Retrospective Planning Permission

Buzyizzy

I sold my house in UK and moved to Ireland seven weeks ago. I have not completed the purchase on the house I am living in, but the vendor has allowed me to stay on a caretaker's agreement. No problem with that on either side.
My solicitor who is handling the purchase has been very thorough and asked the vendor's solicitor for confirmation that the triple garage, which is huge and I am currently using to stable two horses, has planning permission as it is a new construction. It doesn't have any. As it exceeds the 25m2 limit, it should have had planning permission. When the vendor bought the property, the garages had just been built, but his solicitor didn't pick up on the pp.
An engineer is coming out, hopefully before Easter, and he will confirm either way. If it should have had pp, then the vendor has to apply for retrospective pp, which could take up to three months. This would call a halt to the purchase, which also means I can't do any of the work that needs doing. This includes securing the fields that I am currently using. As a result of that, I am unable to return to work as neither horse is totally secure. My solicitor has suggested that I pay a reduced rent during the three months, but I will have very little money coming in.
And on top of that, if the pp is refused, I will have no option but to leave the property and return to the UK, much poorer and pretty much unable to purchase a decent sized place to live.
Total nightmare!!

Gumbo

Yep. Pretty much what you have posted, but I see no question in there?

The seller needs to apply for retention permission and you have to wait it out.

sydthebeat

pm sent

Metric Tensor

Not asking you to divulge anything sensitive Syd but from my point of view this is a pretty straight case of the vendor applying for retention and everyone waiting it out.

Is there an angle I have missed?

PM welcome!

Buzyizzy

There are several issues I raised in my thread, all of them worrying, not least the fact that I need to be earning by 1st May and I basically can't. Planning hasn't even gone in yet so whilst the vendor has been jumping up and down that we haven't completed, if he'd had his paperwork in order, none of us would be in this position.
I have no idea whether permission will be given, but my usually optimistic solicitor has told me what the procedure will be if it's declined, which will be financially catastrophic to me.
So you see, it isn't just a case of waiting it out:(

Gumbo

Buzyizzy wrote: »

There are several issues I raised in my thread, all of them worrying, not least the fact that I need to be earning by 1st May and I basically can't. Planning hasn't even gone in yet so whilst the vendor has been jumping up and down that we haven't completed, if he'd had his paperwork in order, none of us would be in this position.
I have no idea whether permission will be given, but my usually optimistic solicitor has told me what the procedure will be if it's declined, which will be financially catastrophic to me.
So you see, it isn't just a case of waiting it out:(

It's a tough position, but you have no choice.
Hopefully it gets granted for you.

Calahonda52

Hamlet Act 3, scene 2,
The OP doth protest too much, methinks.
Stable the horses somewhere else and get to work.

I also wonder if using a garage to stable horses is a change of use.

Angry bird

Yes it is. Domestic garage condition specifically excludes the housing of horses etc.

Metric Tensor

Sorry OP. I was not trying to be facetious by saying "wait it out".

With this being an extremely important purchase for you it is my opinion that the paperwork HAS to be correct BEFORE you purchase. The only way to have it correct is for the vendor to get retention permission for the garage* - this will take 12 weeks from when it's lodged. No shortcuts available.** So when I said "wait it out" I meant that the only way to fully protect your investment means a 12 week wait.***


* It will be very difficult for the vendor to call it a garage in the retention application if there is horses in it.

** In theory it can happen in 9 weeks. In my 15+ years in the industrt seeing, thousands of planning applications I've seen this happen once.

*** There may be alternatives but all of them involve you taking on risk and therefore the possibility of losing substantial sums of money. If you are borrowing to buy the property the bank may not allow you to take these risks with their money.

Buzyizzy

MT, sorry if I was abrupt, no excuses when peeps are trying to help.
Is it going to be more difficult to gain permission if there are horses resident? I have only had to add one stable door as one of the garages was kitted out to be a stable, just never used.
It's a cash purchase, all the more important for my investment to be protected, given that it's all I have:)
Having been an underwriter for mortgages in my earlier life, I know that it would be impossible to secure a loan.
I really hope it's granted, it will be a lovely place once I've spent some money on it.

Metric Tensor

When I say "very difficult" to call it a garage on a planning application if there's a horse in it - what I mean is "almost impossible".

Obviously you can call it what you want but the planners will not give you retention permission for a garage if there's livestock in it when they visit!

Angry bird

What MT says is correct, and if I came across such on a site inspection I would recommend to invalidate the application on inaccurate description, i.e. public notices should include the word, stables, or I would recommend a significant further information request to re-advertise the application to includes stables and asking the question, how is effluent from the horses stored and disposed of, and land available for same, in accordance with relevant guidelines, or I would recommend refusal. Let's say I had 12 planning applications on my desk a week, at least 3 would be retention of this and that, for sale purposes and everyone of them demanding quick decision, special treatment etc., and they don't get it, because I don't have the time. All this means, not up to you to regularise the planning, and keep those horses out of there. You can obtain the necessary planning permission for horses in that garage or wherever, once the property is yours.

sydthebeat

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, claim exemption for the duck

Buzyizzy

AB I am well and truly stuffed then. You say, keep those horses out of there, but that's impossible. Even if they are out in the fields, it will still be obvious that the building is being used as stables. Oopsies.
Better start making plans for my move then. i shall have to look on this as a very expensive holiday.
Syd, I guess I can but try.

Metric Tensor

Is the stable in a field beside the house? If so go to the planning website of the local authority and check to see what site boundary was used for the original planning permission for the house.

There's a possibility you could buy a completely compliant house and site in one transaction now and separately buy a paddock and stable in a few months time when the vendor has regularised as/if necessary.

Buzyizzy

Sadly no, it is a tandem triple garage with a flat roof next to the house, a few feet from a public road. If I could send you the plan, I would It's literally about 10m from the house and right on the boundary with next door's garden.

Buzyizzy

AB I read the exclusions to be if the garage was attached to the house?

Angry bird

Yep it's a pain for sure, but better to know where you stand, good luck.

Angry bird

Attached or detached, to the side or rear.

Buzyizzy

Angry bird wrote: »

Attached or detached, to the side or rear.

Is it allowed to be partially in front of the house?

Angry bird

No, cannot be in front at all.

OO7FITZY

I have stumbled on this thread with interest as I now find myself in a similar albeit less stressful situation

So hope someone can help advise me on the following?

Issue is purchase of a house which now appears to be missing PP for a conservatory to the front of the house, 20sqm in size and has been standing for > 10yrs I would say

Have raised with vendors solicitors and have not heard anything so just for my own understanding can anyone give feedback on the following:

I expect vendor to apply for retention with County Council
BUT, if they do not and say they are selling as is - is that illegal if that's not too strong a word to put on it?
Also as they vendors solicitor is aware and our solicitor is aware also - can a house sale be transacted legally if the parties are made aware of non-compliance with local planning laws?

Metric Tensor

Nothing illegal about it but a few points:

1. If you are borrowing to buy it the bank will not allow you to buy a non-compliant house and your solicitor will be expected to enforce this.
2. If it is actually built as long as stated (and provably so) the council cannot make you knock it but do not mix this up with actually having planning permission. It is still an unauthorised development.
3. You will not be able to get planning permission for any works in future to the building until this is fixed.
4. Most likely any future purchaser of the house will make you get retention before you sell it to them. This will be at your expense and is not guaranteed!

sydthebeat

You can buy a car without an nct..

Its a similar, but much more expensive situation.

OO7FITZY

sydthebeat wrote: »

You can buy a car without an nct..

Its a similar, but much more expensive situation.

Thx for the feedback...NCT analogy is a good one but with legal professionals at the both sides of the sale my expectation (naive or not), is that the vendor should make this right before the sale goes through...Im ok to pay deposit as long as it is refundable and wait for the official retention to come through, otherwise I think we should walk

Buzyizzy

Thanks for all the replies. I have been unable to read them due to a technical blip, but now having done it, I did right to walk away. House went straight back on the market after my departure and PP has still not been applied for. As an aside, the auctioneer was absolutely foul and threatening and insisted on paying me a visit the day before I left. To say I was glad I never have to see him again is an understatement. A horrible, horrible man. I returned to U.K. with massive relief.