Planning "permission"

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emerald city » Fri Feb 05, 2010 4:42 pm

To: above posters.
In relation to local councils - planning consent etc. Does anyone know if the draft statutes referred to by TPTB in relation to listed building "consent" mean. I would never submit a form again applying for "consent". It was the biggest mistake I ever made. As they trapped me into some sort of contract without notification.
I am now fighting them as a freeman and the complaint of not being told of that contract.
What I have done is so little an incident, only a matter of a few people lodging a complaint about my new paint colour, which I didn't submit an application form. Then I was tricked into applying for "retrospective" consent.
No-one has ever on any site told me the definition of a draft statute, anyway as a freeman I consider myself not affected by their tricks anymore.
Best wishes, would ,like to know how you got on. It is not often a thread like these are seen, they are mostly about money. :thinks:
emerald city
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emmanualgoldstein » Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:01 pm

A draft statute is not a statute it is a suggestion that a statute should be passed. It is not enforcable.
emmanualgoldstein
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emerald city » Sat Feb 06, 2010 7:58 am

For emanuelgoldstein; :hug: :hug: Thank you, at last someone has answered. Your'e a star.
:blush:
In case you thinkI am a complete fool, I did know what the word "draft" meant. But "DRAFT STATUTE" ????
So as I have always thought, all the crap I've been getting from council, draft statutes being aimed at me left and right, should in theory then have absolutely no grounding whatsoever . Why then are they issuing an Enforcement Notice on this matter.??

This is worth looking into further and may apply to all council planning or listed building issues, if they have been aiming draft statutes at you.
It is odd, although I did state to the council that they were only draft statutes, they didn't address that but came back with a lot of legalise, town and country planning.........on and on and on. (Like they do)

I couldn't get any defininition anywhere online for "draft statutes".

So, if I have unknowingly contracted with them - even if they didn't get my consent to this, they have only a signed application form . BIG QUESTION, all contracts require two signatures of agreeing parties so would they have had to sign that application form also, to form a lawful binding contract - without two signatures would it even be "legal", in their world. ?? and shouldn't I also have been sent a copy of the signed contract with their signature on ???
Good wishes.
emerald city
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emmanualgoldstein » Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:27 pm

Dont get me wrong, just because its not enforcable doesnt mean they wont enforce it, but if they do enforce it, they have to do so lawfully otherwise their enforcement action will fail. There are two stages to defending yourself from this and the first is the appeal with the secretary of state and the second is in a court.

The enforcement order has to be given within 4 years of the change happening, otherwise they cant do any enforecement whatsoever. Furthermore the enforcement order has to be served within 28 days of it being approved by the secretary of state. If its not they have to go back to square one. It has to state on it what needs to be done and in what time frame it needs to be done, and if its a planning order thats been created since you started painting your house, you are entitlted to be compensated.

My knowledge is more about the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act but I dare say it has a translation in all other versions of this act. A draft statute sounds to me like a section 71 planning order and since they call it a draft statute it sounds like they do not yet have the persmission of the secretary of state to carry out any enforcement.

Could you scan or type in hat the enforcement notice says and tell me what area your in. I want to get as much practical knowledge on these matters as I can since I think I may need it for myself in future.
emmanualgoldstein
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emerald city » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:21 pm

ToEmanuelgoldstein,: I will give you all the details when I get it from file. This is very useful info. Also I will keep on this thread. Thanks
emerald city
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emerald city » Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:11 am

To: emanuelgoldstein.

One or two queries first:

"just because it is not enforceable, dosn't mean that they cannot enforce it". How can they lawfully enforce something not enforceable.

"if they do then they would have to do it lawfully" - how so?

Info. 1. "applications" are submitted to your local council.
2. You "appeal" against the negative outcome to your area Planning Inspectoriate.
3. If the councils decision is "upheld" you can then "appeal" against the enforcement NOTICE when issued to you
by the council - this appeal also goes to the Planning Inspectorate of your area.
4. In my case this was also "upheld".


As it is NOTICE could I not issue a Notice to them..?
I notice you didn't address my contract questions, was there a reason for this, am I wrong on this.?
I think the Plan. Inspectorate is given his "powers" by the Sec.of State. Does he have then powers over me ??

As I know their next step is a local magistrates court (de facto) I know from info.on these posts that I can claim my Freeman rights by not creating a joinder in any way and not recognising the court. We are still talking "draft" statutes here.
If in spite of my not "going into" their jurisdiction, they somehow issue an Order for my to re-paint, then can't I charge them for carrying that order out - say in the region of £4,000..????? according to Rob Mennard.
If I still do not carry out any of their orders cos they refuse to accept my fee, then their only option is to enter my property and be subject to trespass.
Oh; and I am in SouthEast of England.


I will give you the details of Enf. Notice later as promised.
Good wishes.
emerald city
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emmanualgoldstein » Sun Feb 07, 2010 7:24 am

emerald city wrote:To: emanuelgoldstein.

One or two queries first:

"just because it is not enforceable, dosn't mean that they cannot enforce it". How can they lawfully enforce something not enforceable.
Its not lawful, thats my point

"if they do then they would have to do it lawfully" - how so?
Section 127 of the scotland TaCP Act deals with how enforcement notices are to are to be served. Firstly, there has to be a breach of planning control - ie you didnt ask if it was lawful even if it was - secondly the actions have to be unlawful with regard to the structural plan for your area. This is a document you will find on your local councils website but some councils like to keep it well hidden, prefferring that you only let them deal with the structure plan and read their bumph so you can take their perspective of the law to be the law.

I know your not in scotland, but there will be an equivelant statute for you in the TaCPA for england and wales. The scotland act states that they have to serve the owner with a notice and anyone else with an interest in the land likely to be affected. This would include tenants and if theres a superior who owns the land that your house is sitting on (country estate person you probably didnt realise owned your land), though it probably doesnt extend to the people who have just the mineral interests under your house or such like, as it wouldnt really affect them.

The notice has to be served within 28 days of it being issued. They cant just write up notices willy nilly, they need to apply for a notice and have it issued to them so they can serve it on you. If the notice was dated 28 days or more before it was served, you can appeal on this alone and have it chucked in the bin without much effort.

It should state what it is you are expected to do to comply and by what time you are expected to do it by. You must be served the notice 28 days before the date by which you must do something - ie paint it a colour they like. If 28 days is still too short a period you can appeal this to have the length of time extended.

I very much doubt the structural plan for the area states what colour the houses have to be so it is likely an adjustment that they didnt warn you about in advance. If they want the house repainted, it is only equitable that they should pay for it. However you should check it out because there may be something in there under the look and feel of the area. They also have to state things like what will happen if you dont reply to the notice but this is getting to the point where your just getting them to write it out properly.

They will mention their appeals procedure but they will likely skip the part about your right to take them and their appeals procedure to court, especially if they have cost you money both in terms of the useless paint you bought to paint the house in the first place when no one told you it was unlawful, and of course in terms of the fact that they want you to paint it in a colour they like. Because they are being this nit picky in bringing up the issue, dont be shy about being nit picky about how they serve their documents.


Info. 1. "applications" are submitted to your local council.
2. You "appeal" against the negative outcome to your area Planning Inspectoriate.
3. If the councils decision is "upheld" you can then "appeal" against the enforcement NOTICE when issued to you
by the council - this appeal also goes to the Planning Inspectorate of your area.
4. In my case this was also "upheld".

In scotland the appeals procedure is writing to the secretary of state,, it looks a little more beaurocratic where you are.


As it is NOTICE could I not issue a Notice to them..?
I suppose you could, my interest is in the legal side rather than the lawful side in regards to planning.
I notice you didn't address my contract questions, was there a reason for this, am I wrong on this.?
What contract question?
I think the Plan. Inspectorate is given his "powers" by the Sec.of State. Does he have then powers over me ??
A burglar has powers given to him by his crowbar.

As I know their next step is a local magistrates court (de facto) I know from info.on these posts that I can claim my Freeman rights by not creating a joinder in any way and not recognising the court. We are still talking "draft" statutes here.
If in spite of my not "going into" their jurisdiction, they somehow issue an Order for my to re-paint, then can't I charge them for carrying that order out - say in the region of £4,000..????? according to Rob Mennard.
If I still do not carry out any of their orders cos they refuse to accept my fee, then their only option is to enter my property and be subject to trespass.
Id prefer to see this won with a freeman defence, but the angle Im coming from is a statute one. Its an indignity that we have to throw their shit back at them especially when its as ludicrous as them not liking what colour your house is. Next they will be arresting garden gnomes for wearing red hats.

Oh; and I am in SouthEast of England.


I will give you the details of Enf. Notice later as promised.
Good wishes.
emmanualgoldstein
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emerald city » Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:11 pm

To: emanuelgoldstein

As I understand it then. I am in the private process at the moment, with Notices etc.
If it goes to court then a public process takes place. Does that mean I cannot challenge it at all. As a freeman.

So if I keep to the Freeman process, as you suggest - I am at this stage:

Sent: Conditionl Acceptance of their points...
Notice of Default & opportunity to cure.
Notice of Dishonour.

O.K. should I then repeat again with Notice of Default followed by Notice of Dishonour. and then what. I have these questions so many times with no response from the site, I could scream. I feel it is pointless posting.
(sometimes)

I think that as long as I can keep the process of Notices going the better for me. They have not given me the information I requested in the Conditional Acceptance. Flatly refused in fact. !!!!! :grr:
emerald city
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby emmanualgoldstein » Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:38 am

I think freeman michael is the guy to speak to on the freeman approach here. Ive never done the freeman process (though Ive been inspired by it - I just dont have the full deck of cards to be sure I can pull it off) - I think your now wanting to chase a commercial injury claim and my understanding of this process is as far as youve gone with it - notice of dishonour. Even if you dont follow the commercial injury claim and they do take it to court (usually a sneaky hint that they will be doing this in the corner of a notice they send), you have these notices sent and you have to file them with the court- darren pollards probably the best advisor here on court filings and the like.

Im keeping a close eye on what your doing for my university of life undergraduate degree in saying fuck off to the PTB :giggle: , but Im getting out my depth here - this is beyond the scope of my knowledge.
emmanualgoldstein
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: Planning "permission"

Postby Jayen4 » Sat Mar 27, 2010 2:08 pm

Regarding planning permission,you guys might want to have a look at these links.

http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/02/26/an-englishmans-home-is-his-illegal-castle-in-a-haystack/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-510161/Hay-presto-Farmer-unveils-illegal-mock-Tudor-castle-tried-hide-40ft-hay-bales.html

The house was built and lived in for over the 4 year 'rule' before he unveiled it,but the planners/council STILL went after him and I believe they want it demolishing ! I don't know the current state of affairs tho'....

There was another story a fair while back about a guy who had built something on his own land and the planners/council/polce got involved. He told them that if any of them tried to come on his land,that he would shoot them. ... Anyhow,they turned up with a JCB in tow,to start demolishing his building. The council official was told in no uncertain terms that if he stepped through the gate,he would be shot (guy had gun in his hands at the time). Arrogant official took no heed and went onto the land,at which point he WAS shot (and killed)! The guy also shot the fella in the JCB and shot a police officer in the arse,as he was running away ! lol
So,I suppose the moral of this story is that,they WILL try to impose 'thier' rules on you,even to the point where they get killed ! How stupid are they ?? Presumably the guy got jailed for killing the council official......but in reality,should he have been,as he gave a clear warning and the council idiot ignored it....and subsequently lost his life over it !
I'll see if I can find a link to this story and put it in later.
User avatar
Jayen4
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 10:26 pm
Location: Nr Wakefield. West Yorkshire.

PreviousNext

Return to Land Claims

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests