Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Lothair Road House Conversion
Originally this post was a notice about the weekly planning applications update. However, since it's turned into something more substantial, I've moved that notice elsewhere and am making way for this discussion to focus on a planning issue on Lothair Road.
Read on............
Read on............
Tags for Forum Posts: illegal conversion
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
Marian, Juliette,
Do either of you have any good evidence (or even a strong belief) that the work to convert from 2 to 4 has taken place recently (or less than 4 years ago)? Note that this property already has permission to be 2 flats. We can only oppose the application if we can prove that it has not been 4 flats for more than 4 years. This may require an examination of the evidence filed to see if it has been fabricated (and there are a group of us who can help with that) . We cannot object to this application just because it's a conversion if it was done more than 4 years ago. Please PM me your phone number if it's easier to discuss by phone.
-
Permalink Reply by Andy Cheatle on
-
Hi Juliette - how was Germany?
Now that you know who I am, I can't add much more to my previous post!
I said what I know so that it might jog a memory or two.
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
I'm not sure it would be worth talking to the owner unless someone does know him - he's unlikely to say anything that would help us here, he'll just want to back up his claim that the flats have been there for four years plus.
-
-
How can we go about proving this? We are trying to prove a non-event!
If it can't be proved that it has been converted to 4 flats, doesn't this mean that it hasn't been converted (legally)?
Any advice?
-
-
As I understand it (and there are others here who are more expert than me), the owner will have to supply 'proof' that the flats have existed for 4 years plus. In an earlier post on this thread, Bushy says that the proof - according to the housing officer in charge - isn't in the form of official documents (like gas bills) which, though easy to forge, are also easy to verify. I think there have been cases where applications for a CoL have been rejected because the evidence provided isn't compelling enough - I'd hope this would be the case here.
And, apologies for carrying on banging on about this, in response to Q8 he says "retention of 4 self-contained flats, with two established and looking to establish two other units". How does that square with saying that all 4 have been there since 2005??
-
-
The Planning Officer who is in charge of deciding this case has already told me that as far as he's concerned, the tenancy agreements (copies) and statutory declaration (from the owner themselves) is all he needs. The implication is that unless he is provided with firm evidence to the contrary, he will grant this application. Objections from neighbours are insufficient in themselves and he is under no legal obligation to actually make his own investigations (that's the law I'm afraid). He will only do what the law tells him, not what he thinks is right or worthwhile. So he will not make his own investigations - that's up to residents.
-
Permalink Reply by VIX on
-
Here we go again!!!
Copies of some Tenancy agreements and an oath from the owner are not enough evidence by themselves, as these can easily be faked.
Tenancy agreements and oaths are only some items that can be used as evidence, but I do not think these are good without other items to support them. i.e utilities of council tax. If they haven't supplied utility bills [as a planner] I would ask why.
If objections have been made then the planner should take those objections seriously.
Has anyone looked at the VOA for this property? That should establish the council tax records.
I know not ALL applications are dodgy, but considering what has come light recently I would expect planning officers to take a more active approach to doing a little bit of investigation before granting COL's.
I think I took a look at this application along with several other HOL bods and weve all found the application rather vague.
Has anyone complained to planning about the lack of evidence? or looked into the app further? -
-
-
Can anyone local who lives on Lothair rd see any new meters for the property? This is a tell tale sign of a new conversion, boiler vents are another indicaton.
Don't be fooled if no one has seen any actual building work going on, developers can be very sneaky in how they go about sub dividing spaces!
Ill be happy to go take a look at the file if someone wants to call planning and ask for the file to be brought from storage . Don't let them fob you off by telling you it can be looked at on Micro fish. -
-
Permalink Reply by Anette on
-
How do we go about getting this sorted? The man is clearly completely wrong, we know that - how can we get the system to realise it? Meeting with head of planning?
-
-
-
Vix - council tax on this property has always been paid as a whole house and not two or even four flats (see my post at top of first page).
-
Permalink Reply by TTTH on
-
This case has now gone to appeal and can be found here on the government's planning portal:
http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/makerep.asp?caseaddr...
please add your objections
-
-
It's worth pointing out that the objections should be based only on the quality (or lack of) of the evidence. It is irrelevant whether or not this conversion is a breach of planning permission etc. All that is at issue is whether the Officer made the right decision that "on the balance of probabilities" the applicant has not shown that the house had been used as four separate bedsits for more than 4 years.
Alison - not sure what you mean but this decision (which I wasn't aware of until now) appears to be evidence that the planning department are now looking at COL applications (and particularly the evidence submitted) much more rigorously and with a new set of guidelines to help them. Which is the result of the work of a bunch of us (including Nora and Alan) liasing with the council over the last 6 months. And it's good news all round. I would be amazed if this decision was turned round on appeal - the evidence submitted is hopeless.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
