What made you UNHAPPY today!

[windymiller]

49 minutes ago, andydclements said:

I remember how we had Social Services in to help assess father's needs, we didn't think we needed to make any changes at the time. They left and the list was massive including, shower out swap to wet room, alter doors so that he couldn't fall and prevent access to him,  still didn't think he needed those but they say so.. 12m later and realised that he'd have been unable to be at home at that point and probably would have been like that for months if it wasn't for those things having been done. It was really sobering to realise how things changed in c6months.

ive built a downstair disabled toilet and wet room and had the ot people out in advance so we had got most things ready but poor lad just has no strentgh or stability and although mentally all there can only say "yes" thats come from a man who was so active and agile 🙄

[phil flash]

13 hours ago, Colin P said:

Funny thing was I was playing about with all possible permutations of UK number plates and had decided that the best plate possible would be E17ORA. 

Why?  I don't get the 17...   

When I saw E9 ORA my first thought was 'shame it's not a 5'  - 5 in Roman numerals being V, but found that's already on a grey Evora.

Mine is Launch Edition #14, and 13th made as Lotus didn't use #13, so 13 or 14 might have some significance for mine, but it's got 9 so that'll do me. It's all trivia anyway.

[Colin P]

Just a personal view. In my opinion a 1 and a 7 together looks the most like a V than anything else, closely followed by just a 7. That said I have had comments about a mash up between East 17 and Rita Ora and "El Zora". 

[windymiller]

our spells evoro ??? 🙄

[Doug Ashley]

''What made you UNHAPPY today!'

...the long-awaited delivery tracking emails relating to a valved back box (ordered back on February 4th......), turned out to be tracking a phantom parcel.  It's still at the workshop of the particular supplier.

[Colin P]

Put in an application for certificate of lawful development back in November, to replace flat garage roof with pitched. It is permissible, I know it is. Due Jan. planning officer wrote in Feb asking for an extension and she’d respond by 8th Feb, since when nada. No response to emails requesting update etc. Gave up, put in a complaint on Friday, reply today. No surprise, refused on the basis that it isn’t within the rules for permitted development. It is. Won’t answer phone. Have sent email addressing each end every rule and asking her EXACTLY why it has been refused. I wonder how long this will take. 
 

I know full well it’s a case of he has complained I’m just going to refuse it. 
 

In the meantime the flat roof continues to leak. Fuckwits. Not answerable to anyone, seem to forget that they are public servants, not masters. 
 

it’s a bit like being arrested. Why. You broke the law.  Exactly which one. You broke the law, er yes, which one?  

[Barrykearley]

You do not need any consent to like for like repair or replace.

far better off not asking sometimes 

[windymiller]

if your changing flat to pitched it is altering the external appearance (but that usually refers to the house) and therefore may well need permission particularly if theres a listing nearby ? but agree with barry id of just done it 🙄

[Barrykearley]

Appeal the refusal based on the fact they didn’t determine it in time - they have firm guidelines laid down for this.

frankly - I’d be inclined to crack on anyway and await a stop notice. Pretty sure you could be done and dusted before the clowns even realise.

I am assuming here you ain’t listed nor in a conservation zone.

[Colin P]

Not in conservation zone etc, but I just know that come sale time people will want the certificate. It is integral to the house, but the portico and garage are flat. The thing is it meets every criteria for lawful development. 
 

I will be appealing it, but it’s a bit difficult when they are not specific about why it’s refused. 

ommentary upon the technical criteria:

Development not permitted

B.1  Development is not permitted by Class B if—

(a)permission to use the dwellinghouse as a dwellinghouse has been granted only by virtue of Class M, N, P or Q of Part 3 of this Schedule (changes of use); Not applicable

(b)any part of the dwellinghouse would, as a result of the works, exceed the height of the highest part of the existing roof; No part will exceed the height of the existing roof. The dwelling is 2 storey, the proposed roof is at ground floor elevation.

(c)any part of the dwellinghouse would, as a result of the works, extend beyond the plane of any existing roof slope which forms the principal elevation of the dwellinghouse and fronts a highway; No part will extend beyond the plane of existing roof slopes

(d)the cubic content of the resulting roof space would exceed the cubic content of the original roof space by more than—

(i)40 cubic metres in the case of a terrace house, or Not applicable

(ii)50 cubic metres in any other case; The volume is minimal and well within this limit

(e)it would consist of or include—

(i)the construction or provision of a verandah, balcony or raised platform, or No varandah, balcony or platform is being created

(ii)the installation, alteration or replacement of a chimney, flue or soil and vent pipe; or no chimney, flue, soil pipe or vent pipe is being altered

(f)the dwellinghouse is on article 2(3) land. N/A

Conditions

B.2  Development is permitted by Class B subject to the following conditions—

(a)the materials used in any exterior work must be of a similar appearance to those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing dwellinghouse; All materials will be such

(b)the enlargement must be constructed so that—

(i)other than in the case of a hip-to-gable enlargement or an enlargement which joins the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension—

(aa)the eaves of the original roof are maintained or reinstated; and No amendment to eaves of the original roof

(bb)the edge of the enlargement closest to the eaves of the original roof is, so far as practicable, not less than 0.2 metres from the eaves, measured along the roof slope from the outside edge of the eaves; and this spacing will be approximately 2 metres, vertically.

(ii)other than in the case of an enlargement which joins the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension, no part of the enlargement extends beyond the outside face of any external wall of the original dwellinghouse; and No part of the roof will extend beyond the existing footprint of the buildings or the roof curtailage.

(c)any window inserted on a wall or roof slope forming a side elevation of the dwellinghouse must be— No windows being added

(i)obscure-glazed, and N/A

(ii)non-opening unless the parts of the window which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window is installed N/A

Interpretation of Class B

B.3  For the purposes of Class B, “resulting roof space” means the roof space as enlarged, taking into account any enlargement to the original roof space, whether permitted by this Class or not. See comments under volume

B.4  For the purposes of paragraph B.2(b)(ii), roof tiles, guttering, fascias, barge boards and other minor roof details overhanging the external wall of the original dwellinghouse are not to be considered part of the enlargement. These will in any case retain their existing positions.

 

[Barrykearley]

Woah hang on - you done a class B pd application??? Why have you not just applied on standard householder ??

i am genuinely confused here - it looks like they have judged it based on agricultural class B not householder class B - from what I can see - they are two completely different things ?

[Colin P]

It was. Response is merely based upon the reason for refusal and the sections that they referenced. It is not a agri property. 
 

“The proposed development would not fall within the criteria of Class B of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) and would not be lawful.”

[Barrykearley]

I’m proper confused - why don’t they make this easy.

so - simply put - I’d crack on and fix it doing what you want. If you are worried about a future sale - then a certificate of lawfulness after 4 years is the way.

they should have determined the application proactively. They clearly haven’t done this and you are left with a leaking property. 
 

sadly these tossers hide behind confusing words and pishe - all the while confusing the land owner with legal jargon. One thing is for sure - most councils have zero cash for enforcement 

[C8RKH]

If she has got it that wrong I would but in a complaint of incompetence to her professional body, the Director of Planning,  and the Council CEO. There is no excuse for this and as you said earlier they are there to help and assist as much as to enforce.

[Barrykearley]

Sadly @C8RKH the system is pretty poor - the only recourse you have is to appeal the decision formally. You may find some obscure bollocks technicality that the planner is correct on which upholds the decision - even though actually doing the work is acceptable but needs applying for subtly different. That’s a massive issue with t(e current planning process and appeal system.

[Colin P]

I shall be phoning her every day until she speaks to me, and her boss. I shall be putting in the full planning and the appeal. 
 

I had this before with Epsom and Ewell, and I did exactly this. Tell me exactly why it fails and I’ll tell you why it doesn’t. Then they had a choice of either looking incompetent or issuing the certificate. With E&E they agreed to issue the certificate and didn’t. On the third request I ended up telling the guy that I was on my way to the council offices and would be asking for him personally and he’d better have the Cert ready. Funny enough it was left with reception by the time I arrived. 
 

I really hate planners. Hitlers the bloody lot of them. This is not to say that they do not do an important job, it’s just how they do it. Officious, unhelpful and without any way of holding them accountable. 
 

Stupid this is, the flat roof is Fugly and my neighbours would all like to see it done. 

1 hour ago, Barrykearley said:

 the work is acceptable but needs applying for subtly different.

This is the problem. It should be easy, they should look at it with a view to agreeing if appropriate under whatever basis it could/should pass, but they rather approach it looking for reasons to say no, even if a technicality rather than any actual good reason.  It is also set up to try and make people use planning consultants, they do not like direct applications. 

[Barrykearley]

5 minutes ago, Colin P said:

I really hate planners. Hitlers the bloody lot of them. This is not to say that they do not do an important job, it’s just how they do it. Officious, unhelpful and without any way of holding them accountable.

Ahh the response will be you haven’t paid for a pre app consultation. 
 

I can’t possibly put my feelings about planners into print.

[mdw]

I love the way with planners it's we are not going to tell you the rules, you have to pay  then we will tell you you got it wrong.  Then you can pay for another guess.    Then you see the mess they have made of my town for years.     I actually hope it is corruption and brown envelopes as otherwise it's shocking incompetence.

[eclat22]

18 minutes ago, mdw said:

I love the way with planners it's we are not going to tell you the rules, you have to pay  then we will tell you you got it wrong.  Then you can pay for another guess.    Then you see the mess they have made of my town for years.     I actually hope it is corruption and brown envelopes as otherwise it's shocking incompetence.

Unfortunately I believe it is both

[C8RKH]

1 hour ago, Colin P said:

It is also set up to try and make people use planning consultants, they do not like direct applications. 

I can sort of understand this. Given how people in general struggle with even simple instructions can you imagine the quality of some of the submissions. E.g. fag packets with nothing even on the back of them. However, if they made the rules simpler....

[PaulCP]

@Colin Pyou could try a game of bluff. We, along with 3 neighbours, had a reverse type situation a few years ago. The local planners approved an “industrial type” development on rural land opposite us and it was clear that they had failed to follow certain procedures. (Fortunately one of our neighbours had previous experience in legal planning matters)

Since it is not possible for objectors to appeal a planning decision we wrote to the Senior Planner, recorded delivery, stating where they had failed to follow procedure and informed them that we were putting the entire matter in to the hands of a barrister to gain a recognised legal opinion. The Senior Planner quickly reviewed the approval given and withdrew it.

Planning depts do not like going to court, especially if they believe that their decision is not 100% water tight.

It was a bluff that we were prepared to follow through but fortunately the bluff worked.

[LotusLeftLotusRight]

On 06/05/2021 at 09:27, phil flash said:

Why?  I don't get the 17...   

When I saw E9 ORA my first thought was 'shame it's not a 5'  - 5 in Roman numerals being V, but found that's already on a grey Evora.

Mine is Launch Edition #14, and 13th made as Lotus didn't use #13, so 13 or 14 might have some significance for mine, but it's got 9 so that'll do me. It's all trivia anyway.

I chose E9 ORA because it’s a 2009 Evora. I much prefer private plates that refer to the car, rather than the owner. It also appeals to future owners, as you have found. That’s why I also bought X4 GTE for my #4 GTE. Neither plate cost much money, but they certainly enhance the cars IMO.

Anyway my beef today is about greenfield development. This morning I had to drive to an appointment. The direct route proved to be impossible due to a road closure, so I ended up going on a 50 mile round trip through East Northamptonshire, out one way and back another. Due to the pandemic I hadn’t been on those roads for a year. Two things struck me. First how shockingly bad the road surfaces were, even the vital A14 A1/M1 trunk road had big pot holes every few metres. Second was the depressing spread of residential and warehouse development on what was until recently lovely farm land. Every few miles I would see vast swathes of countryside being destroyed by JCB’s finest. Thousands of acres lost forever. Why is this allowed to happen? How do they get planning permission? I remember growing up during the Thatcher years and green belt land was sacrosanct, even during those get-rich-quick years. Why do we need so many new houses? Population growth is stalling (Brexit & CV-19). The local infrastructure cannot cope as it is, but the local authorities will happily take your 6% annual council tax increase each year on top of all the free money from the new residents. You can bet your bottom dollar, that every house will get bought and moved into, the day after it’s completed, so where are these people moving from? They’re not homeless, so are they leaving empty homes? I just don’t see the need for this land grab around all of our towns.

[PaulCP]

2 minutes ago, LotusLeftLotusRight said:

the local authorities will happily take your 6% annual council tax increase each year on top of all the free money from the new residents. You can bet your bottom dollar, that every house will get bought and moved into, the day after it’s completed,

You overlook the increasing pressure on those gold plated final salary defined benefit related pension schemes, which are becoming more and more underfunded as time goes on due to ever receding investment returns.

They have to keep these schemes funded somehow. They could of course follow private industry and increase employee contributions or change to a defined contribution type scheme but there is a large element of “vested interests” at play.

It is time these local councils were made to show how much of the council & business taxes & other income received  goes in to maintaining these gold plated schemes.

[windymiller]

decided to clean the patio today and have so screwed my back up 😞

[C8RKH]

On 08/05/2021 at 12:00, PaulCP said:

the local authorities will happily take your 6% annual council tax increase each year on top of all the free money from the new residents.

Don't forget the millions in development payments they get from the developers for these new schemes. That's on top of new annual revenue for the council tax from the people who buy the houses.  Local Authorities are great at one thing usually. Wasting money!