles (and then subject to statutory and constitutional requirements).”

[jules_s]

You definitely need to engage a Planning Consultant, I'd be fcuking fuming

[FLD]

Planning consultant says I have no chance. Whilst it breaches planning he says the revised application will be approved as it is not within 20m of my house. He did say I could ask for conditions such as trees to screen it.

As a development to the whole situation the applicant / councilor came round and gave us some verbal. FFS!

[FLD]

Might be worth doing some investigation, arming yourself with some ammunition and firing in an official looking letter that states you are seeking formal legal advice. Should be enough highlighted below to build a simple case for action or to demand a review and formal response, especially when also copied to local newspaper editors.......

The present framework includes a duty on the authority to promote and maintain high standards of conduct by authority members and also to adopt a code dealing with the conduct expected of members acting in that capacity which must be consistent with Nolan principles (ss 27 and 28). The code must include provision considered appropriate by the authority in respect of registration and disclosure of pecuniary and other interests (s 28(2)). By s 29 local authority monitoring officers must establish and retain a register of member interests. Authorities (other than parishes, for which their principal authority (per s 29(9)) will have relevant responsibilities) must also under s 28 have arrangements under which written allegations can be investigated and determined with the involvement of specified “independent persons” to give views to the determining body and to be available for consultation by both authority and subject member.
If a member is found to have breached the code the authority may take this into account in deciding whether to take action in relation to that member and if so the nature of such action (s 28(11)). However, authorities under the present regime have only limited scope to impose sanctions on members in breach. Hickinbottom J remarked on this on 15 May 2014 in Heesom v Public Services Ombudman for Wales [2014] EWHC 1504 (Admin), [2014] 4 All ER 269, noting it was uncontentious that: “There being no common law right for an authority to impose sanctions that interfere with local democracy, upon the abolition of these sanctions and…[with certain statutory exceptions]…a councillor in England can no longer be disqualified or suspended, sanctions being limited to (for example) a formal finding that he has breached the code, formal censure, press or other appropriate publicity, and removal by the authority from executive and committee roles (and then subject to statutory and constitutional requirements).”

Awesome stuff. This development is on a site not listed as an interest!

[FLD]

Register of interests recently updated!

[jules_s]

Just a thought, does the applicant have a political leaning?

The whole situation seems so bent that (if they do) I'd be inclined to drop some shitty bombshells into the opposite party leader's inbox with a read receipt

Might not get you anywhere as they all feed from the same trough but it'd certainly make me feel better

[MAXR]

Planning consultant says I have no chance. Whilst it breaches planning he says the revised application will be approved as it is not within 20m of my house. He did say I could ask for conditions such as trees to screen it.

As a development to the whole situation the applicant / councilor came round and gave us some verbal. FFS!

I did think that the planners would regularise the development under amendments. It's far easier for them, it costs less money to police properly & far, far less time for their overworked staff.

Ive seen many departures from planning applications regularised in this way & have myself used this underhanded process to get what I want. I guess if you know planning well enough, you'll know the loop holes, know that it I should poor managed & that the councils planning is very under staffed.

You can take further steps, but they will be very costly & very unlikely to overturn the council's mind. The committee members would more than likely back the planners. Ultimately, if you escalated it to an appeal officer for judgement, I think he would back the planning officers, as it will be seen as a 'minor' deviation.

[davep24]

Trying to resolve this kind of thing at planning level is usually fruitless. You have to remember most of the people on the planning committee are only there to stop things being built or to get stuff they want building.

Now if you have compelling evidence that the vendor lied on the information pack, You certainly have a good case. In theory, if you can prove they lied, your contact with them is void and you can return the house to them and they have to refund all costs. In reality you could be compensated for the perceived reduction in value. This may be a contentious point as you paid for a property not a view.

Don't bother chasing after solicitors, again they look after each other and will tie things up for years costing you a fortune for not much.

[CHILL Gone DUTCH]

It will become a traveler sight very soon

Edited by CHILL Gone DUTCH, 18 July 2018 - 08:54 PM.

[FLD]

It will become a traveler sight very soon

I did consider inviting them. Lol.

[Ivor]

Thanks folks. The new application does show on the planning website as mentioned. Comments are welcome on that it won't change. I spoke to solicitor today and I do have a case against the vendor. This would involve evidencing the decrease in value of my house because of the barn. She estimated costs for this to be around 25k and suggested I live with it. There is also a claim against the searches company / solicitor for not finding this (it is directly opposite me!!). This will result in a return of fees rather than anything substantial. Still, might pay for a night out.

Thanks again for all the input.

I pursued a claim against a searches company ( incorrect water search) and got an award of £28k, cost me £1k solicitor fees, did the initial work myself including them admitting liability, used the solicitor to force payment

[Ivor]

If the vendor knew, and you can prove that, then you surely have a claim against the vendor, I'd speak to your conveyancing solicitor, as someone has suggested

[FLD]

So far I have explored the following....
1) Persuing the vendor for compensation. They are listed on the barn planning application as having been informed / consulted about it. They said no to being informed of any planning. There is obviously a mi-match here. I spoke to a solicitor about this. I have to prove loss of value to my house which is possible given that I recently bought it and I could get a new survey to prove the loss. Estimated costs for this were 25-30k with a low return on the loss in value.
2) Persuing the search company. Not sure who has liability here, the search co or the solicitor. I employed the solicitor and I suspect he sub-contracts the searches so my grievance is with the solicitor. Need to check this. The search company has a big disclaimer in the terms saying that the information provided may be inaccurate or incomplete and that it should be checked by the customer. I suspect the solicitor may have employed them on my behalf in which case id be fooked. I've asked another solicitor about this and I'm waiting to hear back.
3) chased the planning of the barn itself. There are several anomalies here in that the applicant is on the council and didn't declare a conflict of interest. The address of the application is wrong also; its listed as the owners house which is not next to, opposite or linked to the land where it's built. She is up the road from it. It's built in the wrong place also but the planning officer isn't interested in enforcing it. They have had to submit a change of position planning application which I will get to comment on. I suspect the best I can get is some planting to screen it from view.

I suspect I've generally been shat on. Bah!

[Ivor]

Doesn't the conveyancer do the planning checks not the search company, interesting that the search company has a disclaimer, makes you wonder what's the point, who are they?