42 replies to this topic

[surreydodger]

Hi Olive,

What you are sadly enduring here, is the typical LPA response to not help you follow the regulations and stay within the laws, but one who will just use a bloody-minded steam rollering approach. It's where I get a bit cross with LPA's who are full of stuff on their websites about 'contact us' when in doubt or needing help but then find only negative lines of response.


Anyway, whinging here won't get us anywhere. Keep calm and do not let their attitude or replies wind you up (and if they do,, of course they do ,, then don't show it). You need to stick to your approach of making genuine enquiries to understand precisley what they consider legal for you to retain your 'mobile' structures. For as much as they can be obtuse in telling you in effect to 'get off' you have to remain equally obtuse (but level headed,, no sniping, no sarcastic digs!) in asking to understand the rules, which ones apply and where you might find them written.

Even this approach may not produce a direct result but inevitably, the LPA will make some little slip up or give away some bit of info for you to work on. If you do end up going in to face enforcement, you are at least coming from the moral high ground. The moral high ground in itself is not enough but at least you are fighting from a better position in the eyes of an Inspector.

[boiow]

in case you have not seen this link yet.
http://blog.primesta...k/horse-shelter

[olive]

Thanks for your response. I am aware of this case and so are the Council but it doesn't seem to have convinced them that mobile shelters don't need planning.

[KChally]

Perhaps if you just ignored them, then they may come to their senses. A bit drastic and scary I know, but in reality everyone knows even LPA that mobile structures dont have to be moved within such short time spans. We have pig arcs on our land which are not moved all the time. We have a polytunnel with no planning permission and that hasnt been moved EVER from when it was erected. Call their bluff so to speak

[Piglet]

What I have found sometimes to help to enquire of other LPA's what their policies are or enquire of the community.gov.uk web site and see what they say. Best of all, just stand your ground Piglet

[olive]

A further update. I moved my 2 field shelters and shipping container a short distance as reqested by the LPA in April this year and have just received a letter acknowledging this and stating that they require the structures to be moved more frequently than once a year but are reluctant to state how often. They wish me to advise them of the next proposed movement.

Did anyone notice someone was fined recently for failing to demonstate mobiles are mobile?

[che]

Hi Olive,

Looks like you are going to have to call their bluff on this one. My reply would be along the lines of.

" To assist the council I have moved my temporary structures to prove they are indeed mobile. I do not believe there is any requirement to move them to any timescale and to record such movements for council purposes. Please forward the legislation you base your request on.
Please advise me also that this requirement extends to all temporary buildings within your catchment area. I an lead to believe this is not the case and as such it constitutes discrimination or harassnent. Untll this informaton is provide any movements will be at my own discretion and dependant on my operational needs any enforcement action will be appealed. "

[Cornish Gems]

Did anyone notice someone was fined recently for failing to demonstate mobiles are mobile?

We must have missed it - do you or anyone else have further details, please?

[olive]

We must have missed it - do you or anyone else have further details, please?

If you google 'Man fined for failing to move field shelters' you should find it. I think it was in the Horse and Hound in September. They were on some form of hardstanding.

[Cornish Gems]

Thanks Olive, very interesting article wonder what they will do regarding pig arks etc, now for those who are unable to google the link from Olive here is a direct link Man Fined for non movable shelter.

CG

[che]

Interesting article but peraps not as worrying as at first reading, I assume the people did not appeal the enforcement notice. Placed in this position I would tak photo of every mobile structure in the area and report them individually to the enforcement team. They have a duty to deal with each one and when the appeal takes place you will have evidence that you are being victimised.

[Cornish Gems]

We think the warning word is 'hardstanding'. If you look at this link (posted earlier by Boiow as blog.primesta....k/horse-shelter), Report re Inspector's decision, you will see that the Inspector in the appeal for 'Purbeck DC -v- Bennett (2001) made a number of points as to why the shelter should be deemed as being mobile.

Previously on this forum, we believe that it was stated that one could put up a shed on a hardstanding, but we feel that this is pushing the boundaries too far. We have to face the fact that councils will so their best to make sure that life is difficult for the ordinary man so it would behove us to ensure that we do not appear to be taking advantage of them in any way.

[surreydodger]

Maybe the question not being asked or answered is 'How far?'

If I were ever asked to move a mobile then I gladly will. I would request the Planning Dept. to provide the distance I need to move the structure to comply with legislation and the statutory evidence supporting that determined distance.

Pleas god don't let any relation of mine ever fall so low to become a planning officer

[olive]

Thanks everyone for the replies.

I have previously asked how far and how often and the only reply was from their own footprint. I have also asked if this request to move shelters is being applied to other similar structures in the area and if records are being kept of their movement - they chose not to answer these points.

I have found SD's previous advice to keep calm, cooperate and not be sarcastic helpful if somewhat difficult to maintain. My wife happened to discover the planning officers on site in July, they had climbed over a locked gate. When challenged about this they said they were allowed to do so if there was an enforcement order under consideration. When she pointed out the gate was sagging because people kept climbing over it they were quick to point out they climbed near the hanging post to prevent such damage.

Interestingly the last couple of communications have not mentioned enforcement just their desire to prevent the structures establishing a degree of permanance.

[surreydodger]

Seems to me the solution therefore lies with occasionally moving the field shelters of their own footprint. Frankly, in reality I'd let them do the chasing. If they notify you that the shelters have not appeared to have been moved recently just tell them how dreadfully sorry you are that you haven't done so and will do so immeadiatly

Look at it like this. For them to take enforcement action they will have to justify that expenditure. If enforcement actions can be avoided without any loss of integrity to the regulations, then planners are required to reach an amicable settlement first. Hence, they will notify that you are possibly in breach of regulations before they can take legal action. Once notified,, humble apology and move the offending shelter off it's footprint (as per their recomendations). Breach has been remedied.

They will soon find someone else to go pester.

Just a footnote re planners on your land. Yes, they have rights to enter,,, forcibly if necessary,, but they do still have to follow procedures. To say they are doing so in considering enforcement action they must be able to prove such. Whereas I always recommend folks to deal with planners absolutely straight faced, neither angry nor nice, if they (or anyone else) comes onto my land by jumping gates or ditches, they will be escorted off forthwith.

It is a different matter if a gate is unlocked but where the boundaries are secured no one is entitled onto my land excepting a uniformed police officer. After that, I consider anyone else claiming to be 'entitled' as a con man and thus I am kicking them off my land. They may re-enter having made proper acknowledged appointment or in the presence of a uniformed police officer.

[Piglet]

Not sure if anyone has already mentioned this, but mobile field shelters are considered to be pieces of agricultural equipment rather than development so do not need any planning permission.

This is according to the following blog:

http://blog.primesta...k/horse-shelter

Coincidentally I was out walking on Sunday and happened upon some lovely big mobile field shelters in a location where they would not normally be allowed if on foundations.

Piglet

[boiow]

it makes perfect sense to me to make all animal shelters mobile. not only does it obviate the planning application process, but is also more conducive to animal husbandry. our chicken coop is much easier to clean out because it is on wheels. and the goat and llama shelters are frequently moved without any need for prompting.
it will be interesting to see the councils reaction to the new horse shelters that we will have this autumn. not only are they mobile but they will be larger than commercially available ones.
the council have been round recently and took photos of our chicken coop because our neighbour thought it was a building that required planning permission because it has a tiled roof. (sorry don't know how to post photos)

[andrew.redman]

I am the person who was taken to court and fined. Planning officers have never met with us but have climbed locked gate and taken photos. Because the ground was so wet we could not get on it without extending the existing track. All our horses ended up with mud fever but planning are not interested in animal welfare."that's not our problem" The fact that there have been sheep belonging to same owner for19 years and horses for10 years makes no difference. In fact have stated in wriiting tha the stables are on concrete which they are not and "there was no evidence of other stock in the field" In fact 27 ewes sheltering under the trees. "stables and field shelters are not appropriate for sheep" "nobody can build anything in Carmarthenshire without planning permission"

[boiow]

to get round the issue of your case and continue to use mobile field shelters i would use rubber mats or something similar that can be easily (fairly) moved when the field shelters are moved.
i would also appeal that to move the shelters according to rigid calender timing is not as important as moving them according to the conditions that are prevailing at the time. this would make their movement capability 'essential' but also secondary to the needs of the animals.
if your 'intent' is to leave the field shelters in one position then planning permission is probably required.
i explained to our enforcement officer that mobile shelters are preferable to fixed structures for animal welfare as they can be moved to suit the prevailing conditions. and are more hygienic. and the complaint that our neighbour made that structures were appearing without planning permission was true but lawful. also he had better get used to it as we are having many more to house the animals according to animal welfare standards. that was on wednesday still waiting for a response from council.

[Cornish Gems]

When we use a field shelter as a livestock shelter, then we use a lot of straw and we mean - a lot!

Last winter, though, we used one to protect the large round straw bales provided by our friendly neighbour, but did not put them on the ground. Instead, we put them on pallets to keep them off the ground. Once, we had finished using that straw, we removed the pallets and towed the shelter further down the field, so that it was handier for the pigs whose arks had been moving further and further away from their starting point a year ago. The pallets are now back inside, as we are expecting a largish delivery of small straw bales next week. We maintain that it is a 'field shelter' and therefore is a shelter in a field. It did not even stay in the same place as long as an old-fashioned hayrick would have done.

Elsewhere in this community forum, it was mentioned that a shed could be put on a hardstanding, but we feel that this would not be acceptable to a lot of councils, so once again we have used pallets. However, the planning officer did comment on the restraining straps and suggested that we should move them around so as to avoid the appearance of permanence!

One of our awnings does NOT have pallets - instead we have used paving slabs and these can be easily removed once the caravan is removed.

Andrew, you have our sympathy. Did you attend the court? Was it a Magistrates or County Court? Did you have anyone to represent you at the hearing? Please accept our thanks though for showing us that councils are likely to frown on anything that has any kind of base which could possibly be deemed as being permanent or even semi-permanent unless it is something that has been granted pp.