To object to my neighbours planning.

[WhenWillTheBuildersFinish]

We were lucky enough to buy our house many years ago. We are rural and the nearest neighbour is 1/4 mile away, totally obscured by trees etc. So we have total privacy. Our neighbour, who we have been friends with for 15 years has dropped the bombshell that they are building a house right next to ours for their duaghter to live in. They are also going to put a driveway across the front of our property (we front onto common land) with her access road going up the side of our house. Her house will be able to see into our bedroom and bathroom. so we totally lose our privacy.
We are so upset about this we don't know what to do. The chap submitting the planning was turned down a few years ago for a similar planning application, so he has now submitted it saying the house has agricultural tie, it is all a lie, his daughter lives in the city 25 miles away and works in journalism. He is a retired solicitor who used to work for the local authority, so he knows all the loopholes.
What can we do?

OP, thinking more about this I reckon you have a very good case.
Your objection is obviously critical, or he wouldn't have become so angry - he would just have ignored you.
And the boasting about pushing it through the Commons was a vain attempt to convince you that you'd be wasting your time fighting it.
You still need to submit your objection properly with the expect help you've been offered, but I reckon you are onto a winner!

mistlethrush - surely basic policies about where you can and cannot build do not rely on neighbours objecting? are those kind of policies not considered anyway regardless of whether the neighbours object?

i just think the OP should be really clear and focussed in her specific objections and not just come across as nimby regarding any development at all.

Yes those policies are considered anyway but there are also more detailed policies that address direct impacts on amenity of neighbours etc.

Although I don't know for sure, the fact that common land is involved suggests very strongly that it's a rural location and other restrictive policies will apply. It may be green belt or AONB for example. I think it's highly unlikely that residential development would be supported in this sort of location but there are always loopholes and people can and do exploit them.

The OP should not have to negotiate as to where is the most suitable location for a development that would be contrary to policy. In the sort of situation that I think the OP is located it's almost her moral duty to be a nimby

I'm not a planner, but I am very cynical. You say that his land hems in yours, and that he uses (or would use?) an access road that is entirely yours- do you think there's a chance that he is trying to bully you into selling up so that he can buy your house and land? If he bought your property, there would be far fewer restrictions on how he developed land that was already residential, in comparison to going through the agricultural tie hoops.

How can it possibly not be a conflict of interest for him to be in charge of what happens to the common and at the same time having a planning application to build on it?

no, they don't rely upon neighbours objecting, and they should be taken into account without any objection being made. However, it doesn't hurt to make the objections fully so that its clear that the relevant planning policies have been taken into account - and in fact if you can tie your objections onto policies it makes it all the more difficult to ignore your objections.

For instance, if WWTBF wrote in a letter 'please refuse this as it will overlook our property and is in between our two houses' this would seem a bit nimbyish. However, if she wrote 'please refused this for the following reasons: in terms of overlooking, the proposals are contrary to Local Plan policy x which indicates that main windows should not be closer than 21m from other main elevation windows and in this case these distances would not be met; the house lies in an area away from the village envelope in open countryside where the only justification for properties is if they are necessary for agriculture or woodland management, in this case the property is not associated with any agricultural or woodland business and therefore there is no justfication for it being built in this countryside location. Indeed, such development would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework that indicates that development should be sustainable as it is not close to services and facilities and any resident would have to drive to access them or indeed any agricultural or woodland business.

That's turning a very personal objection into a policy based objection which holds significantly more weight.

Inertia that is definitely a possibility but it would only advantage him if he was intending to develop further.

The usual route is to apply for a house with an agricultural tie using whatever cobbled together evidence of need you can muster. Then you install a family member who lives there quietly for a couple of years before an application is submitted to remove the agricultural tie and separate the new dwelling into a new unit, making it available to be sold on the open market. Frequently you get an application for a granny annexe at some point as well so family member moves into big house, applicant moves into bungalow and agriculturally tied house is sold to fund it all.

They think we're stupid

The bit about him being head of the Committee sounds like a clear conflict of interest to me and there are complaints procedures available.

In your situation I would contact my MP - they tend to be good on an I dividual basis.

many if not most women are fairer in their planning permission, as they do not have this chauvanist/male pride/arrogance ,old-school tie mentality. Why does your other half not not deal with him ? Man to man.

Oh, just noticed the last post was in June. How has your terrible situation developed?