Rear extension on Neighbour scheme refused

[tony1851]

Brass neck.... you must be a notherner. Calling me out.... next you’ll be taking me on the JK show.
I think receiving an email 1 hour before the last working day is over takes the pi ss, so yeah I was going to say I’ve not seen it. Who really cares because they certainly don’t when it comes to bull shi ting.
I’m not fussed about it being Justice because it’s clearly not allowed what I require. Just don’t send me an email saying it is, wait all 42 days to tell me it isn’t..... Yeah so for that reason I couldn’t care less about lying.

Long story short, she admits she was wrong and if I submit a new full plans application it’s going through.

Thanks for guiding me down the Moral highway though.

Not getting involved in this morality issue, but for your own sake you need to beware of the legalities. I agree that the council has been negligent in the advice you were given initially, and that they have slyly got their refusal in at the last minute. But even if you could prove legally that they had not given you notice within the 42-day period, that in itself does not trump the fact that if you built the extension as you propose, it would be unlawful; the council would be in a position to take enforcement proceedings against you.
The problem with the neighbour consultation scheme is that the council is not being formally asked to judge whether a proposal is in fact permitted development or not. If no neighbour objects and the council approves a proposal on the basis of information submitted, and which later transpires to be not p.d. in the first place, then the development is unlawful.

 

[Leofric]

The problem with the neighbour consultation scheme is that the council is not being formally asked to judge whether a proposal is in fact permitted development or not. If no neighbour objects and the council approves a proposal on the basis of information submitted, and which later transpires to be not p.d. in the first place, then the development is unlawful.

Yes, an unsatisfactory system in my opinion.

 

[wessex101]

The problem with the neighbour consultation scheme is that the council is not being formally asked to judge whether a proposal is in fact permitted development or not. If no neighbour objects and the council approves a proposal on the basis of information submitted, and which later transpires to be not p.d. in the first place, then the development is unlawful.

But surely that is exactly what the Planners did do in this case. There is no mention of neighbours objecting just the Planners said it isn't PD because it projects beyond a side elevation and is more than half the width of the house.

 

[tony1851]

But surely that is exactly what the Planners did do in this case. There is no mention of neighbours objecting just the Planners said it isn't PD because it projects beyond a side elevation and is more than half the width of the house.

Yes, I agree, and that is what I said in my first paragraph.
In my second, shorter, paragraph I was writing in more general terms having had bitter experience of a similar issue with a LPA.

 

[wessex101]

Yes, I agree, and that is what I said in my first paragraph.
In my second, shorter, paragraph I was writing in more general terms having had bitter experience of a similar issue with a LPA.

Fair point. I haven't done many of these thankfully so I'm still a bit vague on some of the technical points. I happened to be looking at one I did back in 2014 and never really noticed this note before.....
"It is important to note that this written notice doesn’t indicate whether or not the proposed development would comply with any of the other limitations or conditions of Schedule 2 Part 1 Class A. If you want confirmation that the proposed development would be lawful (e.g. on the basis that it would comply with all of the limitations and conditions of Schedule 2 Part 1 Class A), then you should submit an (optional) application to the local planning authority for a Lawful Development Certificate (LDC)."

At the time I was trying to be clever and thought I could get a raised deck "approved" by lumping it in with the extension. Clearly that wouldn't have worked but we are outside the 4 years now so hopefully I got away with it. Oh and on this one I clearly showed an existing small rear projection on the back of the house so technically they should have rejected it.

 

[Notch7]

I seem to recall doing a job where this happened -I applied for a neighbourhood consulation, which was approved, then had to apply for LDC.

It was a few years ago, but that's what I think happened......

Seemed bizarre at the time.

 

[Nakajo]

I clearly showed an existing small rear projection on the back of the house so technically they should have rejected it.

The technical guidance was only amended in 2016 (I think), so while it may have been a breach according to the TCPA, the LPA would have been unlikely to have picked up on it.

 

[wessex101]

I clearly showed an existing small rear projection on the back of the house so technically they should have rejected it.

The technical guidance was only amended in 2016 (I think), so while it may have been a breach according to the TCPA, the LPA would have been unlikely to have picked up on it.

No because it was technically beyond a side elevation and more than half the width of the house, that old chestnut.

 

[noseall]

Thanks for guiding me down the Moral highway though.

Much needed too.

 

[Leofric]

I have had less trouble just applying for planning permission for house extensions than all this carry on seems to be