'illegal' mock-Tudor castle he tried to hide behind 40ft hay bales

roddydogs

planning_officer wrote: »

If you read my posts, it depends on whether he chooses to waste some more time by submitting a pointless appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. Plus the Council are not going to advertise when bulldozers would be going in anyway - it's not going to make the 10 o'clock news.... the first we hear of it will be when it is demolished. And I don't work for that particular Council, so I have no inside information on timescales!

Think youll find IF its ever bulldozed it will be on the news.

RDB

This has been going on so long now, I remember couple of years ago it got to this stage and everyone said it will come down

Will it be the same thing every couple of years and all the time he is laughing at the planners.

seven-day-weekend

As planning officer, myself and others keep saying repeatedly, the reason it is taking so long is that he keeps taking it to the next stage of appeal. This is his RIGHT, whether we like it or not. At every stage the clock starts again, that is the legislation , again whether we think it should be or not.

However, afaik, the only place for him to go now is the European Court of Human Rights and as there are no human rights issues here, that will be a non-starter.

The place WILL come down one day, but the process of law is a long and drawn-out process. Mr Fidler is not having preferential treatment, that is how it works in all cases if they go that far.

Dinah93

The one in Ingleby Arncliffe is the next borough from mine. He was granted outline permission that the premise of a house (no mention of scale or location on the plot) would be acceptable. So he just build whatever he fancied - that article makes it seem like he had permission for that exact house! There is a big difference between say a 2 bed bungalow and a 5 bed 2 storey exec home, and that is why you need full pp before doing anything!

roddydogs

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

As planning officer, myself and others keep saying repeatedly, the reason it is taking so long is that he keeps taking it to the next stage of appeal. This is his RIGHT, whether we like it or not. At every stage the clock starts again, that is the legislation , again whether we think it should be or not.

However, afaik, the only place for him to go now is the European Court of Human Rights and as there are no human rights issues here, that will be a non-starter.

The place WILL come down one day, but the process of law is a long and drawn-out process. Mr Fidler is not having preferential treatment, that is how it works in all cases if they go that far.

He may not be getting preferential treatment, its just that hes run rings round a "Dozy" council for so long, no one will believe till they see the Bulldozers.

planning_officer

roddydogs wrote: »

He may not be getting preferential treatment, its just that hes run rings round a "Dozy" council for so long, no one will believe till they see the Bulldozers.

Oh dear oh dear - how is the Council dozy? I wish people would actually try and make an effort to understand the processes involved before posting such drivel. The Council served an enforcement notice quickly as soon as the house appeared (as they should) and they won the appeal against it (as they should)! Everything done right so far in fact!

planning_officer

RDB wrote: »

This has been going on so long now, I remember couple of years ago it got to this stage and everyone said it will come down

Will it be the same thing every couple of years and all the time he is laughing at the planners.

ARRRGGGHHHH. Have you read anything above???!!! Let's summarise: the appeal process takes time - Mr Fidler has lost ALL the appeals he has submitted so far. It is his right to appeal once more to the European Court of Human Rights. That is the last time he can appeal, as they are no more options open to him after that. In my opinion, such an appeal is a non-starter. End result = house will be demolished... once the appeal routes have been exhausted.

In actual fact, I reckon the planners are more likely to be laughing at Mr Fidler, the amount of money and stress all these lost appeals must be causing him!


PS I didn't mean to 'thank' your post by the way... clicked it in error... (serious error!)

planning_officer

roddydogs wrote: »

Think youll find IF its ever bulldozed it will be on the news.

Of course it will, but I meant it's not going to be on the news announcing it to the world before it happens! Only afterwards.

timmyt

it was a bad decision. the removal of the hay bails was deemed to be construction so time never started (i.,e the 4 year rule). Course it was not construction. The court is not indepedent! Precedent is a risk but they can't create law. He got away with it, full stop, but oh no.....and to now remove a house at a time when Plymouth and Swindon planners need a slap for what they have allowed legitimately...and with hosues so few, and rip off milk the public with more tax SDLT

sabretoothtigger

If it he had scaffolding up for 4 years surrounding the house and then taken it down, would that have been the same