We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

New Build Estate...deviations from planning for roads and playground

2»

Comments

  • Section62
    Section62 Posts: 11,077 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Name Dropper
    Section 62 has provided some excellent points for framing a complaint to the Planning Dept.  However my experience of flagrant breach of planning conditions persisting for a decade or more on our estate is that they may take a decision to under-enforce; they'll view the cost of enforcement outweighs the benefits of planned surface finishes.

    Completely agree regarding enforcement.

    However, the residents committee could think very carefully before taking responsibility for the playground, and perhaps consider employing an independent play consultant to audit the site.

    In the event of someone being injured using the playground there is a risk of a compensation claim being made, and if it can be shown that the safety surfaces originally designed weren't provided (the design being available for public information in the planning documents), then the liability (of the residents committee) could be difficult to avoid.  (Insurance should also be considered, and insurers may refuse cover without the playground meeting accepted standards)

    The problem might be getting all residents to refuse to accept the liability (potentially resulting in the playground being removed entirely) because some people just might not see the risk (until it is one of their (grand)children who gets hurt).
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 604.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.5K Life & Family
  • 261.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.