Solicitor failed to spot planning permission

da_rule

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote: »

How did the seller answer the - are you aware of neighbouring whathaveyou - question in the sellers' information form?

How they could they not be aware, I mean that's likely to be why they sold up, isn't it?

Question 3 on the TA6 Property Information Form. The problem with this question is that it asks if the seller was aware, and proving that can be difficult. I mean I know I've walked along streets and ignored planning notices stuck to lamp posts etc. So whilst they may (or may not) have known about the planning permission it's proving that knowledge that would be difficult.

da_rule

Possibly, but only if the resident objected. Also, the previous residents might not be the people who sold the property (mortgage repossession/sold by personal representatives after the death of the owner etc) so they would have a completely justifiable reason to not know that the planning consent existed.

The only thing that strikes me as odd is that some planning consents on other properties have shown up and not this one.

magpiecottage

Would the council not have written directly to the occupiers of the neighbouring property inviting comment?

princeofpounds

Yes, the council writes to properties that are directly adjacent to a planning application.

There are various possibilities here, if not your fault. Your lawyer may have mucked up, the sellers may have lied on their SPIF, or the council may be in error (most likely by not having the database right for planning and addresses).

These are not mutually exclusive.

First step is to contact the solicitor and find out what was asked, from whom, and what the replies were.

System

Don't forget that planning agreement could have been given 3 years before any work started so any letters to affected properties would have been before that time. Also there is no follow up from the council to the affected properties so they get one letter advising them of the planning application and then no further correspondence.

If the previous owners got the letter 3.5 years ago and nothing else since then they probably would have totally forgotten about it.

Also, how far back do the council's search when the solicitor requests a search?

Had the people who are building the houses done enough work on the site previously to keep the pp alive so it may have been applied for even longer ago?

Catti

A common misconception about 'local searches' is that they are about the 'locality'. They are not.

They are a search to find out what records the Local Land Charges Register hold about the property being searched against. Most local authorities state that they give no information about adjacent properties.

If a solicitor is not told about concerns about neighbouring land, he cannot be expected to investigate it.

AlexMac

My council posts detail of al planaps, including lists of who was written to in consultation, on the web, so whether or not this is done by yours this implies that info is public so why not check with them after a web search? If you can prove the seller had been consulted, you can consider action but in any case, you need to start with your solicitor

gladysrocker

He did do some investigations for himself re the council website. The land had planning permission refused twice on the basis that any development would have a negative effect on my sons property. The last application was July last year and it was refused in November and that is still the status on the website. He feels like he did everything correctly but has been duped somewhere along the way and I agree with him. What's the point of having information available to the public when it's misleading and incorrect?

da_rule

If the application was rejected then it would not have shown up on the search results. Have you actually phoned the council to ask them? It might be that the property next door is being built with no permission.

gladysrocker

Yes da rule, he phoned them yesterday after the bulldozers had moved in and the permission has been granted contrary to what it says on the website.