Builder trying to change house 1 year later

ProDave

Unless you are a giant, I can't see the need for a fence more than 6ft tall.

Hutch100uk

Yeah not sure why they r that high. Although my neighbours house sits higher than mine so it does mean they can't see into my windows. All the fences on the street at the same though. I can't understand how the builder thought they could get away with it then!

Hutch100uk

Spoke to the planning department of the council. Apparently this issue has been ongoing since the fences went up (nearly 2 years ago). So the builder has continued to sell the properties knowing that certain things did not conform to planning.
I just don't know how they can get away with it.
The planning department said they had been in ongoing talks with the builder all this time as there had been other issues. This final meeting last month concluded that the fences are the main issue to be resolved.
The Planning lady did say that people should check plans conform but that is only if you are buying off plan - no-one in our phase did!!!

And yes it is the height of the fence. Planning never agreed to fencing (and certainly not that high), it should have been much smaller railings).

chappers

Hutch100uk wrote: »

The Planning lady did say that people should check plans conform but that is only if you are buying off plan - no-one in our phase did!!!

That's bad advice as it would be your responsibility anytime within the enforceable period, which I believe that since the planning department has intervened is now indefinitely.

Doozergirl

Hutch100uk wrote: »

Spoke to the planning department of the council. Apparently this issue has been ongoing since the fences went up (nearly 2 years ago). So the builder has continued to sell the properties knowing that certain things did not conform to planning.
I just don't know how they can get away with it.
The planning department said they had been in ongoing talks with the builder all this time as there had been other issues. This final meeting last month concluded that the fences are the main issue to be resolved.
The Planning lady did say that people should check plans conform but that is only if you are buying off plan - no-one in our phase did!!!

And yes it is the height of the fence. Planning never agreed to fencing (and certainly not that high), it should have been much smaller railings).

For future reference, there are always plans, regardless of when you purchase. Even buying off plan isn't actually buying off the building plans themselves, but the developer's pretty pictures.

AdrianC

Hutch100uk wrote: »

Can ANYONE answer my question - what happens if my next door neighbour refuses to let the developer make the changes???

Ultimately, you own a house which is in breach of the planning permission granted for it, and for which the council are now seeking to bring it into line with that permission.

So the builder has continued to sell the properties knowing that certain things did not conform to planning.
I just don't know how they can get away with it.

They can't. That's what the council are now doing.

Liability for the breach passed from the developer to you at the time that the house sold - which is why people are advised to make sure there's PP and BR sign-off on work done shortly before a sale, and why indemnities exist. It's you that could be prosecuted. You should be thankful that the developer is doing the work for free without any argument...

Doozergirl

AdrianC wrote: »

Ultimately, you own a house which is in breach of the planning permission granted for it, and for which the council are now seeking to bring it into line with that permission.



They can't. That's what the council are now doing.

Liability for the breach passed from the developer to you at the time that the house sold - which is why people are advised to make sure there's PP and BR sign-off on work done shortly before a sale, and why indemnities exist. It's you that could be prosecuted. You should be thankful that the developer is doing the work for free without any argument...

PP is not like BR; it is pre-approved, never signed off. You'd need to check against the actual plans yourself if you want to be sure.

AdrianC

Doozergirl wrote: »

PP is not like BR; it is pre-approved, never signed off. You'd need to check against the actual plans yourself if you want to be sure.

Yes, my bad - I should have said "ensure it conforms to PP, and has BR sign-off".

In this case, it sounds like it's simply a case of the fence is too high to not need PP, but wasn't on the application (and wouldn't have been granted anyway) - it does sound excessively tall.

EachPenny

Nick_C wrote: »

How tall is the existing fence? I believe you can erect a fence up to two metres without planning permission

This isn't correct - Permitted development rights are not universal and this is a good example of where they probably don't apply. If the planning consent specifies the details of the boundary then there is no PD right to 'erect a fence up to two metres without planning permission'. This is the kind of case where the Planning Authority may specifically remove certain PD rights to ensure the development stays as originally planned.

AdrianC wrote: »

In this case, it sounds like it's simply a case of the fence is too high to not need PP, but wasn't on the application (and wouldn't have been granted anyway) - it does sound excessively tall.

Strictly speaking whatever fence is put up requires planning consent if it forms part of a new development. Fences between dwellings are not exempt from the requirement for planning consent, but instead are permitted in some circumstances for existing dwellings.

The boundary details are one aspect of the planning application, and if a fence is included in the proposals then that fence is approved as part of the consent for the dwelling. If the developer wants to put up a different type of fence to the consented one then they either need to get agreement it is not a material change, or else apply for a variation to the original consent.

It is effectively the same as the developer not being allowed to build the house 6 feet larger at the back than the original plans and then claim it is a permitted development 'extension'.

EachPenny

Hutch100uk wrote: »

...I can't understand how the builder thought they could get away with it then!

What usually happens is somewhere between design and completion, someone doesn't look at the plans and builds what they think looks ok, not what was agreed.

By the sound of it what got built probably cost more than what was planned, and wasn't necessarily done to save money.

Hutch100uk wrote: »

I just don't know how they can get away with it.

They aren't. The Planning Authority are taking a route towards enforcement action and requiring the developer to rectify the fault at their expense and with loss of goodwill from their customers. With reputational damage also a risk. Many people would regard that as quite a high price to pay.