Retrospective Planning Permission and Buidling Regulations

martinsurrey

westernpromise wrote: »

Isn't there a risk that you could be ordered to bring the outbuilding up to scratch as a dwelling so he can carry on living in it?!

ordered?

surely its a moral obligation, its a asbestos sheet roof, with no insulation!

A few stiff breezes and the roof could blow off showing the fella's bed with asbestos.

Even if it doesn't blow off, the flex caused by the wind could be more than enough to release fibres into the air. especially if the roof is aging.

EachPenny

lincroft1710 wrote: »

You are overthinking.

The annex was constructed to be used as someone's sole or main residence, a standalone dwelling. If the council ask the VOA to assess the annex for CT, they will just laugh at the suggestion of it only being a shepherd's hut.

So you expect the tenant to totally empty the annex of all his possessions? Might deceive the council into believing it is empty, won't stop a CT band for a separate dwelling.

Valkyrie888 wrote: »

...the annex is a barn with carpets.

Only the OP knows exactly what the building looks like, but it sounds like a cowshed with an asbestos roof in which someone has arranged some basic facilities. Most of which (I assume a shower, washbasin, sink, food heating equipment) would not be out of place in a farm 'welfare' room. The electricity is supplied from the farm supply which tends to suggest the 'annex' is ancillary to the farm, rather than a separate dwelling.

But if the current owner is publicly marketing the annex as separate living accommodation the point is moot.

chappers

EachPenny wrote: »

. The electricity is supplied from the farm supply which tends to suggest the 'annex' is ancillary to the farm, rather than a separate dwelling.

However it is secondary metered which would suggest otherwise

lincroft1710

EachPenny wrote: »

Only the OP knows exactly what the building looks like, but it sounds like a cowshed with an asbestos roof in which someone has arranged some basic facilities. Most of which (I assume a shower, washbasin, sink, food heating equipment) would not be out of place in a farm 'welfare' room. The electricity is supplied from the farm supply which tends to suggest the 'annex' is ancillary to the farm, rather than a separate dwelling.

But if the current owner is publicly marketing the annex as separate living accommodation the point is moot.

If you read OP's second post you will see that the annex has been in existence for the past 30 years and has been rented out to the former owner of the farm/smallholding for 15 years at £350 pcm. It was therefore clearly constructed as a standalone dwelling. The source of the electricity doesn't feature in the test of whether it is a separate dwelling for CT purposes.

Its history has been established, it is a separate dwelling. The tenant has managed to avoid paying CT because the building was converted without pp or building regs and was therefore not picked up by the council. Further as it was converted pre Council Tax, the CT annex situation was not in force and it would have been a dwelling in its own right under the 1967 General Rate Act.