Developer's broken promises

Atomix

Could it be that the wall will be built when they begin building the flats?
As they will have the man power and materials there anyway?

glasgowdan

Isn't a 6ft fence better than a 6ft wall?

davidmcn

Atomix wrote: »

Could it be that the wall will be built when they begin building the flats?
As they will have the man power and materials there anyway?

I'm pretty sure that's the most reasonable interpretation of what they promised: "the 1.8 Metre feature wall proposed will be extended into your boundary" surely implies "if we get planning permission and then build the development".

Though the "extent of which will be agreed post approval" adds some doubt (what happens if the parties don't agree?).

But as the OP isn't even sure whether planning permission has been granted yet their concern seems premature.

Thrugelmir

The wall is most likely the least of their concerns at the moment.........

michael1234

TrickyDicky101 wrote: »

I don't think you have a contract. I think it would need to have been written as a deed as 'generally positive' is too ephemeral to constitute consideration (required by contract). You don't have a deed either.

Thanks for your reply. "Generally positive" was in addition to writing a positive comment to be shown in public on the council's planning website. I did that and even publicly mentioned (at their suggestion) how pleased I was they were building this wall. In the unlikely even I'm ever (or someone else reading this) is ever in a similar situation, maybe the best approach would be to sign a document with them requiring payment of a nominal sum e.g. £1 ?

Slightly more off-topic until I get a response from the planners I won't know if the planning-void is some kind of mistake or not. Certainly the website software frequently goes down and frequently has errors and in this case even if it was voided, I don't see why they would remove all the public documents associated with it.

And yes, I guess they would be far more worried about planning permission being rejected (until they appeal of course) than my wall but they didn't start this thread.

And we wanted a wall to control noise (the other side would be a restaurant for the elderly folks living there - it is retirement flats)

Thrugelmir

michael1234 wrote: »

And yes, I guess they would be far more worried about planning permission being rejected (until they appeal of course) than my wall but they didn't start this thread.

And we wanted a wall to control noise (the other side would be a restaurant for the elderly folks living there - it is retirement flats)

Not sure a wall alone is going to have the desired effect. Seems as if the developer got off lightly.

Atomix

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Not sure a wall alone is going to have the desired effect. Seems as if the developer got off lightly.

Maybe a leylandii hedge instead? Plant now before any objections?

elverson

On the planning website, once the application has been approved or refused there will be a Decision Notice from the council in the list of documents - this may take a few days to be uploaded.

See example here: http://www.beacons-npa.gov.uk/dcdms/findapp/getFile?appNumber=07/00892/FUL&path=Decision/Decision%20notice.pdf

If approved there will usually be a list of conditions for the development within the Decision Notice (this can be quite a long list for a major development). If refused there will be a list of reasons for refusal.

Sometimes applications have 'reserved matters' which means that some of the details are to be agreed later.

If there's no Decision Notice yet, either the application is still being determined, or it has been withdrawn by the developer.

Freecall

In planning, the term 'void' has a very specific meaning and refers to planning consent which has been granted erroneously.

If the proposed development is relatively large and of local public interest (50 flats probably would be), it will not have been handled under delegated powers but instead will have gone to committee.

If the application was approved but it was later discovered that this decision was based on inaccurate information laid before the committee, the responsible officer (usually the LPA's Chief Executive or Head of Planning) can declare the decision notice 'void'. This is a rare step to take as it can leave the LPA open to action by the applicant for damages.

It is possible that this has happened in this case however.

This is all speculation though. Why not call the planning office and ask the status of the application?

michael1234

Hi

Again, many thanks for the interesting and useful replies.

The image linked to below is from the planning department's website. I wonder if Freecall might be right? Certainly there was a public consolultation and ultimately it was decided by committee rather than delegated powers. They have already part completed the demolition part which was started before the s106 was in place (and thus the permission itself) so maybe by starting demolition before formal approval was enough to say that work had started prior to the conditions being satisfied (even though of course demolition by itself doesn't require pp)
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81371113/planning_status.png

I sent an email last week to the council but no reply as of yet.

Back to my direct issue (assuming all the above ends up being a long delay), I've set the wheels in motion for an initial consultation with a local solicitor. I'll only go through with it if/when I get a flat refusal from the developer. Without seeing all the emails etc she thinks at this stage it is a contractual issue with the developer.

I hope it doesn't turn out that it is perfectly ok for a big company to make written assurances that aren't in any way enforceable. At this point, my gut tells me its about 50:50 on that.