A very dubious use of a S215 notice by K&C after a new paint job on house house – the Beach Hit paint job. Not a LB or A4D so development but permitted development. Obviously a case of political pressure to ‘find a way’. The courts in In Berg v Salford City Council have held that a notice can cover improvements and not just ‘poor condition and maintenance thereof’. This to my mind is excessive interference in property rights. Lets say someone was refused planning permission and painted on the front of their house, ‘Councillor Sloe go to hell’, now imagine a section 215 notice coming in. It does raise the point of the fine line between section notices on condition and deemed advert consent.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Decisions, Decisions, Decisions 
Andrew
This is the letter I sent to the CounciL:
The ODPM S215 Notices Good Practice Guide https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11491/319798.pdf says:
“The scope of works that can be required in s215 notices is wide and includes planting, clearance, tidying, enclosure, demolition, re-building, external repairs and repainting. ”
The sample letters in Annexes B and F are ideal for this case.
The fact that it is not a listed building does not matter as the current state of the building is detrimental to the amenity of the neighbourhood, in this case a conservation area. It is, due to the widespread publicity, a nationally known eyesore.
Since this is such a clear case for action and the means to achieve the change is there, is there any reason why a warning letter could not be sent immediately to be duly followed by a S215 Notice requiring action?
Yes it is this gradual creep of S215 scope that had me worried, just my personal view.