No planning permission for outbuildings of house i'm buying

[mooch]

I've discovered that the house we're buying does not have planning permission for a car port and brick shed built about 20 years ago.

We know that in 1992, the owners applied and were granted planning permission for a detached garage next to their existing garage to the side elevation of the property.

However that is not what was built. Rather than build the approved garage the owner himself built a carport and brick shed which are attached by a side entrance to the existing garage.

I've sketched out the original, proposed and existing plans which hopefully should make it clear.


Front view - Original Plan

Front Original Plan

• mooch
• 10 Apr 2013
• 1

Front view - Proposed Detached Garage

Front Proposed Plan

• mooch
• 10 Apr 2013
• 1

Front view - Actual Existing Carport and Shed

Front Existing Plan

• mooch
• 10 Apr 2013
• 1

Topdown view - Original Plan

Top Original Plan

• mooch
• 10 Apr 2013
• 1

Topdown view - Proposed Detached Garage

Top Proposed Plan

• mooch
• 10 Apr 2013
• 1

Topdown view - Actual Existing Carport and Shed

Top Existing Plan

• mooch
• 10 Apr 2013
• 1

All diagrams

Untitled

• mooch
• 10 Apr 2013
• 1

I've tried to use http://www.planningportal.gov.uk to determine whether the buildings needed planning permission or were permitted development.

The property is sold as a deceased estate and the vendors (the children) have been asked via solicitors why the actual buildings differ from the proposed detached garage. I am waiting to hear back from them.

Much of the information I know about the property is from the neighbours who I know and who lived there prior to the work being done.

The outer walls of the shed replaced a fence that was probably about 6ft. Although a fence was replaced I assume the shed walls will fall under the rules for outbuildings rather than garden walls.

The rules for outbuildings state that :

"Maximum height of 2.5 metres in the case of a building, enclosure or container within two metres of a boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse."

The far wall of the shed is on the edge of the neighbour's drive/property, so I believe the 2.5 metre max height applies. This height of the wall varies because the ground is raised in areas but it definitely exceeds 2.5m in places - e.g. it is 2.77m at the front of the car port.

I'd appreciate any opinions as to whether as I believe the buildings do not qualify as permitted development and if so what the implication is for us buying the property.

I am told by our solicitor that we can either seek evidence that the building is over 10 years old or get indemnity insurance, but I am concerned this would not be sufficient if we later want to make alterations to the outbuildings. For instance were hoping to change the metal gates on the car port to a solid door or wall to make that area safer for visiting grandkids. I am worried that submitting an new plans would bring the existing buildings under scrutiny and invalidate any indemnity.

Any advice much appreciated.

 

[mattylad]

Get written statements from the vendors on the time that they have been there also get them to buy you the indemnity policy.

They are the ones selling.

 

[masona]

I'm not sure but don't quote me on this, I have built a big summerhouse and outbuilding slightly over the building regs and when asked by the BCO, I told them I built it 17 yrs ago, they said there's nothing we can do about it anyway as it's over 10 yrs I think, someone might know more about this

 

[tony1851]

After all this time it's not a problem.
Four years is the time-limit; there is nothing to worry about, regardless of how big the structure is, or it not being built according to plans.
Don't know why this figure of 10 years keeps cropping up; your solicitor should know better.

 

[Larchfield]

Tony (above) is spot on.

4 years is the limit for punitive action in respect of planning law, irrespective of the size/style of the development.

I've just bought my grandparents' house. My grandad built a 3x3m extension to the side/rear of the property in 1985. I asked the same questions of my solicior. He told me not to be concerned.

Seriously, this is NOT an issue, not least because a carport doesn't usually require planning permission anyway.

 

[mooch]

Thanks for the advice.

It being only a 4 year time limit, I think it would be pretty easy for us to get signed statements from the neighbours to attest that it has been there over 4 years.

I am more concerned with the consequences if we wished to alter the buildings. At the moment the car port is not very useful to us, so we may well wish to change that to block up the entrance and possibly make it a more habitable structure.

If we were to submit plans for alterations would they be viewed as completely new plans as the buildings never had any plans submitted or approved. In which case would issues like the height and proximity to neighbours come into question.

I know this is a lot of 'what ifs' but I thought I should get an idea before proceeding.

 

[tony1851]

The fact that the orignal development was unlawful has no bearing. If you submitted a planning application showing your proposals, it will be treated as a normal, new application and judged on purely planning grounds.

They can't 'punish' you by saying 'we're not going to give you planning permission because the rules were broken previously'.

 

[^woody^]

Don't know why this figure of 10 years keeps cropping up; your solicitor should know better.

Because there is a four and ten year period, depending on the the type of breach of planning control

 

[tony1851]

Don't know why this figure of 10 years keeps cropping up; your solicitor should know better.

Because there is a four and ten year period, depending on the the type of breach of planning control

In the OPs case, why should it be other than 4 years? Didn't suggest a change of use.

 

[^woody^]

The ten year limit can apply to several situations other than change of use. Many people get caught out when applying for a LDC in year five!

 

[mooch]

The fact that the orignal development was unlawful has no bearing. If you submitted a planning application showing your proposals, it will be treated as a normal, new application and judged on purely planning grounds.

They can't 'punish' you by saying 'we're not going to give you planning permission because the rules were broken previously'.

Thanks. I'm not really concerned about being 'punished', though I get what you're saying.

My concern is that any new plans would be treated as a new application, rather than based on an approved/permitted structure.

I've spoken at length to the adjoining neighbours about the buildings and they said that at the time, they were under the impression that a new garage was going to be built. They were then asked if it was okay to change the fence to a brick wall.

They said okay, and then the owners proceeded to build the shed and car port, with walls higher than the original fence.

If they had known that it was not approved or permitted, they may well have objected.

Now 20 years later, if we were to submit new plans, I think they would be well within their rights to object to the new plans which would incorporate the existing buildings (which exceed permitted development).

In this instance 4 or 10 years wouldn't make much difference as its in an area where lots of neighbours could attest to being more than 10 years.