Garage being used as a home

[Thehouseintheforest]

Hi there I have NC as think my neighbours wife is on here . I am after some advice and genuinely don't know what the best course of action is.

My neighbour applied for permission to build a separate granny 'annex'. This was refused. They then applied for a double garage with a games room above. This was granted.

The property was constructed and finished in May. Since June a family of three have been living there.
I had the opportunity to meet the woman of the family today. We walked home together from our local village shop. About a mile along a country lane. All our properties are at the end of this 'no through road' . There are five houses in total . The area is in a conservation area and sssi .

The new 'tenant' of the garage was thrilled with her new home. Apparently it is 'beautifully finished and fitted out' as a 2 bed country house. For which they pay a commercial rent. They intend to be there a long long time.
I haven't told her that the property is not meant to be residential.

AIBU to contact planning enforcement and tell them what is going on ?
Will they care ?

I know the usual suspects will pipe up with 'its none of your business ' - but surely the whole point of planning is that people abide by it. It is my business because my neighbour has unilaterally deciding that he doesn't have to take notice of planning laws and has increased the dwellings in our hamlet by 20% without permission.

Or should I just live and let live. Do the same myself and bring in a bit of extra income.? Few people ever come up here- they will probably never know ..

It seems really wrong to me, but is it. ?

‘It’s perfectly legal’

Er, no, it definitely is not.

unmaintained land does not suddenly become unowned ffs ! (Id better get out and sweep front steps).

Definitely report!

Without being outing, I can absolutely categorically say that planning enforcement will want to know.

I'm a local councillor and this is exactly the kind of thing that I deal with.
I also guarantee anonymity wherever possible when passing on issues like this as no one wants to be known as the person who grassed up the neighbors. But this is both a planning issue and safety issue for the tenant.

YABU. There are no where near enough houses in Britain. It really should have been approved. If you have no safety concerns it would just be mean to report it - especially as there is a family happily living there. It’s one thing if you had safety concerns but there is no harm done here.

Well done, OP.

We have lived close to a building site which has consistently flouted its planning permission over the last 8-10 years, and have raised queries with the council many times. Sometimes it turns out to be OK, sometimes - tbh the great majority - it's not OK, the enforcement people swoop and sort that issue out, then there's a pause for about 6 months, then owner / developer tries another scam.

It really should have been approved.

Why?

@elephantfan she is referring to adverse possession.

Just because dwellings are needed, on average, over the entire country DOESN'T mean that every proposed dwelling (whatever the design, and wherever it is) should be allowed to be erected.

@cantkeepawayforever because I can’t see any good reason not to. They approved a building of the same size to be used as a garage and games room so it’s not about environmental factors like light, space between houses etc. So surely it would be even better if that space was used as additional housing. Also there is an argument to be made that someone is entitled to do what they want with their property (so long as it doesn’t harm anyone). This reeks of NIMBYism.

Report to council tax enforcement - I bet you pay each month - but they won’t be paying if it’s not been banded as a dwelling

So many people not paying means it goes up for everyone else

So Boggles, every house - or every house with any land - should be allowed to build at least 1 smaller dwelling on their property, because 'it doesn't harm anyone'?

Be a shame if the council were told about that fenced off bit within 10/12. years (un/registered), eh? Or if all neighbours did same drawing attention to it b

We explored doing a similar thing, interestingly - rebuild an existing garage as a granny annexe for the future, but not as an integral part of the house.

It wasn't allowed - we never got as far as formal planning, but i had a long discussion with planning - because allowing such second dwellings risked changing the nature of the area from one of uniform-sized houses to each one being like 'a hen with several little chickens' as the planning officer described it, and that would change its character (as well as population density for e.g. schools, sewerage and other services, difficult to retrofit).

On the other hand, a vacant brownfield site a little way away has been developed as a whole site of uniform smaller dwellings, which does make much better planning sense.

It’s one thing if you had safety concerns but there is no harm done here.

I would also point out that since it was BUILT as a garage, the standards for safety, insulation etc etc will not be the same as for a fully independent dwelling. So there are safety concerns.

I'm with Boggles on this. The amount of mean spirited posters on this thread has made me feel quite depressed.

(Even our replacement garage has a clear proviso in the permission that it cannot, under any circumstances, be used as an independent dwelling)

anna but only a very few have agreed with his selfish, f you, illegal development.

So Anna, you think it is OK for someone to apply to build a small house, not be allowed to, so get permission to build something else and then build the house anyway, but to the building regulations / standards of a garage (and rather than use it as 'a granny annexe', let it out at a v. high rent)?

Could you explain why it is mean-spirited to think that's wrong?

(There is also the additional issue that none of this history has been disclosed to the new tenant, who has rented in good faith but in fact is living in an illegal dwelling that may not meet the relevant standards)

Illegal dwellings in outhouses / garages need to be closely monitored, otherwise you end up with situations like this.

I am in a conservation area and have converted an out building into an annexe

It doesn't have a full kitchen, although it has all the mod cons except an oven and hob. It is used for DC and sleep overs. I have rung the council and they don't seem to be too concerned. Because from the road you can't tell anything has changed then there isnt a problem.

BogglesGoggles

This reeks of NIMBYism.

You could not be more wrong. Far from 'not in my back yard' mentality. My concern is that if this is permitted then there is absolutely nothing to stop the other 4 houses in our small hamlet including my own - from doing EXACTLY the same. Thus doubling the cars/sewage/footprint in an SSSI.

.. and that same behaviour continuing throughout the village for every home owner with a garden.

I agree that more homes are needed but if one person is allowed to ignore planning - what stops everyone else doing the same ?

You absolutely did the right thing, and your neighbour did not. I know you must feel bad for the tenants, but that really isn't your concern. He is a CCCF.

If the property is in a small hamlet, that suggests a rural location. Government policy encourages new dwellings, but only in sustainable locations ie those that don't rely on private cars for accessing services and amenities, which is unlikely in rural locations. Other aspects of sustainability include protecting biodiversity (therefore issues in an SSSI) and protecting heritage assets (possible issues in a Conservation Area). Planning considerations will not just be about the built form itself, but the impact the use may have. A new garage won't impact on neighbours in terms of increased noise, disturbance, overlooking like a new dwelling could, even if the building was the same. A new garage won't result in increased car journeys, pressure on doctors, schools, water/sewerage infrastructure etc. They are very different proposals, and the Council wouldn't have refused the annexe unless it had sound planning grounds to do so - it costs money to fight appeals and run the risk of costs being awarded against them if the decision is flawed.