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

sabretoothtigger

I was told its in the law already that a farmer can live on his farm in order to conduct his business. I know he didnt get prior permission but seems a fair point

The-Joker

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

I was told its in the law already that a farmer can live on his farm in order to conduct his business. I know he didnt get prior permission but seems a fair point

Any link for this Sabre? How do you qualify to be a farmer? Grow a few gabbages?

Anybody could buy some cheap land because there is no chance of ever getting planning permission, then say they are a farmer and have a right to live there?

Davesnave

The-Joker wrote: »

Any link for this Sabre? How do you qualify to be a farmer? Grow a few gabbages?

Anybody could buy some cheap land because there is no chance of ever getting planning permission, then say they are a farmer and have a right to live there?

Exactly. That's why it's a load of nonsense.

I am acquainted with people who set up in business on land in my county about 5 years ago. They've been allowed a mobile home. If they have a viable business, proved with proper accounts spanning those 5 years, they will be allowed to build a permanent residence, after submitting plans for something considered appropriate.

I don't reckon their planning submission will look in any way like a castle! :rotfl:

Errata

If they have a viable business, proved with proper accounts spanning those 5 years, they will be allowed to build a permanent residence,

I thought that only applied to those who farmed livestock?

Davesnave

Errata wrote: »

I thought that only applied to those who farmed livestock?

I didn't mention the type of business these people are engaged in.

I believe, however, that if a genuine need to be on-site is proved, then a new, non-livestock business could be supported by an agriculturally-tied dwelling.

The-Joker

One chap on grand designs did it with charcoal making he said he had to live there because of the danger of fire spreading

DaftyDuck

The-Joker wrote: »

One chap on grand designs did it with charcoal making he said he had to live there because of the danger of fire spreading

Well, if you will build a castle out of charcoal....

Ozzuk

Latest on this...result in 6-8 weeks:

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/honeycrock-farm-hidden-house-appeal-8056972

The-Joker

Ozzuk wrote: »

Latest on this...result in 6-8 weeks:

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/honeycrock-farm-hidden-house-appeal-8056972

I like this bit

A public inquiry has been held into whether a house, built in secret more than 10 years ago without planning permission, can stay standing in Salfords, near Redhill.

My prediction in another ten years the headline will say

A public inquiry has been held into whether a house, built in secret more than 20 years ago without planning permission, can stay standing in Salfords, near Redhill.

John_Pierpoint

I know of a site where a scrap metal type business set up. The local authority was criticised by the inspector for failing to offer this two man business help to relocate to somewhere less "Green Belt" - possibly another non conforming site that now had established user rights; so he gave temporary planning permission to the owner (not the land).
The owner prompt sold the land and business to a "mate" and continued to trade for several years, while the new owner gradually took over.

Meanwhile the local authority appeared to slip into a deep slumber for about 8 years, before starting to make threatening noises - these dragged on for over two years and eventually turned into a full blown public inquiry (at vast expense to the local tax payer).

That inquiry lasted about 10 minutes until the inspector ruled that the business and its (new) owner had been operating "illegally" for more than 10 years and so there was no case to answer. [For a domestic type situation that 10 years is cut to 4]