Bought a house and plans for cycle lane weren't disclosed

Davesnave

melb said:

unfortunately the "herd instinct" is still alive and well on MSE.  As if you wouldn't be a bit cheesed off if the house you bought was suddenly going to have double yellow lines painted outside it. 

This has nothing to do with the feelings you suppose respondents might have if this happened to them. People who reply on the forum give their honest assessment of the best course of action.The most responsible advice will caution against starting litigation simply because a situation seems unjust.

In this case, it might be possible to prove that the council sent out consultation documents to residents, but that will not show that the vendor read them or cared enough to recall receiving them when filling-in the TA6. Proving intent to deceive might not be as straightforward as you imagine.

Also, we don't know other details surrounding this matter. For example, when my local council removed a number of parking spaces where I used to live, this was in parallel with the introduction of other measures, such as residents' parking permits and time restrictions, which immediately reduced demand for remaining spaces by removing commuters who parked all day. These changes are rarely made in isolation; there will be gains and losses depending on one's point of view.

Sachs

Even if you were so obtuse as to believe receiving a letter from the Council (specifically because the Council believes it affects your property) about a highways scheme directly adjacent the property doesn't count as receiving correspondence affecting the property 3.2 has you covered:
"3.2 Is the seller aware of any proposals to develop property or land nearby, or of any proposals to make alterations to buildings nearby? If Yes, please give details:"
3.2 doesnt even need to affect the property, just needs to be any development nearby. Unless you want to argue immediately outside the front door is not nearby.

davidmcn

Sachs said:

Even if you were so obtuse as to believe receiving a letter from the Council (specifically because the Council believes it affects your property) about a highways scheme directly adjacent the property doesn't count as receiving correspondence affecting the property 3.2 has you covered:
"3.2 Is the seller aware of any proposals to develop property or land nearby, or of any proposals to make alterations to buildings nearby? If Yes, please give details:"
3.2 doesnt even need to affect the property, just needs to be any development nearby. Unless you want to argue immediately outside the front door is not nearby.

I'm not sure that enacting a Traffic Regulation Order constitutes "development" though (it certainly doesn't in the planning sense of the word, which I presume is what the question is aimed at).

Sachs

A Streets for People scheme 5 years in the making will almost certainly include planning permission somewhere, it's rarely just painting lines on a road.

But sure, the vendor could argue that it doesn't affect their property and the bit that needed planning permission wasn't considered nearby so they don't consider the cycle scheme that runs past their house development.

Ultimately that would be for the judge to decide (which I still think is a waste of time). I just think most people here are wrong about what they need to disclose and perhaps haven't bought a house recently because the form has changed.