Planning application mistake has cost me almost £25k please can you sign my petition.

mariejader

Please will you help me? I really need your help, it’s just your signature will help us get to the next stage with our ongoing battle with West Berkshire Council.

Basically we missed out a form with our planning application regarding CIL a few years ago regarding an exemption (the box was ticked saying we wished to apply but somehow the form was never received but the council, and I had no knowledge it was missing). We were the first application through the CIL system, at the time hardly anyone knew about it and it was difficult to find information.

We had no idea the form was missing, we were not advised at any stage throughout the process it was missing, it was a simple error that could have been rectified, had we known or been advised!  It wasn’t until we started the works we got  hit with a £20K bill which grew rather quickly with interest to just short of £25k. 

If you click the link it will take you to the news story which was on our local TV channel it will also and give you more of an idea of our issues. The Council has admitted as you can see in the video that we would have been exempt if the paperwork had been received.  You will also see that someone else is in the same position but his bill is £63k. 

We also have a letter from the Housing Minister on Downing Street paper advising that this can be reviewed at any time, this is being ignored.

I have now started a petition and need signatures, I'm not asking for any donations just your signature, it really is that easy, every signature does honestly help us!  Could you afford to lose £25k just for a mistake? It is a lot of money to lose just because a paperwork error was made.

Thank you for reading this and thank you in advance for your signature.

In this link there is TV coverage showing West Berkshire Council publicly admitting if the paperwork was correct we would not have to pay.

https://chng.it/bqxjWcNjWV

Bendy_House

What is the justification for the £25k levy?

Is it proportionate?!

ComicGeek

Bendy_House said:

What is the justification for the £25k levy?

Is it proportionate?!

It's a Community Infrastructure Levy, designed to support schools, hospitals, play areas etc, as new build schemes can increase the pressure on this vital local infrastructure.

Really important as it raises a lot of money from new build schemes, I know our Parish Council gets part/all of this which is funding a new much needed play area. It's calculated on the gross internal area of the dwelling. 

There's an exemption for self build schemes, but I don't agree with that - they are still putting increased pressure on existing infrastructure and should have to pay towards it.

Bendy_House

Thanks, CG.

That puts quite a different complexion on the matter. I'll put my cyber pen back down.

Marie, how much is this build going to cost you? And how much will it be worth when built?

(I think these are valid questions?)

Doozergirl

Signed.  

Have you complained to the Local Authority Ombudsman? Are you able to? 

Doozergirl

Bendy_House said:

Thanks, CG.

That puts quite a different complexion on the matter. I'll put my cyber pen back down.

Marie, how much is this build going to cost you? And how much will it be worth when built?

(I think these are valid questions?)

They should be exempt, other self builders are exempt.  I don't think they're valid questions for that reason, they're intrusive. 

Whilst self builds do put some pressure on infrastructure, they more generally benefit from existing infrastructure.  

They're often in 'windfall' locations that already have local infrastructure in place - direct onto existing roads, benefiting from existing public transport routes, play areas, town or village shops.  They're often either replacing an existing dwelling, building on awkward brownfield and/or infill sites that developers won't touch because they are more expensive to build on.  

They do create an additional council tax liability, so they bring income.  

Self builders get it much harder than big developers in trying to get permission in the first place and trying to raise finance.   They experience more general stress.   They build better quality homes and they don't benefit from any economy of scale or realise profits in the same way as developers do.  

Developers almost exclusively create larger, car-centric developments on the edges of conurbations, requiring new roads, new shops etc. significantly more infrastructure.  

Long live self builders!  

mariejader

This is a levy for builders, not private individuals.

I am not a builder and I do fit into the exemption category for exemption, if you look at the news clip in the link you will see that my council have confirmed I would have been exempt, and would not have had to pay if the paperwork was correct.  Unfortunately I had no idea there was a form missing, the first I knew was when the demand notice landed on my doorstep, after the footings were dug.  If I had know I could have rectified the situation.  How can I put something right if I am unaware of the problem in the first place?  

Regarding putting extra strain on the local area I am not putting any pressure on existing infrastructure as this is our family home, and I still have the same amount of people living in it as before the planning application.

So please pick can I ask you to pick up your cyber pens and sign my petition and help me?

ComicGeek

Doozergirl said:

Bendy_House said:

Thanks, CG.

That puts quite a different complexion on the matter. I'll put my cyber pen back down.

Marie, how much is this build going to cost you? And how much will it be worth when built?

(I think these are valid questions?)

They should be exempt, other self builders are exempt.  I don't think they're valid questions for that reason, they're intrusive. 

Whilst self builds do put some pressure on infrastructure, they more generally benefit from existing infrastructure.  

They're often in 'windfall' locations that already have local infrastructure in place - direct onto existing roads, benefiting from existing public transport routes, play areas, town or village shops.  They're often either replacing an existing dwelling, building on awkward brownfield and/or infill sites that developers won't touch because they are more expensive to build on.  

They do create an additional council tax liability, so they bring income.  

Self builders get it much harder than big developers in trying to get permission in the first place and trying to raise finance.   They experience more general stress.   They build better quality homes and they don't benefit from any economy of scale or realise profits in the same way as developers do.  

Developers almost exclusively create larger, car-centric developments on the edges of conurbations, requiring new roads, new shops etc. significantly more infrastructure.  

Long live self builders!  

The floorspace of any demolished existing buildings are deducated from the calculation of the CIL liability, so any benefit from existing is already taken into account. The CIL liability is calculated against any new floorspace, so does reflect additional pressures on local infrastructure.

We all know that council tax is insufficient to cover all the work required at a local level. Perhaps there could/should be a reduced rate for self builders, but ultimately it's a relatively small amount compared to the land and build costs and benefits the wider community. I don't agree with the complete exemption.

CIL was introduced in 2010, so difficult to claim that nothing was known about it. West Berkshire only applied it in 2014/2015. Expensive mistake from the OP, but ultimately they had incorrectly filled in the paperwork (as stated in the news article on the link). It's not the council's job to guide them through the process, the OP could have appointed an expert to assist them.

Bendy_House

Doozergirl said:

Bendy_House said:

Thanks, CG.

That puts quite a different complexion on the matter. I'll put my cyber pen back down.

Marie, how much is this build going to cost you? And how much will it be worth when built?

(I think these are valid questions?)

They should be exempt, other self builders are exempt.  I don't think they're valid questions for that reason, they're intrusive. I wouldn't never normally ask such intrusive questions, but the OP came on here requesting help on a very specific issue, and I judged them fair and relevant in these circumstances. No-one needs to answer them.

Whilst self builds do put some pressure on infrastructure, they more generally benefit from existing infrastructure. They benefit more? So why not contribute just as much?

They're often in 'windfall' locations that already have local infrastructure in place - direct onto existing roads, benefiting from existing public transport routes, play areas, town or village shops.  They're often either replacing an existing dwelling, building on awkward brownfield and/or infill sites that developers won't touch because they are more expensive to build on. 'Often'? Perhaps each case should be taken into consideration on merit?

They do create an additional council tax liability, so they bring income. As do all houses.

Self builders get it much harder than big developers in trying to get permission in the first place and trying to raise finance.   They experience more general stress.   They build better quality homes and they don't benefit from any economy of scale or realise profits in the same way as developers do. Fair point. And, again, perhaps each should be judged on their indivuad merit? In general, tho', the private individual will almost certainly end up with a much better house than the norm, and at a better price, yes?

Developers almost exclusively create larger, car-centric developments on the edges of conurbations, requiring new roads, new shops etc. significantly more infrastructure. As would a whole street of self-builds! Ok, being flippant. ComicGeek suggested the levy was "designed to support schools, hospitals, play areas..."

Long live self builders!  

Long live self-builders! Amen to that. And I have always dreamed of being one. Most likely too late now.

Doozer, I am not trying to be obtuse. Please tolerate and educate me. My initial opinion is based on what my understanding is/was. I do change my opinions based on evidence.

Around here, the few self-builds tend to be massif houses on large plots with incredible views - we are talking multi-£illions, certainly after completion. Why should they be exempt from this social contribution?

Bendy_House

I do agree that the OP shouldn't be penalised for a simple mistake, a lapse in submitting a document that has no other bearing on the build. Ie, they aren't breaching regs/pulling a fast-one/trying to get one over the planners. They just omitted to hand in a form.

That is harsh and unfair.

Doozergirl

This isn't supposed to be the conversation, Bendy.  The 'little guy' is just asking for help.   You're forming an opinion with no direct experience and now you're arguing it.  eg.  'more generally' does not say 'they benefit more' at all.  I'm saying that 'more often than not' they slot in easily to existing infrastructure - they quite literally fill the gaps and put less immediate strain and have less impact on services.    

They also cost more to build because they're awkward to build but they impact the green environment far less than ripping through virgin fields.  They are beneficial to the wider community in a housing crisis - the planning process usually has to prove that the benefits outweigh harm and these are reasons that get laid out in officer's reports when they recommend planning approval.  

There are very few genuine self builds, sadly, and whilst you've noticed big houses on big fields, that isn't typical of the SB community, in fact those developments like that near me are almost always small development for resale, not self build.  Just anecdotally, all the SB accounts I follow on instagram are replacing or converting something else.  Their motivations are different to those of developers and their access to funding isn't even the same as someone buying a developed house.  The financial
burden is huge and there are enough barriers to self
build without more being placed on people.  

A whole row of self builds wouldn't start life as a self build project.  It would be led by developer or local authority and plots would be sold off post-planning accounting for impact and incorporating CIL, no doubt.  

I'm explaining some of the logic behind self build exemption *that already exists*.  For the purpose of this thread, the OP doesn't need to justify why they shouldn't have to pay it if she shouldn't have had to pay.  They have my sympathy because they are victims of bureaucracy.  Unfortunately, there isn't a self-build hand holding department.  You can employ a professional to help if you understand that you need one for something in the first place.  Our LA was outright hostile when we were going through the process.  

Not as expensive as the OP, but when the planning committee removed all of our our permitted development rights, I didn't realise at the time that they actually had no justification for doing so.  It will cost us more money to get those rights reinstated because they don't need to acknowledge that they did something wrong, they can make me pay for it instead.