4 year rule!!!!

[offroadertk421]

I have a 1.5 acre field that has not been used for agriculture for as far back as I can remember, there is an image of the field on google earth in 2010 showing it beautifully mowed.
There has been a building on the land that was built in 2001 without planning permission, clearly this is beyond enforcement as its been there since 2001.
Since 2011 we have used the field for recreational purposes, its still fully mowed to lawn, it contains an orchard, kids tree house, kids play shed, zip wire, outdoor bath tub with changing shed that contains a hot/cold sink and log burner.
In November 2012 we fully domesticated the main building 8m x 8m, it contains a log burner, solar panels, 240v, sofa bed, seperate bunked bedroom, lighting, sink, hob, oven, hot cold water / shower, seperate shower room/ toilet, dinner table etc.
The planning officer recently caught up with us, we've filled in the relevant notice, stating the facts above.
The planners, I think will argue that it is agricultural land, when in fact they have on record that its been amenity land since 2005. I believe this to be academic as the change of use in November 2012 changes not only the buildings use, but as its now a dwelling and has been for over 4 years, changes the the building and land to residential ? This is according to the T&C planning act.
We are waiting to hear from the planner response to the form we returned.
Any proper advice would be gratefully received.
Thank you.

 

[GeoffJ]

Are you claiming that the field with shed/dwelling is a new plot with dwelling house and the field forms the curtliage?

Or - are you claiming the field is a now part of the curtliage of a your main house that was on an adjacent plot?

The first attempts to claim that the field is now classed as "residential" by virtue of the adopted building? I am not sure that gaining the right to the structure would also gain you the change is usage?

The second claims the field is residential by virtual of it becoming part of the garden of an existing residential property. I have dealt with appeals that argue this detail and they have lost. But both sides provided precedents so it is does appear to be a complicated issue.

 

[^woody^]

It's ten years not four for this situation.

 

[Nakajo]

For proper advice I think you've come to the wrong place. We dispense wiseacring and gentle sarcasm. That's why it's free.

 

[offroadertk421]

[F1171BTime limits.
(1)Where there has been a breach of planning control consisting in the carrying out without planning permission of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land, no enforcement action may be taken after the end of the period of four years beginning with the date on which the operations were substantially completed.

(2)Where there has been a breach of planning control consisting in the change of use of any building to use as a single dwellinghouse, no enforcement action may be taken after the end of the period of four years beginning with the date of the breach.

(3)In the case of any other breach of planning control, no enforcement action may be taken after the end of the period of ten years beginning with the date of the breach.

 

[^woody^]

[F1171BTime limits.
(1)Where there has been a breach of planning control consisting in the carrying out without planning permission of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land, no enforcement action may be taken after the end of the period of four years beginning with the date on which the operations were substantially completed.

(2)Where there has been a breach of planning control consisting in the change of use of any building to use as a single dwellinghouse, no enforcement action may be taken after the end of the period of four years beginning with the date of the breach.

(3)In the case of any other breach of planning control, no enforcement action may be taken after the end of the period of ten years beginning with the date of the breach.

Well, what part of planning control are you claiming limitation from?

Putting a sofa-bed into a building is not domesticating! Have you been paying council tax on the building? Is it a registered home for voting? Is it a registered domicile for all your bills and affairs?

Or is it just a comfy pad for a few hours away on the sofa-bed?

 

[chappers]

could depend on the use of the building prior to the 2012 conversion.
The 4 year rule would generally supersede the 10 year rule if enforcing the 10 year rule would render the building useless. For example if you built a new house there from scratch enforcement could be said to make that building useless.
However if you converted a shed into a dwelling, enforcement would still leave you with a shed, all be it maybe a posh one.
But as Geoff says, these cases are far from straight forward and have gone either way in the past.

 

[cjard]

The planners, I think will argue that it is agricultural land, when in fact they have on record that its been amenity land since 2005. I believe this to be academic as the change of use in November 2012 changes not only the buildings use, but as its now a dwelling and has been for over 4 years, changes the the building and land to residential ? This is according to the T&C planning act.

I was under the impression that unauthorised works beyond the time limit do not change anything, they just become immune from enforcement.. Ergo, your land is still agricultural and the question is whether anything can be done about the non-agricultural use to which it is currently being put. It has not, in the eyes of the law, changed use, and if you have designs of clearing that building off and replacing it with a mock Tudor castle, you'll be in for a surprise.. Unless your council is as dopey the second (third?) time around