deeplyblue Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I'm assuming that neither you nor your landlord have had any notification of this piece of building work. You could, at any rate, start by having a look at the Planning Portal of your local council and see if there are any planning permits still active for the properties around you - they could have got permission for this sort of thing 4 years ago and only be building it now. It's worth checking anyway. As other have pointed out the "permitted development" rules are complex, and have changed recently, however, he should have got Building Regs approval for every stage from the foundations onwards, so if there have been no council inspections, then something is not right. As for the dogs, they are a separate issue, and you need to tackle it soon. If you want to talk to others looking at similar "neighbour nuisance", try browsing on the Garden Law forum, where there are some seriously well-informed people. (Disclaimer: I've never tried their animals forum, but I know they're good on trees, boundaries and rights of way). Garden Law Forum on Animals db Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death on a hobby horse Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) I agree with a couple of the previous posters, your kids come first. Personally, the building is OK if you are happy with it, if not then report it to the council. They don't seem to have informed you about it which I think is a little rude so you owe them nothing. Go and have a chat with them about what is going on and let them know that you are very concerned about the dogs/fence. Your first duty is to your family, your neighbors/friends/community (or lack thereof) come after that. Edited July 21, 2009 by Death on a hobby horse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSV Gray Area Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 When does something like this become illegal? When someone lives there permanently? they can say any thing is illegal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonguest Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 So the dogs would be OK with you if he'd simply moved into the small bedroom in the main house ...?The shed at the bottom of the garden that he may or may not be living in is irrelevant. It's a dogs/fence issue. This reply sums up my feelings quite well too. IF the build is genuinely, to all intents and purposes, out of sight and is unlikely to cause any degradation to your own quality of life in your own home then why make any fuss at all? Either the dogs are an issue or they are not. What difference is it if he lives in the main (parents) house or the rudimentary home built out of sight? Or is it that, deep down subconsciously, you cant stand the thought that you will likely have to pay x zillion pounds to buy a hovel, but this enterprising chap is rolling up his sleeves and trying his best to achieve a modest roof over his head within his likely modest income/financial resources. By definition, the described build will be (by anyones standards) a rudimentary home - and is only done by people who are desperate to have some semblance of a life and basic home. And all you can think about is "Hmmmph! Is he allowed to do that?! SHouldnt be allowed!..." , which is really just the adult version of a whiny kid screaming "It's not fair mummy". I'm not a dog lover at all, and have lived alongside many neighbours who were. The key point being that they respected my space and I respected theirs. Thats all that ultimately matters. I couldnt care less what people do in their own space - as long as it doesnt effect me or others. If the bloke does nothing to you, then leave him be - and leave the local government nazis out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La La Land Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Yes..it will have water and shower and so on..I'm not to bothered about it..we only rent this place..but..he will move in with 2 big dogs...a mastiff bulldog and a rottweiler and the fence at the back is chest high and rotten and we have kids and 2 cats. That's why I want to know if it is legal or not...in case that there will be trouble with the dogs... Sorry but I disagree..much easier to get rid of problem if illegal So are the dogs not legal regardless of what buildings go up in their back yard? Your problem is with the dogs being able to get at your children, so you should be direct and confront this issue and keep at it till the fence is sorted. Anything else just sounds like you be satisfied to punish them in a roundabout way if you don't get what you actually want . After all, what have you gained if you stop focussing on your real problem, get this building (that you care nothing about) removed and the son moves into a flat but leaves the dogs (which you care everything about) in his parents care still with no adequate fencing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinnamon Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Sorry but I disagree..much easier to get rid of problem if illegal Why make a conflict situation where none yet exists? Ask if you can make friends with the dogs, chances are they are just big and like people anyway. And if the guy in question really is an assh@ole, then it's better not to rile him, because it'll end up with in a neighbor war and usually both sides lose. Remember, there are a ton of 'legal' things your neighbor can do in order to annoy you -- 10 beehives in the garden are not unreasonable nor is sousaphone practice at reasonable hour (the hour may be, but the sousaphone never is) and so on. So if you think you're in for a 'war' no matter what you do, then it's time to move house and find another rental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geezer466 Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 The original poster if from Middlesex that well known HPI enclave to the North and West of London. Development of back gardens in Hayes where I used to live was rife, more often than not without the necessary planning consents. This one sounds like it may well be built within planning guidelines but most are not and will encroach onto boundaries and restrict light to neighbours. Builders are only in it for the work and will not advise on potential problematic issues down the line. The case was in Hayes they were built often to poor standard to be used as lets, with MEW money with a view to increasing the overall value of the property. The situation got so bad in Hillingdon the planning department had to take on additional staff to police it. So consider that HPC'rs there was more often a financial incentive to build these rather than a family social one. Chap behind me and 2 doors down tried to build a two storey 2 bedroomed house in his garden. They got to the point where the roof tiles were being delivered and the planning inspector arrived just as they were carrying in the bathroom suite (due to the overwork). One prohibition notice soon put a stop to what was going on and as far as I know the issue is still being fought in the courts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athe Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 The 30sqm was one of apr400's few errors. Read the document - Class E. My mistake - upon checking I find that I have conflated building regs and permitted development. The 30 sqm is from buidling regs. Less than 30 sqm and you don't need a building regs inspection unless someone is sleeping in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
righttoleech Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Rip out every hint of green space that is spoiling suburbia. Only those wealthy enough to live in areas such as Hampstead deserve such luxury. The plebs should be forced to house immigrants from the ever expanding EU in their paved over gardens. The economy will benefit from the burgeoning prostitution, drug and forgery industries that can be run from the contemporary living space thus created. Only joking! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 He needn't worry. Get a train into London and you will see hundreds of such "structures" in gardens backing onto the lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmish Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 8 kids. Do the decent thing and buy them a TV. I'm sure we (i.e The Tax Credit Scheme) will already have done that............... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotoutintime Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) He needn't worry. Get a train into London and you will see hundreds of such "structures" in gardens backing onto the lines. Especially as the trains leaves Slough Station, a nice variety of "Sheds With Beds" Edited July 21, 2009 by gotoutintime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let-them-Burn Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 My mistake - upon checking I find that I have conflated building regs and permitted development. The 30 sqm is from buidling regs. Less than 30 sqm and you don't need a building regs inspection unless someone is sleeping in there. One of our neighbours is a planning inspector. He has built a brick 'shed' at the bottom of his garden to keep his 'scuba-diving' equipment in. This equipment needs a bath for washing it and electrics etc. Of course no inspection is needed as it is for the diving equipment - although in reality it is often used for housing the family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cells Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 See above. The limitation on footprint is if: So I can build another living space in my garden so long as it doesn’t take up >50% of the garden and meets the other limitations of height etc? That seems like quite a lot. is that correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) So I can build another living space in my garden so long as it doesn’t take up >50% of the garden and meets the other limitations of height etc?That seems like quite a lot. is that correct? IIRC that includes buildings already standing IE your house, so say you have 100m2 of land including house, you can build on upto 50m2, but your existing house is 30m2, so that leaves you with 20m2 this is all rule of thumb, and can be changed with special plannnig permissions etc Edited July 21, 2009 by Monkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest X-QUORK Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Or is it that, deep down subconsciously, you cant stand the thought that you will likely have to pay x zillion pounds to buy a hovel, but this enterprising chap is rolling up his sleeves and trying his best to achieve a modest roof over his head within his likely modest income/financial resources. Not sure how enterprising it is to build a property which stands a very good chance of being kocked down when the LPA finds out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.