Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Tedious, but Planning Applications keep coming...
These homes are smaller than Ladder homes and the division of them results in a significant reduction in their social utility.
Can I ask that you support the current objections to these applications by spending 5 minutes on the site below.
http://www.planningservices.haringey.gov.uk/portal/servlets/Applica...
St Ann's Ward
HGY/2011/0483
8 Stanhope Gardens N4 1HT
Certificate of Lawfulness for use of property as two self contained flats
Certificate of Lawfulness
HGY/2011/0505
17 Rutland Gardens London N4 1JN
Conversion of existing property into 2 x 2 bed self contained flats, with erection of rear ground floor extension
Full Planning Permission
I have yet to post my objection, but will do so once at home.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
Is the one for 8 Stanhope Gardens legitimate? I.e. it's for a certificate of lawfulness, in which case the conversion has to have taken place more than 4 years ago. Do you have any reason to think that the conversion may have been more recent? There have been numerous cases recently of landlords converting unlawfully and then applying for a Certificate of Lawfulness with false evidence claiming to show the conversion was more than 4 years ago (e.g fake utility bills). Easier than applying for planning permission, which is likely to be turned down.
-
Permalink Reply by Anette on
-
Good point Bushy. The 2nd one should be objected to easily enough though, and should not even be considered to be honest.
-
-
Interesting, it turns out 8 Stanhope Gardens was refused a planning permission back in 1989 (HGY/1989/0424), but apparently went ahead and converted anyway. From the objections it looks like this is another landlord with a shoddy conversion and overcrowding. Surely this goes against the 4 year rule? They can't blatantly act against the law and then get away with it? Come on people, let's kick up a stink about this one, this is exactly the sort of landlord that needs to be made an example of. Stan, have you called the council to find out what the position is on this one?
-
-
Unfortunately, Anette, yes they can. The law only looks at whether the conversion was more than 4 years ago. Provided there's no outstanding enforcement action, they'll get their COL regardless of the history.
-
Permalink Reply by linka on
-
This is confusing: council policy says they're against the conversion of houses under 120 sqm in size (as -all- the unextended Gardens houses are). So because of this policy, anyone wanting to convert in the Gardens must do the following: convert illegally, keep quiet for four years, and then apply with a unassailable case for permission?
Also, there's a covenant attached to each deed in the Gardens dating from the construction:
"nor shall anything be done or permitted on the said land which shall be noxious dangerous or offensive or a nuisance or annoyance to the neighbourhood... or to the owners or occupiers of adjoining or neighbouring property or which shall be in any wise injurious to the same.”
I'd still welcome input on the legal relevance of that...
-
-
Linka
In terms of your first point, that's absolutely correct. That's the law. It's because historically the certificate of lawfulness procedure was intended to allow people to legalise very old planning breaches which no-one cared about any more. But sadly ruthless developers used it as a way of legitimising illegal conversions. When they realised that they could get fake (old) bills for tuppence over the internet, and that planning officers spent 0.02 seconds looking at the evidence submitted, they knew they were onto a good thing and didn't even bother waiting 4 years.
The good news is that the power of the internet and HOL in particular has helped reduce this dodge to a minimum. Planning officers in Haringey now have a strict set of guidelines on what evidence is acceptable. But in order to make sure we continue to keep a lid on it, it's vital that everyone keeps an eye on any major building works in their street and shouts loudly on HOL as soon as they think there's anything dodgy. Also keeping an eye on the planning applications like Stan has done, and not hesitating to ask for advice as soon as one comes up, will help make sure we keep the illegal conversions out of Harringay.
-
-
Hmm, very helpful, thanks. So I should probably pay more attention to the house (not recently for sale) I've spotted being ruthlessly gutted at the Green Lanes end of Roseberry Gardens over the last few weeks (lots of original decor being junked)... Oh dear...
-
-
No problem. Yes. If you have any suspicions whatsoever, immediately report it to Planning Enforcement (either online or by phone - though it's better to do it in writing to keep a record). They will pop down and see and once they've issued an enforcement notice, it stops the clock on the 4 years rule. You will have to pester them to find out what action they're taking though.
Out of interest, what no. in Roseberry Gardens? PM me if you want more help/advice.
-
-
Bushy, that's disgusting! So Planning says no, owner says fuck you and wins? And then fills the house to the rafters with god knows what fell of the bottom of the Eurostar last week, to hell with the neighbours and their entitlement to a nice life in a house they've worked hard to live in. It makes me so angry!!!!!!
Are you sure the 4 year rule applies when they have had a planning refusal previously? Surely that makes the illegal conversion if possible even more illegal?
It's funny, these discussions used to attract loads of people. Now it seems to be you and me. And Vix when she spots it. What's happened? Have we given up the illegal conversion fight?
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
No, Anette, we haven't given up the illegal conversion fight. But it's going to get a lot harder to win when there are fewer Enforcement officers and lower budgets in other respects. For example, to fight court cases.
As Bushy explains, the Certificate of Lawfulness was introduced for a positive reason. But has presented a few unscrupulous owners with an opportunity to break the rules. The situation he describes is exactly what he and other people - including Vix, Nora Mulready and I - found when we started looking into it. And that included reading old planning files; doing company searches; and checking into Statutory Declarations.
Full credit is due to Haringey Planning staff - and that's something I almost never say these days - for listening, and responding by tightening-up the procedure. And also to Planning Enforcement for doing their best to take legal action - when the law is rarely as helpful as it should be.
Though can I suggest, Anette that it doesn't help to conflate this with illegal migration. That's not the issue. When I was a young man with very little money, I was relieved to find a reasonably priced room. Sometimes sharing a flat or a house with people who became my friends. But if we'd behaved badly the landlord would have evicted us.
Which highlights the fact that there are management as well as legal issues. It won't surprise you to know that owners who don't mind flouting the law, are not the most responsible landlords either. Which impacts not only on neighbours, but people living in illegally converted properties.
-
-
@Alan, glad to hear the fight's not stoppped. It just seems like it sometimes, as this used to be an issue that engaged most of the HoL community, and now there's not that many replies. It just seems like yesterday's news, and that worries me, as it is incredibly important that we stay on this and do not give up. Even if budget cuts and enforcement has been cut down.
As for immigrants, that's part of the problem, when some horrible landlord crams his shoddily converted shack full of people who has no clue what their rights are, are trying to to be found out, and have no idea how to behave in a built up area. I have lived next to similar, it's not fun. It's worse than students.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
