Permitted Development, Certificate of Lawfulness

[DevilDamo]

I'm in the process of going through the PD route on behalf of a client of mine. We have been told the works will fall within PD and so I have advised the clients to obtain a Certificate of Lawfulness offically confirming that.

However, I was under the impression that the PD process was strictly "in-house" as in... neighbour consultations would not be sent out, but it appears they have done. So... what if a neighbour objects to works that fall within PD? Or... shouldn't the LA have notified anybody?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Err, that does seem a bit odd, so has it appeared on the planning register too then? Can't say as I've ever done one tbh but I'd be writing to the head of planning to understand their reasoning.

 

[jeds]

I've done a few in the past but can't remember if neighbours were consuled. The last one I was involved in though was for a client who wanted advice on a neighbouring application and that did come to their attention because of a consultation letter.

 

[DevilDamo]

The application has appeared on the council's Public Access system. That is how my client came across it as she's on there on a regular basis going through validated/decided planning applications.

I've emailed the case officer as I have been dealing with him on pre-application advice for this particular job so he should come back to me tomorrow. I just found it a bit odd because... with it being PD, nobody else but the council should have any say on the matter. This is the first CoL I have completed and I could be submitting a few more. I just don't want to be giving my clients misleading information in telling them it's purely an "in-house" consultation.

I'll see what he says about it tomorrow.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Tis par for the course that the council embarrass us on a regular basis!

 

[DevilDamo]

I have received an email back from the case officer...

We do notify neighbours and they cannot object on planning grounds only on whether the development is lawful or not.

If I knew the neighbours could object, then I wouldn't have submitted an application. Grrr!

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I have received an email back from the case officer...

We do notify neighbours and they cannot object on planning grounds only on whether the development is lawful or not.

If I knew the neighbours could object, then I wouldn't have submitted an application. Grrr!

I had a feeling that's what they would say, but I still don't understand, the planners need a second opinion? Hope your gonna formally ask the planning chief, sounds like baloney to me!

I submitted an application that was received by the planners on 25th March, its still not been validated or even acknowledged because they're 'running behind' after me foolishly telling the client that that particular planning authority was quite an efficient one! Like I say, nothing like being embarrassed by the planners!

 

[DevilDamo]

I emailed them back...

So if the neighbours object justifying why the proposed development isn't lawful, then this could have a major impact on the LPA's decision? If I knew that, I/we wouldn't have gone through the process of submitting an application.

And they have replied...

I’m not sure why you’re so concerned, the proposal is either lawful or not lawful.

I'm not sure if I fully understand this lawful business. I have been informally told by this case officer that our proposals fall within PD. But I was under the impression to have this officially confirmed, I'd have to apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness... but it looks like... that could be refused... even though I have proved it's under the PD allowances

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

No, surely as the planners say it will either fall under PD or it won't. I cannot see that even if the neighbours objected, it could be refused if it conforms with the PD rules. Yet I think it would be worth finding out why the neighbours are given the opportunity to comment? You're getting a typical council employee response, this is why I think you should talk to someone with some weight ie Chief Planner.

 

[peca27]

I would agree.

If it's within the PD guidlines, it's gnerally allowable. Doesn't matter if Mr & Mrs X get a bit upset.

The PD guidlines have been approved nationally, therefore if they come back with a refusal based upon an upset neighbour you would have strong grounds to pursue.

I've had it before on 'normal' planning applications, neighbours effing + blinding etc......but the planners have approved it as it was within the rules. If the neighbour has a legitimate concern, fair enough + I'd do something about it. But if he's just pi**ed off because his neighbour is getting an extension done.......that's not good enough for the LA planners.

The rules are the rules, would be interested to see how this plays out.

 

[DevilDamo]

Tell me about it!

The clients had previously submitted a full planning application for these works, which was subsequently refused on the basis of overlooking/privacy, etc... I have then made some changes to the drawings (as the previous was carried out by an incompetent architect), which the case officer was happy with as it brought the proposals within the clients' PD rights.

I can understand there would be problems if somebody applied for planning approval on somebody else's land or a right of way, etc... as that wouldn't be classed as "lawful" but something like this... I just find bizarre. I just "hope" the LPA approve it because otherwise... I will not be in the clients' good books.

 

[DevilDamo]

After requesting some further (laymans) information, the case officer replied to me with...

I think the important thing to note about Certificate’s of lawfulness for proposed developments’ is that neighbours can only object to the application on grounds of whether the development is lawful or not. i.e. whether the development falls within the General Permitted Development Order.

If neighbours object on such grounds as overlooking, loss of light or any other material planning consideration, then these cannot be taken into consideration when determining the application.

From experience, objectors very rarely manage to think anything that the Council have not already thought of but we still have an obligation to notify them. In the unlikely event that they do, I will let you know as soon as possible.

The advantage of getting a certificate of lawfulness is that should your client move home and a solicitor asks whether a development has planning permission, then she will have the Council’s formal opinion to show them straight away and this would not hold up the move whilst she submits a Certificate of Lawfulness for an existing development.

That makes a little more sense However, I will keep you updated on progress with this application.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I still don't get it at all. I still want to know why they have an obligation to notify the neighbours. It seems pointless.

 

[garyo]

Perhaps the planners think the neighbours might submit information that affects the lawfulness - e.g. "they're misprepresented this boundary" or "they already have an extension" etc

Obviously this is more significant in the planners don't do on site surveys for permitted development applications - perhaps the lazy ones don't?

Gary

 

[DevilDamo]

I have come across a similar statement on various websites...

In particular local authorities need to notify occupiers and neighbours of sites which are the subject of certain proposals. The obligation to notify depends upon the proposal having a significant effect on the site in terms of its use or amenity and notification needs to be given to owners and occupiers of the land affected and neighbours. Local authorities also now have the obligation of giving out specific "neighbour notification" in terms of application for planning permission.

One of my colleagues then stated... well the LA do not "always" notify neigbours on new applications. Is that correct?