Removing holiday let planning permission

davidmcn

Dillon141 said:

Ah well, I can ask the question of the council I guess, then I’ll have my answer and move on! 

Why would you be asking anyway? Surely it's up to the vendor (if they want to sell to you) to do the donkeywork.

AdrianC

Dillon141 said:

If “Mr X wants to live there” is not a good enough reason for the council to change the use of this property to a dwelling, what exactly are the reasons that may influence them then? 

Start with the NDP, if one's been adopted.
Then look at any previous objections that may have been made to the planning from when it was converted.
Then you'd probably need to be the owner of it, prove that it's simply not economically viable as a holiday let, and you might - perhaps - on a good day with a tail-wind, persuade them.

Then they'll be able to sell it for full market value.

Davesnave

Dillon141 said:

AdrianC said:

No, I don't think there has been.

The sole objection that you appear to have given against it continuing as a holiday let is...

Dillon141 said:

What I meant with strange is that it looks odd as the house and outbuildings are set away from the road as one resident and to us locally now it looks strange that two houses exist there. I understand when the original owners converted it it made sense but seems strange to sell them apart- visually if not legally. Lol.

...and...

Dillon141 said:

Thank you for your reply. What I meant is that locally it’s always been one “place” and now of course it isn’t. Looks strange to us locals is what I meant.

I'm not sure how else to precis those...?

"I'd like to buy it to live there" is not a good enough reason on its own, and more than it would be a factor in any other similar restriction - a local or an agricultural tie, or not meeting the criteria for an affordable property.

The thick end of a decade ago, we looked at a property that had a former house built into barns, now derelict. It had a restriction to ONLY be used as ancillary property to the main dwelling, which actively prevented it being used as a holiday let... and also from being sold separately. If it was rebuilt, it could only have been used as a "granny annex" for members of the family in occupation in the main house. "But Mr X wants to buy it and live there" wouldn't have worked there, either.
Looking online, I can see that retrospective permission to refurbish and convert that outbuilding was granted a couple of years ago - and that restriction was reaffirmed...
From the planning decision...
"The ancillary accommodation and the dwelling known as XXX shall not be sold or let separately from each other.
The use hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling known as XXX."

I’m assuming that some “holiday let only” properties have actually been granted permission to change the use to a dwelling? What exactly would cause them to change the use then? Any ideas?

I believe I answered that back near the beginning of the thread, but with the caveat that individual councils will have their own policies and thoughts regarding what constitutes a sufficient reason.

Dillon141

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

Ah well, I can ask the question of the council I guess, then I’ll have my answer and move on! 

Why would you be asking anyway? Surely it's up to the vendor (if they want to sell to you) to do the donkeywork.

Currently it is a holiday let and that is what the current owner obviously accepted as PP on the outbuildings. They also are moving from the area so really I was asking with the view of whether or not if someone who has been local all his life would be able to get rid of the PP clause for it to be a holiday let and actually be a dwelling seeing as there are shortages in the supply of local housing. 

The sale price now would obviously be lower than if it was a dwelling. 

What I mean is maybe the council would rather, or be more willing to change it if it was purchased by someone local to change the use so it could be a dwelling....

I know, I know .... a very long shot! :-/

davidmcn

Dillon141 said:

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

Ah well, I can ask the question of the council I guess, then I’ll have my answer and move on! 

Why would you be asking anyway? Surely it's up to the vendor (if they want to sell to you) to do the donkeywork.

Currently it is a holiday let and that is what the current owner obviously accepted as PP on the outbuildings. They also are moving from the area so really I was asking with the view of whether or not if someone who has been local all his life would be able to get rid of the PP clause for it to be a holiday let and actually be a dwelling seeing as there are shortages in the supply of local housing. 

The sale price now would obviously be lower than if it was a dwelling. 

What I mean is maybe the council would rather, or be more willing to change it if it was purchased by someone local to change the use so it could be a dwelling....

No, planning decisions aren't "personal" in that way. If there were now objective planning reasons for why the holiday restriction was no longer required, and it could then be removed, then the vendor could sell to anyone (at a full market price).

You do sometimes get housing restricted to "locals" or key workers, but that still has problems about restricting the marketability as you'd expect to have the same restrictions when you sell, and mortgage lenders would have similar concerns about how easily they could get rid of it.

Dillon141

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

Ah well, I can ask the question of the council I guess, then I’ll have my answer and move on! 

Why would you be asking anyway? Surely it's up to the vendor (if they want to sell to you) to do the donkeywork.

Currently it is a holiday let and that is what the current owner obviously accepted as PP on the outbuildings. They also are moving from the area so really I was asking with the view of whether or not if someone who has been local all his life would be able to get rid of the PP clause for it to be a holiday let and actually be a dwelling seeing as there are shortages in the supply of local housing. 

The sale price now would obviously be lower than if it was a dwelling. 

What I mean is maybe the council would rather, or be more willing to change it if it was purchased by someone local to change the use so it could be a dwelling....

No, planning decisions aren't "personal" in that way. If there were now objective planning reasons for why the holiday restriction was no longer required, and it could then be removed, then the vendor could sell to anyone (at a full market price).

You do sometimes get housing restricted to "locals" or key workers, but that still has problems about restricting the marketability as you'd expect to have the same restrictions when you sell, and mortgage lenders would have similar concerns about how easily they could get rid of it.

Of course.

The situation that I would obviously find perfect is if I enquired with the council and they said that I could remove the condition, or at least that they would be open to it in a couple of years, and that I purchase the holiday let at a price which reflected the current restrictions on it and after becoming the owner could then remove the condition.

But I’m sure that is a billion to one chance. 

Although I’m assuming that any discussions between myself and the council before I was to buy the property would remain between us? What I mean is, if the council told me they would be willing to remove the condition, they would not be obliged to tell the current owner of our discussions.?

Davesnave

Dillon141 said:

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

Ah well, I can ask the question of the council I guess, then I’ll have my answer and move on! 

Why would you be asking anyway? Surely it's up to the vendor (if they want to sell to you) to do the donkeywork.

Currently it is a holiday let and that is what the current owner obviously accepted as PP on the outbuildings. They also are moving from the area so really I was asking with the view of whether or not if someone who has been local all his life would be able to get rid of the PP clause for it to be a holiday let and actually be a dwelling seeing as there are shortages in the supply of local housing. 

The sale price now would obviously be lower than if it was a dwelling. 

What I mean is maybe the council would rather, or be more willing to change it if it was purchased by someone local to change the use so it could be a dwelling....

No, planning decisions aren't "personal" in that way. If there were now objective planning reasons for why the holiday restriction was no longer required, and it could then be removed, then the vendor could sell to anyone (at a full market price).

You do sometimes get housing restricted to "locals" or key workers, but that still has problems about restricting the marketability as you'd expect to have the same restrictions when you sell, and mortgage lenders would have similar concerns about how easily they could get rid of it.

Of course.

The situation that I would obviously find perfect is if I enquired with the council and they said that I could remove the condition, or at least that they would be open to it in a couple of years, and that I purchase the holiday let at a price which reflected the current restrictions on it and after becoming the owner could then remove the condition.

We'd all like to buy a property with a depressed price because of a legal restriction and later profit from its removal, all thanks to the collusion of the local council. I believe that might be viewed as fraud.

The normal situation is that one may buy a restricted property, often with cash because of weak mortgageability, and then not comply with the restriction in the hopethe breach will not be noticed or the legal situation enforced. Then, after the appropriate period of non-compliance has elapsed, usually ten years, it is normally  possible to obtain a Certificate of Lawful Development, removing the need to comply with the restriction.

The above is the route I've gone down, but it has involved a risk of enforcement over a ten year period. You seem to want the benefits without taking that risk. 

davidmcn

Dillon141 said:

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

davidmcn said:

Dillon141 said:

Ah well, I can ask the question of the council I guess, then I’ll have my answer and move on! 

Why would you be asking anyway? Surely it's up to the vendor (if they want to sell to you) to do the donkeywork.

Currently it is a holiday let and that is what the current owner obviously accepted as PP on the outbuildings. They also are moving from the area so really I was asking with the view of whether or not if someone who has been local all his life would be able to get rid of the PP clause for it to be a holiday let and actually be a dwelling seeing as there are shortages in the supply of local housing. 

The sale price now would obviously be lower than if it was a dwelling. 

What I mean is maybe the council would rather, or be more willing to change it if it was purchased by someone local to change the use so it could be a dwelling....

No, planning decisions aren't "personal" in that way. If there were now objective planning reasons for why the holiday restriction was no longer required, and it could then be removed, then the vendor could sell to anyone (at a full market price).

You do sometimes get housing restricted to "locals" or key workers, but that still has problems about restricting the marketability as you'd expect to have the same restrictions when you sell, and mortgage lenders would have similar concerns about how easily they could get rid of it.

The situation that I would obviously find perfect is if I enquired with the council and they said that I could remove the condition, or at least that they would be open to it in a couple of years, and that I purchase the holiday let at a price which reflected the current restrictions on it and after becoming the owner could then remove the condition.

But I’m sure that is a billion to one chance. 

Although I’m assuming that any discussions between myself and the council before I was to buy the property would remain between us? What I mean is, if the council told me they would be willing to remove the condition, they would not be obliged to tell the current owner of our discussions.?

The council can't say anything remotely binding, and I suspect wouldn't give you particularly useful advice. Besides, how are you going to pay for it with the restriction still in place? Do you have enough cash? Mortgages for holiday homes are tricky even for those who already own another property. 

frogglet

Ask the owner if they have already tried to lift the restriction.

Madmel

This is really to @Davesnave so sorry for derailing slightly OP.

I live in the same county as you but a different district.  There is a property very close to mine which was converted from a potato barn to a house around 12 years ago.  The barn was previously owned by the local large landowner.  The house was eventually sold to a family from the Home Counties who said they were going to use it as their 2nd home, but within months were letting it commercially as a holiday let.  They use it themselves periodically but around 75% of the year it is rented out.  The landowner was horrified to discover this several years later but there were no covenants placed by the developer, so nothing they could do.  Should the owners have planning permission from the county/district as the only applications they have made have been for listed building alterations or putting up a satellite dish?