A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their drive
that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
I don't suppose there are many councillors here, but can a councillor genuinely claim they cannot intervene once the court process has
started? Is there a procedure or set of rules this councillor is following?
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their drive
that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a >Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
I don't suppose there are many councillors here, but can a councillor >genuinely claim they cannot intervene once the court process has
started? Is there a procedure or set of rules this councillor is following?
If the landowner has lodged a formal appeal to the magistrates, then yes,
the court process is in train and there is no mechanism for a councillor to intervene. The only way that an appeal can be pre-empted is if the LPA reaches an agreed resolution with the landowner prior to the court hearing. So yes, your colleague can either take his chances in front of the bench, or he can try to negotiate with the council. It's gone past the point at which his councillor can help him.
[1] If a landowner fails to comply with a Section 215 notice either in full or by means of an agreed compromise, and does not successfully appeal
against it, the Local Planning Authority can either prosecute for non-compliance, or send in their own staff to do the clean-up themselves. If they take the latter option, they can subsequently send the bill to the landowner, and if it remains unpaid then they can pursue the debt through
the courts.
On 14/02/2024 14:58, Mark Goodge wrote:
If the landowner has lodged a formal appeal to the magistrates, then yes,
the court process is in train and there is no mechanism for a councillor to >> intervene. The only way that an appeal can be pre-empted is if the LPA
reaches an agreed resolution with the landowner prior to the court hearing. >> So yes, your colleague can either take his chances in front of the bench, or >> he can try to negotiate with the council. It's gone past the point at which >> his councillor can help him.
I'm slightly perplexed by that last sentence. The obvious way to deal
with this is through negotiation. Why can't the councillor assist the >landowner with this?
It's possible, for example, that the landowner has tried to discuss this
with the planners, but they have been too busy to do that. Or, he may
have put forward proposals that he feels have not been given adequate >consideration.
Mind you, the OP says the landowner was 'quite robust', so maybe the
planners perfectly reasonably don't want to sit down and discuss things
with him, in case he's 'quite robust' again. :)
[1] If a landowner fails to comply with a Section 215 notice either in full >> or by means of an agreed compromise, and does not successfully appeal
against it, the Local Planning Authority can either prosecute for
non-compliance, or send in their own staff to do the clean-up themselves. If >> they take the latter option, they can subsequently send the bill to the
landowner, and if it remains unpaid then they can pursue the debt through
the courts.
Would the scrap value of the vehicle cover the cost of collecting it?
On 14/02/2024 13:18, Fredxx wrote:
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their
drive that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a
Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
Why do you expect a councillor to help your friend keep an immobile
derelict rusting eyesore in his front garden? If he did this then all
the neighbours would be on *his* back. It is most unlikely that planning actually noticed this - they will be acting on information received.
I don't suppose there are many councillors here, but can a councillor
genuinely claim they cannot intervene once the court process has
started? Is there a procedure or set of rules this councillor is
following?
I don't see why not. Seems to me the council is acting in the best
interests of the general public here!
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 13:18:38 +0000, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> wrote:
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their drive
that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
For the benefit of bystanders, a Section 215 notice is an enforcement order issued by a Local Planning Authority (LPA) under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, instructing the landowner to clean up untidy land that is causing a nuisance to neighbouring properties.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a
Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
I don't suppose there are many councillors here, but can a councillor
genuinely claim they cannot intervene once the court process has
started? Is there a procedure or set of rules this councillor is following?
If the landowner has lodged a formal appeal to the magistrates, then yes,
the court process is in train and there is no mechanism for a councillor to intervene. The only way that an appeal can be pre-empted is if the LPA reaches an agreed resolution with the landowner prior to the court hearing. So yes, your colleague can either take his chances in front of the bench, or he can try to negotiate with the council. It's gone past the point at which his councillor can help him.
Once issued, the only possible resolution of a Section 215 notice is either through compliance, a sucessful appeal, prosecution for non-compliance
(which may fail, of course) or direct action[1] by the LPA. But compliance
is subject to negotiation - for example, a landowner may suggest that, although it's impractical for him to comply right now, he will set a binding timescale for compliance in the future when it is practical. Or, the landowner might say that a complete clean-up is beyond his means, but he
will at least do enough to make it tolerable. And the LPA may well accept such a proposal. Even if he has appealed against the notice, he can still render the appeal moot by reaching that agreement now.
It's also worth bearing in mind that a Section 215 notice is rarely issued out of the blue. The LPA will usually contact the landowner first, and ask him to deal with the problem, and only move to formal action if there's no mutually acceptable solution. Most Section 215 notices are issued following complaints by other residents, so early dialogue may well have given some insight into what those complaints were, and what would be enough to
persuade the complainants to withdraw.
Or, he can present a counter-argument
as to why the complaints are unreasonable. That's the point at which it
would help to involve his councillor, because the councillor will often be
in a position to mediate between him and the complainants. Leaving it until it's already waiting for the magistrates to decide is too late.
[1] If a landowner fails to comply with a Section 215 notice either in full or by means of an agreed compromise, and does not successfully appeal
against it, the Local Planning Authority can either prosecute for non-compliance, or send in their own staff to do the clean-up themselves. If they take the latter option, they can subsequently send the bill to the landowner, and if it remains unpaid then they can pursue the debt through
the courts.
Mark
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:41:37 +0000, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
On 14/02/2024 14:58, Mark Goodge wrote:
If the landowner has lodged a formal appeal to the magistrates, then yes, >>> the court process is in train and there is no mechanism for a councillor to >>> intervene. The only way that an appeal can be pre-empted is if the LPA
reaches an agreed resolution with the landowner prior to the court hearing. >>> So yes, your colleague can either take his chances in front of the bench, or
he can try to negotiate with the council. It's gone past the point at which >>> his councillor can help him.
I'm slightly perplexed by that last sentence. The obvious way to deal
with this is through negotiation. Why can't the councillor assist the
landowner with this?
The councillor can't intervene with the court. If the landowner is willing
to discuss it with the LPA, then the councillor can be a party to that.
But
the councillor can't act as an advocate for the landowner in any way. All that the councillor can do is offer advice, and maybe help the landowner to understand what the LPA wants. But the OP says that the councillor has already offered the only advice worth giving at this stage, which is to engage in discussion with the LPA. The implication of the OP's comments is that the landowner doesn't want to do this, he simply wants the councillor
to step in and make the problem go away. And the councillor can't do that.
It's possible, for example, that the landowner has tried to discuss this
with the planners, but they have been too busy to do that. Or, he may
have put forward proposals that he feels have not been given adequate
consideration.
It's not plausible that they've been too busy to communicate with him. Most of the initial contact will have been by ltter and/or email, rather than
face to face. If the planners are busy (which they usually are), then all that means is that it will take them longer to get round to answering an email or letter. They won't just ignore it, it will just start at the bottom of a big pile. And it may also mean that he has to wait some time for an appointment to have a meeting with them. But that's generally a good thing
if you're on the receiving end of something like this, because the longer it drags out the more chance you have to get something done without it needing to go to enforcement action.
Mind you, the OP says the landowner was 'quite robust', so maybe the
planners perfectly reasonably don't want to sit down and discuss things
with him, in case he's 'quite robust' again. :)
I don't think they'd refuse to sit down and discuss it with him. Enforcement officers are used to people thinking that being "robust" is a good way to
try to persuade them to drop a complaint.
[1] If a landowner fails to comply with a Section 215 notice either in full >>> or by means of an agreed compromise, and does not successfully appeal
against it, the Local Planning Authority can either prosecute for
non-compliance, or send in their own staff to do the clean-up themselves. If
they take the latter option, they can subsequently send the bill to the
landowner, and if it remains unpaid then they can pursue the debt through >>> the courts.
Would the scrap value of the vehicle cover the cost of collecting it?
Probably, yes. So the simplest solution would be for the landowner to phone
a scrap company and say "I've got a scrap car you can collect". It would be gone within a few days.
What's probably more of an issue is if the car has more than scrap value (or would have more than scrap value if restored to working order). In which case, the owner may well be reluctant to just dispose of it, particularly if his long-term plans are to restore it himself. The OP hasn't said what type of car it is, but it's one thing to scrap a clapped-out Vauxhall Astra and entirely another if it's a Triumph Stag.
On 14/02/2024 14:58, Mark Goodge wrote:
It's also worth bearing in mind that a Section 215 notice is rarely issued >> out of the blue. The LPA will usually contact the landowner first, and ask >> him to deal with the problem, and only move to formal action if there's no >> mutually acceptable solution. Most Section 215 notices are issued following >> complaints by other residents, so early dialogue may well have given some
insight into what those complaints were, and what would be enough to
persuade the complainants to withdraw.
The council claim there was no complaint, or not putting one forward.
They've quoted a case Berg v Salford City Council to justify acting on
their own volition.
Or, he can present a counter-argument
as to why the complaints are unreasonable. That's the point at which it
would help to involve his councillor, because the councillor will often be >> in a position to mediate between him and the complainants. Leaving it until >> it's already waiting for the magistrates to decide is too late.
This is now only 5 months after the serving of the 215.
The question I ask here, why is it too late? What can a councillor hide >behind so not to get involved. I've heard of a number of cases before
the courts where councillors get quite vocal.
On 14/02/2024 16:04, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:41:37 +0000, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote: >>
On 14/02/2024 14:58, Mark Goodge wrote:
If the landowner has lodged a formal appeal to the magistrates, then yes, >>>> the court process is in train and there is no mechanism for a councillor to
intervene. The only way that an appeal can be pre-empted is if the LPA >>>> reaches an agreed resolution with the landowner prior to the court hearing.
So yes, your colleague can either take his chances in front of the bench, or
he can try to negotiate with the council. It's gone past the point at which
his councillor can help him.
I'm slightly perplexed by that last sentence. The obvious way to deal
with this is through negotiation. Why can't the councillor assist the
landowner with this?
The councillor can't intervene with the court. If the landowner is willing >> to discuss it with the LPA, then the councillor can be a party to that.
The councillor says that is not something they can do. That they cannot
act a go between. Hence my question why not?
What's probably more of an issue is if the car has more than scrap value (or >> would have more than scrap value if restored to working order). In which
case, the owner may well be reluctant to just dispose of it, particularly if >> his long-term plans are to restore it himself. The OP hasn't said what type >> of car it is, but it's one thing to scrap a clapped-out Vauxhall Astra and >> entirely another if it's a Triumph Stag.
I am told the vehicle is of an historical nature, one that doesn't need
MOT or tax. It has family roots and sentiments and the intention is to
put in back into a roadworthy condition.
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:48:13 +0000, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> wrote:
On 14/02/2024 14:58, Mark Goodge wrote:
It's also worth bearing in mind that a Section 215 notice is rarely issued >>> out of the blue. The LPA will usually contact the landowner first, and ask >>> him to deal with the problem, and only move to formal action if there's no >>> mutually acceptable solution. Most Section 215 notices are issued following >>> complaints by other residents, so early dialogue may well have given some >>> insight into what those complaints were, and what would be enough to
persuade the complainants to withdraw.
The council claim there was no complaint, or not putting one forward.
They've quoted a case Berg v Salford City Council to justify acting on
their own volition.
That's not particularly common. But it's perfectly legitimate.
Or, he can present a counter-argument
as to why the complaints are unreasonable. That's the point at which it
would help to involve his councillor, because the councillor will often be >>> in a position to mediate between him and the complainants. Leaving it until >>> it's already waiting for the magistrates to decide is too late.
This is now only 5 months after the serving of the 215.
But it's also after he's appealed to the magistrates. He didn't need to do that. He could have entered into discussions in order to seek a resolution. And if he had been a bit more willing to discuss the matter, and a bit less "robust", as you call it, then the enforcement notice may not ever have been issued in the first place.
The question I ask here, why is it too late? What can a councillor hide
behind so not to get involved. I've heard of a number of cases before
the courts where councillors get quite vocal.
On the basis of what you've written here, I suspect that the councillor is
as pissed off with your colleague's attitude as the planning officers are.
If so, then there's nothing your colleague can do to change that, other than by backing down and agreeing to enter into realistic discussions with the
LPA with the aim of reaching a genuine compromise.
Mark
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to their council
planning department in regarding an old car on their drive that he admits hasn't moved
for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a Councillor. The
councillor has stated categorically that he cannot assist as the court process is in
train. She advised him to talk to planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words
indeed.
I don't suppose there are many councillors here, but can a councillor genuinely claim
they cannot intervene once the court process has started? Is there a procedure or set
of rules this councillor is following?
I am told the vehicle is of an historical nature, one that doesn't need
MOT or tax. It has family roots and sentiments and the intention is to
put in back into a roadworthy condition.
In that case, what he probably needs to do is rent a lock-up or similar
where he can keep the car pending restoration.
Mark
There's the rub. No complaint has been received.
The question I ask here, why is it too late? What can a councillor hide behind so not to get involved.
Surely just a car cover would be sufficient, then who knows what car isI am told the vehicle is of an historical nature, one that doesn't need
MOT or tax. It has family roots and sentiments and the intention is to
put in back into a roadworthy condition.
In that case, what he probably needs to do is rent a lock-up or similar
where he can keep the car pending restoration.
under there, and the council would have no grounds for complaint.
On 14 Feb 2024 at 21:54:14 GMT, "Mark Goodge" ><usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On the basis of what you've written here, I suspect that the councillor is >> as pissed off with your colleague's attitude as the planning officers are. >> If so, then there's nothing your colleague can do to change that, other than >> by backing down and agreeing to enter into realistic discussions with the
LPA with the aim of reaching a genuine compromise.
Is there any obligation on a councillor (not in this sub judice situation but >in general) to advocate for a constituent whose case the councillor believes >to be wholly unreasonable?
On 14/02/2024 15:42, Fredxx wrote:
There's the rub. No complaint has been received.
How would you know that?
On 14/02/2024 15:48, Fredxx wrote:
The question I ask here, why is it too late? What can a councillor
hide behind so not to get involved.
It's not necessary for a councillor to hide behind anything. He can
simply choose not to get involved.
You seem to think the councillor has a duty to side with his
constituent. Why do you think that?
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 10:13:31 +0000, Jeff <jeff@ukra.com> wrote:
Surely just a car cover would be sufficient, then who knows what car isI am told the vehicle is of an historical nature, one that doesn't need >>>> MOT or tax. It has family roots and sentiments and the intention is to >>>> put in back into a roadworthy condition.
In that case, what he probably needs to do is rent a lock-up or similar
where he can keep the car pending restoration.
under there, and the council would have no grounds for complaint.
That would quite possibly be an acceptable solution, too. But the landowner won't know that unless he's prepared to duscuss it with the LPA.
On 14/02/2024 14:22, Martin Brown wrote:
On 14/02/2024 13:18, Fredxx wrote:
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their
drive that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a
Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
Why do you expect a councillor to help your friend keep an immobile
derelict rusting eyesore in his front garden? If he did this then all
the neighbours would be on *his* back. It is most unlikely that
planning actually noticed this - they will be acting on information
received.
There's the rub. No complaint has been received. His neighbours are
happy with the vehicle being there. They've even written letters in
support for his appeal.
[SNIP]
On 14 Feb 2024 23:02:56 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 14 Feb 2024 at 21:54:14 GMT, "Mark Goodge"
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On the basis of what you've written here, I suspect that the councillor is >>> as pissed off with your colleague's attitude as the planning officers are. >>> If so, then there's nothing your colleague can do to change that, other than
by backing down and agreeing to enter into realistic discussions with the >>> LPA with the aim of reaching a genuine compromise.
Is there any obligation on a councillor (not in this sub judice situation but
in general) to advocate for a constituent whose case the councillor believes >> to be wholly unreasonable?
No, not at all. While a councillor should always be willing to discuss any issue with any resident, and offer whatever advice the councillor feels is appropriate, there is no obligation on the councillor to actively act as an advocate for a resident, even in a case where they think the resident has a valid point.
More generally, it's considered bad practice for a councillor to try to persuade officers to apply the rules differently for someone they've been in contact with, as compared with people who haven't spoken to their
councillor. A councillor can legitimately flag up situations where they believe that the officers have either made an error or are unaware of relevant facts. And where a decision is genuinely borderline, they are entitled to offer their opinion. But they can't ask for special treatment.
To give a real life example from my own experience, I was contacted by a resident in social housing who felt that they had been allocated unsuitable housing due to their disability. I contacted the housing officer, and discovered that the housing department had not been correctly informed of
the resident's disability. The housing officer, with the resident's permission, followed that up with the resident's GP and the outcome was that the resident was moved into a different, more appropriate priority group.
The last I heard was that they were happily living in a house which did meet their needs. But that wasn't because I had asked the housing officer to bend the rules or treat the resident differently, it was because I had asked the housing officer to make sure that all the relevant facts were taken into account.
On the other hand, there was a situation where I was contacted by a resident who had been advised that their planning application was likely to be refused. The resident asked me to intervene and do my best to get the application granted. I declined, on the basis that I couldn't see any reason why the pre-application advice from the planning officer was incorrect.
The
application was deficient in several key policy areas and refusal was, as
far as I could see, the correct response. What I did do, was to advise the resident to alter the plans to make them compliant with the policies. They declined to take my advice, submitted the application anyway, and when it was, as expected, refused, blamed me for not being helpful. Such is life.
Mark
On 15:42 14 Feb 2024, Fredxx said:
On 14/02/2024 14:22, Martin Brown wrote:
On 14/02/2024 13:18, Fredxx wrote:
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their
drive that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a
Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
Why do you expect a councillor to help your friend keep an immobile
derelict rusting eyesore in his front garden? If he did this then all
the neighbours would be on *his* back. It is most unlikely that
planning actually noticed this - they will be acting on information
received.
There's the rub. No complaint has been received. His neighbours are
happy with the vehicle being there. They've even written letters in
support for his appeal.
[SNIP]
It appears the grounds for serving a section 215 notice depends on the council's own visual impression and not that of the owner. I sense the communications may well have touched upon the aesthetics and the parties' value judgements.
"If it appears to the local planning authority that the amenity of a
part of their area, or of an adjoining area, is adversely affected by
the condition of land in their area, they may serve on the owner and
occupier of the land a notice under this section.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/215
Is there anything in the following document which may help?
"Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Section 215, Best Practice
Guidance"
<https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/
5a7973c5ed915d07d35b59cc/319798.pdf>
https://shorturl.at/kxMN6
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:48:13 +0000, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> wrote:
On 14/02/2024 14:58, Mark Goodge wrote:
It's also worth bearing in mind that a Section 215 notice is rarely issued >>> out of the blue. The LPA will usually contact the landowner first, and ask >>> him to deal with the problem, and only move to formal action if there's no >>> mutually acceptable solution. Most Section 215 notices are issued following >>> complaints by other residents, so early dialogue may well have given some >>> insight into what those complaints were, and what would be enough to
persuade the complainants to withdraw.
The council claim there was no complaint, or not putting one forward.
They've quoted a case Berg v Salford City Council to justify acting on
their own volition.
That's not particularly common. But it's perfectly legitimate.
Or, he can present a counter-argument
as to why the complaints are unreasonable. That's the point at which it
would help to involve his councillor, because the councillor will often be >>> in a position to mediate between him and the complainants. Leaving it until >>> it's already waiting for the magistrates to decide is too late.
This is now only 5 months after the serving of the 215.
But it's also after he's appealed to the magistrates. He didn't need to do that. He could have entered into discussions in order to seek a resolution. And if he had been a bit more willing to discuss the matter, and a bit less "robust", as you call it, then the enforcement notice may not ever have been issued in the first place.
The question I ask here, why is it too late? What can a councillor hide
behind so not to get involved. I've heard of a number of cases before
the courts where councillors get quite vocal.
On the basis of what you've written here, I suspect that the councillor is
as pissed off with your colleague's attitude as the planning officers are.
If so, then there's nothing your colleague can do to change that, other than by backing down and agreeing to enter into realistic discussions with the
LPA with the aim of reaching a genuine compromise.
On 15/02/2024 11:43, GB wrote:
On 14/02/2024 15:42, Fredxx wrote:
There's the rub. No complaint has been received.
How would you know that?
The council claim they are acting on their own volition, and the word 'complaint' is never used by the LA.
I thought councils worked on transparency, though I can understand the
the fear of retribution.
He has since said the councillor said there had been a complaint, yet
the LA are unwilling to call this a complaint and refer to to this as a report or query in their bundle. He's convinced something underhand is
going on.
On 15/02/2024 11:49, GB wrote:
On 14/02/2024 15:48, Fredxx wrote:
The question I ask here, why is it too late? What can a councillor
hide behind so not to get involved.
It's not necessary for a councillor to hide behind anything. He can
simply choose not to get involved.
You seem to think the councillor has a duty to side with his
constituent. Why do you think that?
I take your point, but where the colleague is told their councillor
cannot get involved is not the same as choosing not to. Hence my
original question that hasn't been answered.
At the very least I would have thought they would act as a mediator.
On 15/02/2024 11:49, GB wrote:
On 14/02/2024 15:48, Fredxx wrote:
The question I ask here, why is it too late? What can a councillor
hide behind so not to get involved.
It's not necessary for a councillor to hide behind anything. He can
simply choose not to get involved.
You seem to think the councillor has a duty to side with his
constituent. Why do you think that?
I take your point, but where the colleague is told their councillor
cannot get involved is not the same as choosing not to. Hence my
original question that hasn't been answered.
At the very least I would have thought they would act as a mediator.
On 15/02/2024 12:06, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 10:13:31 +0000, Jeff <jeff@ukra.com> wrote:
Surely just a car cover would be sufficient, then who knows what car isI am told the vehicle is of an historical nature, one that doesn't
need
MOT or tax. It has family roots and sentiments and the intention is to >>>>> put in back into a roadworthy condition.
In that case, what he probably needs to do is rent a lock-up or similar >>>> where he can keep the car pending restoration.
under there, and the council would have no grounds for complaint.
That would quite possibly be an acceptable solution, too. But the
landowner
won't know that unless he's prepared to duscuss it with the LPA.
The colleague now says that was a solution initially put forward by the LA!
On 15/02/2024 12:06, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 10:13:31 +0000, Jeff <jeff@ukra.com> wrote:
Surely just a car cover would be sufficient, then who knows what car isI am told the vehicle is of an historical nature, one that doesn't need >>>>> MOT or tax. It has family roots and sentiments and the intention is to >>>>> put in back into a roadworthy condition.
In that case, what he probably needs to do is rent a lock-up or similar >>>> where he can keep the car pending restoration.
under there, and the council would have no grounds for complaint.
That would quite possibly be an acceptable solution, too. But the landowner >> won't know that unless he's prepared to duscuss it with the LPA.
The colleague now says that was a solution initially put forward by the LA!
On 14/02/2024 16:04, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:41:37 +0000, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote: >>
On 14/02/2024 14:58, Mark Goodge wrote:
If the landowner has lodged a formal appeal to the magistrates, then yes, >>>> the court process is in train and there is no mechanism for a councillor to
intervene. The only way that an appeal can be pre-empted is if the LPA >>>> reaches an agreed resolution with the landowner prior to the court hearing.
So yes, your colleague can either take his chances in front of the bench, or
he can try to negotiate with the council. It's gone past the point at which
his councillor can help him.
I'm slightly perplexed by that last sentence. The obvious way to deal
with this is through negotiation. Why can't the councillor assist the
landowner with this?
The councillor can't intervene with the court. If the landowner is willing >> to discuss it with the LPA, then the councillor can be a party to that.
The councillor says that is not something they can do. That they cannot
act a go between. Hence my question why not?
But
the councillor can't act as an advocate for the landowner in any way. All
that the councillor can do is offer advice, and maybe help the landowner to >> understand what the LPA wants. But the OP says that the councillor has
already offered the only advice worth giving at this stage, which is to
engage in discussion with the LPA. The implication of the OP's comments is >> that the landowner doesn't want to do this, he simply wants the councillor >> to step in and make the problem go away. And the councillor can't do that. >>
It's possible, for example, that the landowner has tried to discuss this >>> with the planners, but they have been too busy to do that. Or, he may
have put forward proposals that he feels have not been given adequate
consideration.
It's not plausible that they've been too busy to communicate with him. Most >> of the initial contact will have been by ltter and/or email, rather than
face to face. If the planners are busy (which they usually are), then all
that means is that it will take them longer to get round to answering an
email or letter. They won't just ignore it, it will just start at the bottom >> of a big pile. And it may also mean that he has to wait some time for an
appointment to have a meeting with them. But that's generally a good thing >> if you're on the receiving end of something like this, because the longer it >> drags out the more chance you have to get something done without it needing >> to go to enforcement action.
Mind you, the OP says the landowner was 'quite robust', so maybe the
planners perfectly reasonably don't want to sit down and discuss things
with him, in case he's 'quite robust' again. :)
I don't think they'd refuse to sit down and discuss it with him. Enforcement >> officers are used to people thinking that being "robust" is a good way to
try to persuade them to drop a complaint.
[1] If a landowner fails to comply with a Section 215 notice either in full
or by means of an agreed compromise, and does not successfully appeal
against it, the Local Planning Authority can either prosecute for
non-compliance, or send in their own staff to do the clean-up themselves. If
they take the latter option, they can subsequently send the bill to the >>>> landowner, and if it remains unpaid then they can pursue the debt through >>>> the courts.
Would the scrap value of the vehicle cover the cost of collecting it?
Probably, yes. So the simplest solution would be for the landowner to phone >> a scrap company and say "I've got a scrap car you can collect". It would be >> gone within a few days.
What's probably more of an issue is if the car has more than scrap value (or >> would have more than scrap value if restored to working order). In which
case, the owner may well be reluctant to just dispose of it, particularly if >> his long-term plans are to restore it himself. The OP hasn't said what type >> of car it is, but it's one thing to scrap a clapped-out Vauxhall Astra and >> entirely another if it's a Triumph Stag.
I am told the vehicle is of an historical nature, one that doesn't need
MOT or tax. It has family roots and sentiments and the intention is to
put in back into a roadworthy condition.
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their drive
that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
I don't suppose there are many councillors here, but can a councillor genuinely claim they cannot intervene once the court process has
started? Is there a procedure or set of rules this councillor is following?
On 14/02/2024 13:18, Fredxx wrote:
A colleague has been served a 215 notice after being quite robust to
their council planning department in regarding an old car on their
drive that he admits hasn't moved for 10 years or more.
He has appealed against the notice and tried to enlist the help of a
Councillor. The councillor has stated categorically that he cannot
assist as the court process is in train. She advised him to talk to
planning as they would prefer a dialogue. Wise words indeed.
I don't suppose there are many councillors here, but can a councillor
genuinely claim they cannot intervene once the court process has
started? Is there a procedure or set of rules this councillor is
following?
215 Power to require proper maintenance of land.
(1) If it appears to the local planning authority that the amenity of a
part of their area, or of an adjoining area, is adversely affected by
the condition of land in their area, they may serve on the owner and
occupier of the land a notice under this section.
This has progressed such that the vehicles in question have been removed where they have been made roadworthy and have been placed on the road by
his property. I am assured they are taxed, MOTd and insured.
He'd still like to put these on his own driveway rather than taking road parking space from his neighbours who don't all have their own private driveway, so is still going to appeal.
His chances?
This has progressed such that the vehicles in question have been removed >where they have been made roadworthy and have been placed on the road by
his property. I am assured they are taxed, MOTd and insured.
He'd still like to put these on his own driveway rather than taking road >parking space from his neighbours who don't all have their own private >driveway, so is still going to appeal.
His chances?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 52:46:35 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,355,184 |