Accuracy of planning application

[AlwaysMoreCoffee]

Planning experts welcome! I would value your opinions!

Neighbouring land to our house has been sold to a developer. Their first application was hotly contested by a lot of us neighbours. A key point, to our mind, was that their application was inaccurate, not just on one point but on several- they didn’t accurately represent their boundary, their proposed building overlapped into land they didn’t own, they wanted to chop down trees that weren’t theirs, that kind of thing.

It was refused, thankfully, but the reasons given didn’t include any of these inaccuracies and I haven’t been able to find that “not making up total bollocks” is actually a requirement of an application. We invited the inspector/councillors/everyone we could think of to come and visit and take their own measurements and decide for themselves, but it’s not mentioned in the final decision.

How does one hold a developer to account if they’re doing this kind of thing? The planning officer did not seem remotely interested and if he did visit then we never spotted him (due to covid lots of noisy neighbours have been home all day!!).

Obviously if someone tried to build on land they don’t own then legal proceedings could be brought. But by that point the planning application would have been passed and the onus would be on neighbours to fund the legal dispute. And it’s hard to physically prevent someone from chopping down a tree, and you can’t exactly un-chop it again if the action is proved wrong. Surely planning officers should consider this, don’t they??

You need to look up 'material planning consideration' they are the only reasons the planning can be refused. Anyone can get planning on another persons land, it's not illegal. But if they built it, it could be torn down. That's only if the local authority regularly enforce.

It’s a civil matter between two land owners. The owner of the land which the developer has falsely claimed would need to get a solicitor and have the boundaries surveyed. It’s not the council’s place to get involved in arguments over who owns the land and where the boundaries are. In fact I’d suggest the land owner should speak to a solicitor anyway because developers rarely go away, they just change their plans slightly and reapply again and again until they win.

@sweetnessnfight thank you, yes I’ve looked that up and I’m baffled that nothing is there about actually being legally able to build what you say. Why is it legal to get planning permission to build something on land you don’t own?? Seems like a gap in the law to me, I struggle to imagine when that would be appropriate.
I’d have relative confidence in our LA to enforce, but by then the damage would already have been done.

@BlueSoop Yes, the developer coming back again and again is what concerns us. But what weight will a solicitor or official survey carry? The developer can still say “we’re building something 5m wide” and us saying “but you only own 4m of that land” doesn’t seem to matter.

It feels like if the developer resolves the issues the planning officer objected to, then their next application would be accepted and the relevant neighbours would need to be on hand indefinitely to claim ownership of their land or chain themselves to the relevant trees when builders turn up with chainsaws. That can’t be right surely, there must be something pre-emptive we can do?!

Try the Garden Law forum, maybe?

Could you put TPO's on the trees?

The rules on planning have always been daft and any time they're changed it just becomes a 'new' daft. Blindingly obvious to most that you should own the land you plan to develop but in planning it's not a requirement! Couldn't make it up really.

Just keep pushing back, doing what you're doing and invite the press around to have a look too (why not?!). If you can, make the boundary to your land VERY obvious so they don;t 'accidentally' come in and clear it while you're at the shops one day...

Under the planning legislation it is quite possible to make an application for land that you don't own. However, to make it a valid application, the applicant has to certify that this is the case and serve notice on the owner of the land concerned. IF the owner can't be traced, they have to place notices in the newspaper and I think on the land, and again certify that this has been done.

If it is easily shown that the land edged red on the planning application is under the ownership of someone else, eg obvious from land registry documents then the owner should contact the Council informing them that they haven't been served notice and the application is invalid. However, once the application is validated, the Council will still have to determine the application in the same way. The fact that the applicant doesn't own the land will not stop PP being granted if it meets all the relevant criteria. PP in itself doesn't give the applicant the right to implement that permission on land that he has no control over.

Do you know the owner of the land containing the trees? If so, they could approach the Council with a view to having a TPO put on the trees if they are of the required amenity value.

You can get planning permission on land you don’t own. Technically you can even build on land you don’t own, it would be up to the land owner to get a solicitor and stop you. The council isn’t interested in who owns the land, that’s a civil matter between individuals.

Your trump card here is that if there’s a boundary dispute it will make the new homes impossible to sell. So you need to approach the developer with the aim of resolving this amicably. You get a solicitor and surveyor, they liaise with the developers solicitor and surveyor, and try to come to an agreement. If you can’t come to an amicable agreement then it goes to court and a judge decides who owns the land. The court costs can outweigh the value of the land in question so it’s in everyone’s interest to come to an amicable agreement.

We had exactly this issue with a neighbour’s balcony application. The support for it was on land they didn’t own. The councils are supposed to check this before validation but they don’t. The applicant declares they own the land and basically lie on the application. Planners never ever check this against land registry. In our case, a simple check would have shown the applicant was lying.

No officer looked at the site either. Covid excuse. However I contacted my parish council who objected and all the neighbours objected too. Not just on an inaccurate application, but on overlooking grounds. You need to object on the grounds that the application is inaccurate and, in fact, planning authorities have been taken to court, and lost, because neighbouring land owners were not informed of the proposals. If they are not informed, their rights to object and ask questions are removed. Councils are advised very strongly to ensure they know an application is truthful and not remove rights of other property/landowners.

You must also object on planning grounds. In addition, write to the chief planning officer about consultation with owners - and that includes the owner of the land in question. Make sure the land registry is accurate in terms of ownership. If there is no registered owner you simply cannot do much about it in terms of consultation.

As the council hadn’t done due diligence regarding the accuracy of the application, they will have to determine it. Applicants can keep going with amended plans but hopefully amended designs meet the concerns raised by the planning officer.

Ask about the possibility of TPOs. You cannot demand it. Planning permission might well require they stay though when approving landscaping.

We now have another application near us that has no dimensions for roof height. It’s 4 stories instead of 2 and a loft but the application asserts it’s not as high as the original dwelling. As DH is a civil and structural engineer, we’ve called that one out. Unfortunately planners can be duped and inaccurate drawings (cartoons says DH) are accepted as fact.

Thank you all this is very helpful and has given me lots of food for thought!

The trees would never get TPOs sadly. They’re not special. It’s just the brazen cheek of the developers happily asserting that they’ll cut down something they don’t own. And the council planning department not considering that their business when they grant PP!

The fact that the applicant doesn't own the land will not stop PP being granted if it meets all the relevant criteria

Yes this is my concern! And that would be enough to do the damage. Once PP is granted, that will then have the knock-on effect on all our neighbouring house prices and while yes we could start a formal dispute, this would have a negative impact on us too.

The serving notice is something I can pick up on. I know at least some neighbours were served notice but I don’t know whether the one with the contested boundary did. Again though- it’s notice of intent, but it doesn’t give us power to actually do anything, does it? I will investigate that question!

@PresentingPercy good luck with the 4-storey one near you!

Thank you for the Garden Law Forum suggestion, I will check that out too.

Much appreciated all, thank you for taking the time to help

You can apply for pp on land not currently owned. A boundary dispute is separate to the planning process and not in itself a reason to refuse.

The applicant has to sign that the owner of the land has consented to the application. An applicant can be fined if this has not happened. It’s vital Notices are served on neighbouring property and land owners for precisely this reason. It makes a difference. Everyone in planning ignores the fact that the owner of the land must consent. You cannot just have your land built on without having any say so on it!

This is what DH and I submitted to the planning authority regarding the balcony support on land not owned by the applicant. In our case we knew the owner was the management company of the estate and DH is a director of it. No approach had been made to the directors about the balcony. Which also projected over the land not owned by the applicant.

Planners seem very lazy in this regard but you must fight it.

Once PP is granted, that will then have the knock-on effect on all our neighbouring house prices and while yes we could start a formal dispute, this would have a negative impact on us too
Yes it will. But not as negative as if you allow this developer to build on your land and effectively take it off you! You need to assert your right to your land! The owner of that land should begin by erecting a fence to clearly divide it from the developer’s property. Then get a solicitor and surveyor, and open a dialogue with the developer with the aim of coming to an agreement about where the boundary is located and who owns what.

As someone who has been on the reverse side of a breathtakingly malicious boundary dispute I would proceed with caution before creating one - it will affect your property also if you own the neighbouring one and you would have to declare it if you needed to sell and the planning permission for next door falls through.... The ‘red line’ on the LR docs is only valid for + or - 50cm so if the land is separated for example by a natural hedge it may be that the boundary line is not where you assume it should be. Ditto fences - don’t assume something erected 5 years ago before you bought a property was put in the correct place. How long have you owned your property for? Could adverse possession work in your favour if there was a dispute? I really would advise trying to resolve with the landowner before starting down this road as the costs escalate very, very quickly. Secondly as a pp said, a boundary dispute is a separate issue to planning permission so make your case separately - facts supporting why you object to the build first, then you can only wait and go through the planning process before moving to stage 2 - a boundary dispute to be settled before party wall agreements (assuming that these would be required). You could also ask your solicitor who are the best boundary surveyors and then put them on notice which would prevent them from acting for the other party .

I do feel for you, it is incredibly stressful but you need to strategise on fact, and although incredibly hard, remove the emotion. Would also second getting other opinions on the Garden Law forum where there is lots of useful advice.

@PresentingPercy

The applicant has to sign that the owner of the land has consented to the application. An applicant can be fined if this has not happened. It’s vital Notices are served on neighbouring property and land owners for precisely this reason. It makes a difference. Everyone in planning ignores the fact that the owner of the land must consent. You cannot just have your land built on without having any say so on it!

That is not correct.

The applicant has to serve notice on anyone who owns/has an interest in any land that forms part of the application site. The Planning legislation doesn't require that those people consent to the application being made. Obviously the landowner would have to consent to any development taking place, but that is not relevant to the determination of the planning application.

Planning Policy Guidance here

@PresentingPercy

This is what DH and I submitted to the planning authority regarding the balcony support on land not owned by the applicant. In our case we knew the owner was the management company of the estate and DH is a director of it. No approach had been made to the directors about the balcony. Which also projected over the land not owned by the applicant.

Planners seem very lazy in this regard but you must fight it.

The Planning legislation does not require Local Planning authorities to search Land Registry etc for proof of ownership. The system places the onus on the applicant to certify correctly. If other evidence is provided, the Local Authority should put that to the applicant to get the correct notices submitted. As above though, once the authority is satisfied that the application is valid, this will not stop the Council form determining the application. Land ownership is not a material planning consideration.

I may be in a similar situation. In my case it’s the council that own the land and who want to build (destroy) a beautiful field.
I’ve emailed them using their own maps submitted in their application which are all conveniently slightly different showing an overlay of where we believe the correct boundary to be but just get response of ignorance.

The land registry say that their maps are not 100% accurate. Have you been using the land registry map as your proof of boundary?

@Timbucktime You probably need to deal with the Council's Estate Department, or the Council's legal department (they all have different names for these things), rather than the planning department. If you can't find the relevant department/officer, contact your local Councilllor who should at least be able to point you in the right direction. If you're lucky, they may even look into the issue themselves.

Planning Authorites have to be accountable and ensure the certificates for land ownership are valid. If gthey are not, the application should not proceed until they are valid. It is clear the onus is on the developer rto provide them but the planning dept should not proceed in the absence of signed declarations from owners. It is not acceptable that planners fall back on the "we do not have to" instgead of acgtually protecting people from unscrupulous development. Developers know this and get it past planners who do not care. As above.

Land registry is about as good as it gets. Who else would have better records? Most people rely on land registry.

Whether fields can be built on or not depends on the local plan and the area plan. So you will never successfully fight against development that is in the development plan for an area. That ship has sailed.

Op: check out this section of the planning application. It’s the final section. It says clearly what an applicant must declare regarding ownership. Failure to declare accurately is serious. You can get pp for someone else’s land but you must have signed the forms and proved proof.

Where my house is in Cornwall, the planning authority offer a service to check if an application is valid. Unfortunately they still validate incorrect ones. We called them out as above but it’s utterly pointless having these rules on declaration of ownership if they are ignored by the professionals. The pp was turned down.

Actually I’m wrong. No planning officer report and the application was withdrawn. So the application was “decided” becayse it was withdrawn. So it wasn’t considered and it was not refused. So, op, get working on the certificate and the accuracy of the application.

It is clear the onus is on the developer rto provide them but the planning dept should not proceed in the absence of signed declarations from owners.

Owners do not have to provide signed declarations. There is absolutely no requirement for this. Planning Authorities do not have any requirement to check land ownership. They don't have the time or money to undertake such checks when they are not required to.

Serving the notice on landowners is a tick box exercise as far as I can see. As long as it’s been done, it doesn’t give the landowner any help whatsoever. It doesn’t confer any additional likelihood that an application will be rejected. It just makes the landowner aware- well, the landowners here were all already aware. If the developer failed to serve notice then they’d just have to serve notice and start their PP application again, it wouldn’t be any more likely to be ultimately rejected as far as I can see.

I’m kind of despairing again. If our neighbours whose boundary is in question dispute it, that still won’t stop the planning being granted. As @LIZS says, it’s separate and officers wouldn’t use it as a reason to refuse.

We certainly wouldn’t lie down and give up if PP was granted. The boundary is currently clearly marked and we’d all be out there telling builders they can’t build on it! But that could go on for years and affect everyone’s life and property in the meantime. I am desperate to get the PP rejected on the basis that it’s not possible to fit the plans on to the land. But it doesn’t look like one can- the only thing stopping the developer from doing that is if they also want to avoid a massive expensive battle with us. They might decide to make us fight

Are there valid planning reasons for objecting? If PP has already been refused (and dismissed at appeal?), any subsequent applications will have to overcome the previous reasons for refusal. Concentrate on those, along with any other planning issues that the revised scheme may bring up.

Granting planning permission is not equivalent to granting ownership of land. They may get pp but they cannot build until the boundary dispute is settled. Which is why it’s important to get it underway ASAP. You’re likely to find that the developer is as keen to resolve it as you are, because a boundary dispute will delay them building and potentially mean they can’t build at all.