Breach of planning consent?

[penny less]

Hi,

I joined this site about 12 months ago, and had a successful claim against the Hellifax/BoS! I can't post here very often as I only have access while at work, so for obvious reasons I cannot be a frequent visitor!

 

I would still like some help though;

 

Is there anyone on here who has knowledge of planning consent, and alleged breaches of?

 

I don't want to put too much up here about my case just yet, and I am afraid I will be unable to answer any replies until next Mon, but I am sure there is someone on here who will have some excellent advice!

 

"See" you next Mon, and thank you for your assistance!

Penny Less

[Guest ArthurP]

What's the detail of your concern? Do we have to wait until next Monday?

[borisbeaver]

Tune into this channel next week for the next thrilling installment of.....

 

:o Breach of planning consent?:o

[penny less]

Ha, ha!! I can see you are all rivetted to your seats for the next instalment!!

 

Ok, friend bought land, applied for PP to build barn stabling for 4 horses, application turned down, barn too big. Re-applied with smaller barn. 4 objections on grounds of; traffic increase, size of barn, business use. Assured people it will not be a business, justified size of barn and stated that traffic increase is minimal. To get PP the council were assured it was for private use, owner owned all horses, this is a big white lie as there are 4 owners, owner of land etc, and 3 friends. PP granted as long as for private use only. One of the origninal objectors has now kicked up and enforcement officer has visited. It is not a business, no money changes hands, traffic increase, well, it's a public highway and anyway only 4 extra cars. (Lane already has golf course and leisure centre, dog kennels and trout fishing businesses along it, as well as it leading to the common.) This is not my land, but I do keep horse there, I told friend that the lie was not a good idea in the first place, but her hubby insisted. Can the council force them not to have "guests" staying there? The real issue from the letter they had, as far as I could see, is that there should be no business run from there. If money not changing hands, how can it be a business?

 

Hope someone can help? Sorry if it doesn't make sense, not easy to summarise when trying to be a quick as poss!!

Thanks.

Penny Less

[Planner]

Will need to know the exact wording of the particular condition before can advise further. It will be on the Consent notice you where given when permission was aproved. Post it on here and we will have a look.

[patdavies]

If money not changing hands, how can it be a business?

 

Benefit in kind

[penny less]

I don't have the letter in front of me, but I did copy out this paragraph;

 

Quote;

"4 the stable barn hereby permitted shall be used for private purposes only. No trade, business or other commercial enterprise of any kind shall be carried out in or from the building. (reason - in the interests of the appearance and character of the area.)

 

This authority is in receipt of local representation that some, if not all, of the horses being stabled at this site are not in your ownership and therefore may be in breach of the planning permission."

Unquote.

 

As I say, this is not my property, and personally I wouldn't have continued the original lie, but I still don't see how it could be classed as a business? the dictionary definition of business is the exchange of money for goods or services, and there is no money changing hands here.

 

Anyone with expert knowledge out there, please help!

Penny Less

[Planner]

I would write back to the council outlinig that the stables are for the private use of you, your friend and family and as terms the planning condition, no business activity is taking place on the site.

[penny less]

Planner, thank you. That sounds like the logical, sensible way to go. Like me you appear to conclude that it's the business activity which is the issue here? I will advise my friend accordingly.

I just hope that the terrier of an enforcement officer will accept it!

Thank you again,

Penny Less

[penny less]

Hi patdavis,

Thanks for your reply. Benefit in kind, does that count as a business then? This set up is strictly for the 4 owners, no-one else and no payment is made, so I can't see how it can possibly be a business.

Thanks,

Penny Less

PS; Anyway, everyone knows the only way to make a small fortune out of horses, is to start with a huge fortune!!

[patdavies]

Planner, thank you. That sounds like the logical, sensible way to go. Like me you appear to conclude that it's the business activity which is the issue here? I will advise my friend accordingly.

I just hope that the terrier of an enforcement officer will accept it!

Thank you again,

Penny Less

 

Whether he accepts it or not is fairly irrelevant.

 

If he wishes to enforce, then he has to prove the breach (ie that there is business use). It is not the case that your friend has to disprove the allegation.

[patdavies]

Hi patdavis,

Thanks for your reply. Benefit in kind, does that count as a business then? This set up is strictly for the 4 owners, no-one else and no payment is made, so I can't see how it can possibly be a business.

Thanks,

Penny Less

 

Yes, benefit in kind can be counted as business.

 

Imagine that A owns the stable; B is a farmer and has masses of spare grazing land.

 

If A lets B stable his horse in return for being allowed to use B's grazing for A's horse then a contract is formed - business.

[Planner]

Planner, thank you. That sounds like the logical, sensible way to go. Like me you appear to conclude that it's the business activity which is the issue here? I will advise my friend accordingly.

I just hope that the terrier of an enforcement officer will accept it!

Thank you again,

Penny Less

 

Thats the bottom line. The enforcement officer says there has been an allegation of business use, as there hasnt and its private use, there would be nothing to enforce as such.

 

Any problems with this approach then get back to us, as the next step would be applying to have the condition overturned.

 

In terms of "benifit in kind", I ocassionally give people (friends, family, collegues) a lift in my car, so they are reciving a "benifit in kind" from my vehicle, therefore im running a taxi business? I dont think so.

[penny less]

Planner, thank you very much for your advice, I felt all along that it is up to them to prove it, not for my friend to prove it isn't!

 

I like your analogy of the taxi "business"!!

 

I will let my friend see this thread.

 

Thank you.

Penny Less

[patdavies]

In terms of "benifit in kind", I ocassionally give people (friends, family, collegues) a lift in my car, so they are reciving a "benifit in kind" from my vehicle, therefore im running a taxi business? I dont think so.

 

And you would be right, because

 

a) there is a specific exemption in law for the purpose of allowing car-sharing, and

b) this would be occasional, and

c) there is no evidence of exchange - you giving a lift is one-sided; there is no bargain.

 

To be pedantic with my example, if the agreement was such that B could stable his horse as long as he made grazing available to A's horse, then it is a benefit in kind. It would be business conducted for barter rather than monetary exchange, but business nonetheless.

[Planner]

And you would be right, because

 

a) there is a specific exemption in law for the purpose of allowing car-sharing, and

b) this would be occasional, and

c) there is no evidence of exchange - you giving a lift is one-sided; there is no bargain.

 

To be pedantic with my example, if the agreement was such that B could stable his horse as long as he made grazing available to A's horse, then it is a benefit in kind. It would be business conducted for barter rather than monetary exchange, but business nonetheless.

 

a) What would this exemption be then? do I no longer have to pay my taxi driver because of this "law"

 

b) I do it every day (at least once)

 

c) They slip me a £5 for petrol or buy me a drink the next time they see me..... BUT.....And there you have it! you have answered your own question - IT IS ONE SIDED. Pennyless friend provides stables for friends/ family AND GETS NOTHING IN RETURN (apart from their love and friendship)- Hence no business hence no planning condition broken.

[patdavies]

a) What would this exemption be then? do I no longer have to pay my taxi driver because of this "law"

 

b) I do it every day (at least once)

 

c) They slip me a £5 for petrol or buy me a drink the next time they see me..... BUT.....And there you have it! you have answered your own question - IT IS ONE SIDED. Pennyless friend provides stables for friends/ family AND GETS NOTHING IN RETURN (apart from their love and friendship)- Hence no business hence no planning condition broken.

 

I'm sorry, I responded because I thought you had raised a query regarding my attempts to explain that a benefit in kind can (and does) give rise to a 'business' transaction.

 

As it now appears that you are responding to the OP and not my explanation, I shall say no more.

 

However, the OP has not confirmed that there is not a benefit-in-kind arrangement in place.

[Planner]

Hi patdavis,

Thanks for your reply. Benefit in kind, does that count as a business then? This set up is strictly for the 4 owners, no-one else and no payment is made, so I can't see how it can possibly be a business.

Thanks,

Penny Less

PS; Anyway, everyone knows the only way to make a small fortune out of horses, is to start with a huge fortune!!

 

You looking at the same screen as me?

 

Why even mention "Benifit in kind", it as absolutley nothing what so ever to do with this query. In planning a "business" would be any of the A1 to A5, B1 to B8, C1, C2, D1 or D2 use classes not some "you let me stable my horse here and i will cut your grass arrangement". What the people that have objected to it are obviously trying to imply is that these are being run as commercial stables.

 

The key word is business - not business transaction or contract.

[penny less]

Hi, patdavis, sorry not to reply earlier. It is a long held dream of my friends to have her own land and stables to keep her horse, she wanted the security of knowing that she would not be subject to the vagaries of someone elses yard ownership. 3 years ago we had to leave the yard we were all on as they sold up, lucky at that time we found a lovely local man willing to rent us his redundant building and land. However it was likely the situation would arise again and rather than split up a happy band of riders when the opportunity came up to purchase land, she went for it. It's not acceptable to keep horses alone, they are herd animals, so as one of the conditions was that it couldn't be a business, she decided that we'd not pay any money. Suits us just fine! And, as Planner stated,

"This set up is strictly for the 4 owners, no-one else and no payment is made."

She has no intention of ever running it as a commercial yard. The area is way too idyllic to ruin it with hoards of strangers running about! There is just us 4, 3 who are happy to hack around the lanes, and the owner who also hacks but competes at weekends. We look after the land and the surrounding area as we value the countryside, what could be more rural than stables and horses grazing?

No way is it a business. And yes, I do count myself very lucky to have such a good friend!

Penny Less