The Caravan Act, yeah right.

Sponsored Links

Interesting one. Seems to me there wouldn’t have been any issues if they’d have just built what had been approved.

Not really a mobile home is it? Not like the park homes you see dotted about the place. I doubt very much it was brought to site in two halves, craned into position, and bolted together like many park homes are. Looks much more like it’s simply a timber framed house. The panels were probably shop produced and brought to site in sections, but what they effectively seem to be doing is calling it a temporary moveable space to circumvent planning law, which it clearly isn’t.

They also seem to be implying that building it “on a plinth” somehow makes it a caravan :rolleyes:. Pretty much every timber framed building is built on a masonry plinth to DPC level, otherwise, well, it’s going to rot, isn’t it?

If it’s truly “moveable”, then it isn’t going to cost them £60k to have it demolished. Stick an advert on eBay - buyer arranges dismantling and transport, it’ll be gone in no time.

There is a possibility that they have been badly advised by the supplier of the building, but I bet there will be something in their Ts and Cs that states it is the buyer’s responsibility to comply with all permissions and restrictions.

The article also states that they got retrospective planning permission to convert the garage in 2018. That implies that the garage had already been converted, which I can only assume it hadn’t been as if that were the case why then build a timber frame home?

Furthermore, they are apparently paying a mortgage on it. As you can’t get mortgages on mobile homes they either aren’t paying a mortgage, or the mortgage company is satisfied it’s actually a fully fledged timber framed house.

So many questionable statements in this article it’s hard to feel sorry for them. Even if their neighbours have no objections councils really don’t like to allow precedents to be set and often tend to come down hard on people who ignore or try to bend the rules.

Man Jailed For Refusing to Demolish Man Cave
There seems to be a discrepancy between what they claimed in the LDC application and what the sensationalist newspaper report says.

In the application they go to great lengths to say it will not be a self contained dwelling and that it will just be ancillary accommodation to provide an extra bedroom. Then in the newspaper article they claim their "home" is going to be demolished?

They can't have it both ways.
Sponsored Links
" As you can’t get mortgages on mobile homes they either aren’t paying a mortgage, or the mortgage company is satisfied it’s actually a fully fledged timber framed house."

I think that's because most are park homes so the owners don't own the land it's sitting on. This situation is apparently different - parents' land?
They've got permission for one thing, decided that they don't want to pay for it, so have chanced it and tried to cheat the system, and then hoped for a public "backlash" (which seems to be the hip word nowadays) to help get what they want, not follow the rules what the rest of us have to.
Typical report, full of inconsistencies, untruths, half-truths and laced with the usual sympathy devices. "homeless by Christmas", "financial ruin", "honest held belief". Oh well, that's ok then, why didn't you say that earlier. As Ronny said, if it's mobile, they can just move it. Nothing lost. I note John, along the road, thought it was "tasteful". Do they not do eye tests in Solihull?
Whenever I see a photo of people with arms crossed I usually make immediate gut feel assumptions.............

........ my gut has served me well through life :giggle:

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.

Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

Sponsored Links