need help with planning

[munchingB]

i would name and shame the people in the planning department in your local newspaper.

could your local authority be after a fine perhaps?

find a local journalist-people love sob stories and hate to think of animals without homes so you might gain some public support and the council will have to be accountable to someone.

i would also get on to the local rspca office and say that your animals are at risk due to some nonsensical uncooperative administrator.

create a storm and then take the local authority to court.

i would be suing them already were they causing me stress for some unknown reason.

seriously stick it to them!

 

[cjard]

Couple of things:

Permitted Development/building sheds (in mainland UK) only applies to the curtilage of a dwelling house, which might not necessarily be all the land a house owns/looks like a garden. It wouldn't be reasonable to assert that a farmhouse on a hundred acres has a 100 acre curtilage and 50% of it can be covered with sheds. Be certain that they cannot attack you from this angle
http://planninglawblog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/curtilage-confusion.html


Other thing - why get so stressed about this? The council write a couple of letters threatening enforcement and you've engaged 9 architects and a solicitor, sit up at night wringing your hands with worry and screwing yourself to the ground, asking questions like whether you should apply for this, apply for that and questioning over and over what you've done wrong because after all you MUST have done wrong because the council said so, hm?
Currently you're certain that you're in the right; fire off one letter asking what you've done wrong, with a reminder that if you're not furnished with that information and merely stonewalled further you'll make a formal complaint about the attitude of the council and await a visit from an enforcement officer so he can tell you what you've done wrong..
And if he won't tell you, make a complaint about him and await your court date. At some point, someone is going to have to tell you what they think you've done. This wouldn't been the first time planners have led the layman's dreams astray because of an ulterior motive

Any letters you do write, keep them simple, emotionless and direct. Don't question and second third fourth guess what you think they think you did wrong. Don't make it a verbose ranting or pleading - a few simple sentences that convey the exact bullet points of your argument and imply that you've got better things to do with your time than supplying them with verbiage will be fine..

"Innocent until proven guilty"
"Least said soonest mended"

 

[munchingB]

..and then kick him square in the nuts!

 

[suity]

Hahaha, thanks guys. That's some great advice and some good ideas.

Cjard - Thanks for the point about the curtilage of the property, thankfully I have checked and my large back garden is a direct part of the domestic property.

You set my mind at ease a bit and put things into perspective. There are many reasons why this is getting to me. The main one is that this is my elderly grandmother's property, who gave me her blessing to live in this home and keep my animals in the back garden. I stupidly told that to the planning office, and the lovely folk down there used that as ammunition, explaining that the enforcement notice would be issued against her as well as me, and that she also would have to go to court. It would kill me if she had to get involved in this. And secondly, I have spent my life savings on this move, if they get their way I will have nothing left and nowhere else to go.

My solicitor advised one more letter from my architect and if that doesn't work he would write me a strongly worded one. Would it be too much to include in this letter that I have already started the formal complaints procedure, and that if this harassment does not stop I will be contacting the ombudsman, the local papers, claiming back my costs AND potentially filing a law suit against them?

 

[cjard]

If your solicitor is going to write that letter, I'd let him decide. My personal style would be not to list everywhere I'd turn, but merely to say that I was prepared to exhaust every available means of public and legal forum in bringing the council to account if this unwarranted harassment does not cease - let their imaginations (if they have any) conclude how many courts, newpaper and letter writing campaigns that includes

Given that it's your grandmother's house, has she willed the house to you? Or if she dies might you find it up for sale and being split X ways? I'm not sure of the tax implications if she gives you the house now - I was once told "if you can afford to give it away you can afford to pay the tax on it" from an accountant who was cynical for his young age .. but my vote would be, if grandma is prepared to let you live in he house, she should really consider making it yours now (which takes the heat off her) while she's alive to prove her soundness of mind and can resolve any arguments such a gifting may cause - wills can be changed. Either that or keep her fully appraised of the council's threatenings - old people in my experience have much more hardened resolves than they might first be given credit for. Of course, you know your family better than I, but she might enjoy a day out to tell some beak to get stuffed

Seek professional advice on the tax issue if you decide to change the house ownership

 

[suity]

Thanks again cjard, you are right and that does sound like a better way of explaining what I just might do.

The house has been willed to my mum. It's a family matter that has been discussed to great extent as we are aware something awful could happen if she passes away and the process wasn't sorted out properly. My understanding is that everything is sorted and we should be fine. I appreciate the advice/concern

 

[suity]

I just seen your edit. Hahaha you are completely right, what a powerful lady my gran is and I am sure if the time comes she will put people in their place. However, I absolutely want to avoid that if it is possible. She is so happy that I am in this house, enjoying it and looking after it. At this point, I don't want to make her upset by telling her we're having trouble.

 

[blueboy2001]

If I were in your position, I'd sit tight and wait for the enforcement notice. By law, that will have to state what the breach is and give you reasonable time to comply (usually at least 3 months).

Nothing can happen to you until you fail to comply with a notice, and then the Council could seek to prosecute you to the Magistrates Court.

You can appeal the notice, and all action will then stop until the appeal is determined.

I think the issue here is not so much the sheds and their dimensions, but rather whether your animal collection can be considered incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse. From the pictures, it does look akin to a small zoo! There is case law in this area, most notably the Wallington case:

Wallington v Secretary of State for Wales and Montgomeryshire DC. This establishes that a test of objective reasonableness should be applied in determining whether a particular use or activity should be regarded as being incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse as such. In that case, although it was acknowledged that Dr Wallington kept dogs as a hobby, it was held that the number of dogs involved (over 40) was so extraordinary that it resulted in an alteration to the character of the residential use to the extent that a material change of use requiring planning permission had occurred.

If it gets to that stage, you are really in the hands of the Inspector at appeal to determine whether he or she thinks your collection is extraordinary and changes the character of the residential use.

If you are going to seek legal advice on this, don't waste your money on a general solicitor. You need to find a planning specialist, and the good ones do planning and nothing else - but there aren't many around, or get your general solicitor to instruct a good planning barrister - but that'll get expensive very quickly. I'm not sure the legal route will do you much good, it'll be a written reps appeal which you can easily prepare yourself and you'll be arguing a single point of law. The Inspector will make their own mind up.

 

[suity]

Hi blueboy, thanks for your reply.

I've received another letter this morning, after I sent them a letter demanding answers. They ignored all of my specific questions, and also ignored my request for a meeting, they have also changed their story and now state that I am running an 'animal shelter'.

Here is a section from their letter:

'although not for profit, the scale of the animal shelter is not domestic and accordingly requires planning permission...

... Enforcement action will now proceed unless a written statement is received with a timeframe to cease use as an animal shelter and to remove the associated structures...'

Okay, so we have a bit more information to work with now. Never before has the words 'animal shelter' been used by the department, but they are now saying that is the reason why this is not domestic. I do not run an animal shelter, I just want to enjoy my pets in my own back garden.

I intend to write to them, explaining that I do not run an animal shelter, and therefore the use of being an animal shelter is 'ceased' (since it was never happening in the first place).

So my question is this. If the non-domestic 'use' of a garden shed ceases (or was never used for that use in the first place), that garden shed obviously reverts back to being 'domestic', do the department still have authority to enforce you to remove that garden shed?

I hope that scenario makes sense, thanks everyone.

 

[munchingB]

i would advise your council that when they take you to court that they had better have some good proof that you are running a shelter....then go on to accuse them that they are running a brothel...but you have yet to gather evidence : )

 

[suity]

i would advise your council that when they take you to court that they had better have some good proof that you are running a shelter....then go on to accuse them that they are running a brothel...but you have yet to gather evidence : )

Hahaha, very tempting, if only it were that easy! I do wonder what 'evidence' they have to support their claims though.

Let me rephrase my previous question in another way:

Lets say someone has a nice big garden and they want to start a small catering business, so they erect a small garden shed in their back garden without planning permission and they kit it out with ovens and start baking cakes to be sold.
The planners get wind of this and tell the person that they need planning permission for what they are doing or they need to cease the non-domestic use immediately. The person complies and ceases the use, and the shed goes back to being domestic. Is the shed now permitted development or do the planning department still have authority to enforce it's removal?

 

[cjard]

The idea is that the shed exists for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house. The issue was never with the presence of the shed but with what was being done in it. Cakes are a business, billiard room for the kids is incidental enjoyment

 

[suity]

The idea is that the shed exists for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house. The issue was never with the presence of the shed but with what was being done in it. Cakes are a business, billiard room for the kids is incidental enjoyment

Thanks, that's what I thought.

So I asked them for specifics of why my sheds were non-domestic. They explained that they believed my sheds were for the purpose of of an animal shelter. I have now told them that I am not running an animal shelter and the sheds are for my own personal pets, therefore incidental.

In theory, now that I've explained I am not using the sheds for the non-domestic use of an animal shelter, they now have no authority to enforce their removal?

 

[noseall]

In theory, now that I've explained I am not using the sheds for the non-domestic use of an animal shelter, they now have no authority to enforce their removal?

Do you think a simple explanation from the 'offender' would be enough, or do you think mebbe the council have heard it all before?

They may like to draw their own clandestine conclusions.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

They can draw whatever conclusions and inferences they like. ATEOTD they will have to prove them correct in a court of law, and as this is a criminal matter they will have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.