Hello, we've received a letter outlining a breach of condition regarding planning that was taken out 2 years prior to us buying the property.
In a nutshell:
Before we bought the house, the owner obtained planning permission to build a dwelling on the land belonging to his existing property. One of the conditions for the new build was that both properties were to have on site parking in the form of a shared drive leading up to individual garages.
He then sold the piece of land where the new property was to be built. The house was built by the buyer who followed the plans, but only on his property and land and not on the neighbouring property (Our house), which was to also have alterations as detailed in the planning (driveway & garage). Before the new house was completed the owner of the original property sold it to us, and we have lived here for nearly two years before receiving this letter from the council.
Our reply to the letter was;
"Dear Ms XXX,
We have received your letter regarding the above alleged breach of planning condition.
At the time the planning permission was granted the property of 22 Main Street was owned by Mr XX. He sought planning permission to build a second dwelling on the garden of 22 Main Street as detailed in the permitted plan.
However, after having permission granted, he sold off part of that land, now called 22A Main Street. The builder that bought that land built the house as described in the plans, but as he was not the owner of 22 Main street, he did not carry out the remainder of the plan, to erect garages and access at 22 Main Street. I do not understand how the planning permission could still have been applicable when the builder didn't own part of the land to which the plans referred.
Our seller did not build that garage or access on 22 Main Street, and he subsequently sold the property to us shortly before 22A was completed. Our solicitor did not express any requirement for us to carry out the part of the plans that fell on our land.
I would like you to clarify the legal position here. As far as I can see, the builder chose to carry out the part of an approved plan that fell on his land but not the part of the plan that required there to be garage and access to 22 Main Street (Impossible, as he didn't even own the land). This letter suggests that because he chose to do that, we are now obligated to build something on our land? Because somebody moved into that house? I cannot understand how we can be legally obligated to do so? Surely the planning permission became null and void as soon as the land was divided?
I do hope that I have managed to communicate the situation effectively. It may be helpful for me to explain this over the phone or in person. Please can you get back to me as soon as possible regarding the legality of this situation? It is, of course, a little worrying to be suddenly told that we must lose part of our land and finance a building project just because the builder on the adjacent land decided to build something.
Kind Regards
X"
The reply we received just basically asked that we meet and talk about how we'll meet these conditions.
The conditions clearly stated that the new dwelling can only come into use when all of the planning conditions are met, so as they have not been met and if we refuse to have work carried out will it effect us or the people in the new dwelling (they have been living there for a year now)?
Ps. The plans for our property are horrendeous, a complete afterthought to the new dwelling. Even though we have to give the neighbours access to their garage via our driveway, the plans show that half the length of our garden would be turned into a drive with bits of land rendered useless around it.
Any help appreciated, thank you!
In a nutshell:
Before we bought the house, the owner obtained planning permission to build a dwelling on the land belonging to his existing property. One of the conditions for the new build was that both properties were to have on site parking in the form of a shared drive leading up to individual garages.
He then sold the piece of land where the new property was to be built. The house was built by the buyer who followed the plans, but only on his property and land and not on the neighbouring property (Our house), which was to also have alterations as detailed in the planning (driveway & garage). Before the new house was completed the owner of the original property sold it to us, and we have lived here for nearly two years before receiving this letter from the council.
Our reply to the letter was;
"Dear Ms XXX,
We have received your letter regarding the above alleged breach of planning condition.
At the time the planning permission was granted the property of 22 Main Street was owned by Mr XX. He sought planning permission to build a second dwelling on the garden of 22 Main Street as detailed in the permitted plan.
However, after having permission granted, he sold off part of that land, now called 22A Main Street. The builder that bought that land built the house as described in the plans, but as he was not the owner of 22 Main street, he did not carry out the remainder of the plan, to erect garages and access at 22 Main Street. I do not understand how the planning permission could still have been applicable when the builder didn't own part of the land to which the plans referred.
Our seller did not build that garage or access on 22 Main Street, and he subsequently sold the property to us shortly before 22A was completed. Our solicitor did not express any requirement for us to carry out the part of the plans that fell on our land.
I would like you to clarify the legal position here. As far as I can see, the builder chose to carry out the part of an approved plan that fell on his land but not the part of the plan that required there to be garage and access to 22 Main Street (Impossible, as he didn't even own the land). This letter suggests that because he chose to do that, we are now obligated to build something on our land? Because somebody moved into that house? I cannot understand how we can be legally obligated to do so? Surely the planning permission became null and void as soon as the land was divided?
I do hope that I have managed to communicate the situation effectively. It may be helpful for me to explain this over the phone or in person. Please can you get back to me as soon as possible regarding the legality of this situation? It is, of course, a little worrying to be suddenly told that we must lose part of our land and finance a building project just because the builder on the adjacent land decided to build something.
Kind Regards
X"
The reply we received just basically asked that we meet and talk about how we'll meet these conditions.
The conditions clearly stated that the new dwelling can only come into use when all of the planning conditions are met, so as they have not been met and if we refuse to have work carried out will it effect us or the people in the new dwelling (they have been living there for a year now)?
Ps. The plans for our property are horrendeous, a complete afterthought to the new dwelling. Even though we have to give the neighbours access to their garage via our driveway, the plans show that half the length of our garden would be turned into a drive with bits of land rendered useless around it.
Any help appreciated, thank you!