Is the planning system corrupt?

I agree with much that is already said. Where I previously lived, there was a very suspect builder putting in for planning permission for something. He was known to have made planning permission for things and then cancelled various parts of the plans all to his benefit and to the detriment of the rest of the people. So I copied the planning application and got quite a few people to join me from all over the town to be ready to jump on any changes he tried to make. Every time there was the least deviation from the original plan we went to the council about it.

He tried to "accidentally" knock into a tree with a machine, but fortunately one of our group saw it and stood by the tree phoning us all and we descended and stuck to our plan of each phoning two other people so that the crowd grew quite quickly. It did then sink into his arrogant head that we had no intention of letting him get away with anything, and he - no doubt quite begrudgingly - then had to follow the plan. We kept tabs on everything he did, making notes and taking photos right the way through.

So, I think that vigilance is going to have to be the key. If it is legal and y ou are allowed to record the meeting where the great promises are made, tape them, or if not write down what is said. Send a letter to your local paper outlining what has been said and hope they are not in league with the builder. Then as things carry on you will be able to stand up to any changes, both referring to what was said on the original planning operation, and also if you have proof that this has happened before you can also bring that to peoples attention. This way being under the public gaze, if there is any suggestion of councils or specific people letting them get away with things, you both have the proof of what was planned against what is actually happening and of course councillors can be clearly reminded that they were voted in to provide good service to ALL in the locality not just to some pal of someone.

The local paper is often your best ally. They know such things are of great interest to the local people and therefore from their point of view will sell more papers, plus giving them an angle to keep up the interest in what is happening. Once such builders realize that they are going to be watched , checked up on, and reminded of what they actually said at the planning meeting, they will probably do one of two things. Either make one decent job of a site, with the plan that they can keep referring to that site in the future. Or they finish the site asap and disappear elsewhere where they hope to continue in their dishonest way. Well if they choose the former, every time they mention road A you then reply but what about road B and C, showing just what they are up to. Good luck with any campaign you get involved in and I have every intention to carry on being that annoying old biddy who makes sure that everyone knows what is happening, until I stop breathing!!

But they built a 3-storey car park opposite us, even after we took the council to judicial review and won.

It's almost impossible to stop local councils building anything they decide. We and our neighbours were told that a vacated site beside our lane, owned by the council, would become a surface car park

Planning system well out of control.
More new proprties mean more Council tax payers? Yet the conservation rules seem archaic in some respects

Besides HMO's which are little more than the new overcrowed lodging houses.

My beef is Overseas buyers who buy blocks of brand new propeties as investments in our towns and cities.

This was kick started in the mid to late 80's with the so called, regeneration of our inner cities when they took hold. Then they were really championed and adored by the Blair Government.

Who were shown to be a bunch of arse kissing low life.

Au Revoir

👎👩‍🎓🏢💰💰💰

I often wonder if there are backhanders involved

Councils are become more and more unitary authorities, which means local planning will be heard at a county hub - in my case 40 miles away. Our county has already shown that they care nothing for us.
However, our entire planning team was sacked for corruption, so somebody did notice eventually. But they were also incompetent - housing was begun behind us without any warning; when we protested, they told us it was not near us; I invited them to come look; oops! But we were told we could do little because permission had been granted; we wrote to national and it was rescinded.
But it was Barratt homes so they just repeated the application to get it approved; and to get around the potential to flood, they simply lifted the foundations, and we now have a house which over looks our bungalow (something they said would never happen) and less than 20ft between the 2 buildings. Our council would never fight the big builders because of the legal costs, so we have thousands of homes on areas we KNOW flood because we watch it every winter- they just lift the foundations 2/3 ft up, so the council then have to spend huge amounts on drainage on the surrounding existing areas.

they have built two schools and a dr's surgery though

Where I live, the land owners have the same surname as most of the local councillors and as it's not a common name I suspect it's all related

There are no such things as affordable homes. The minute they are sold the price goes up and they become part of the housing stock. The only way to reinstate affordable housing is to have council owned housing that CAN NOT be sold. We have major issues with this in rural areas

Some of these developers’ underhand goings on are unbelievable! So sad for people who bought in good faith.
When I bought my seafront flat, it wasn’t entirely tongue-in-cheek that I bought it because it was assumed nothing could spoil my sea view. I am sincerely hoping that there will never be some way that some underhand toe-rag will find a way around this! I have my fingers crossed though, as anything can happen these days!

The term ‘ brown envelope ‘ has existed for a long time. Anyone who thinks to the contrary is naive

Grammaretto

A couple of years ago a couple in Midlothian were forced to demolish their home because they hadn't been given planning consent.
They also thought that they would be able to apply retrospectively.
Midlothian couple lose battle to save 'dream' £650k mansion from demolition - Edinburgh Live share.google/lJ1yc9vayVENv06Ye

Yes, because they are individuals without bottomless cash to repeat appeal.

windmill1

It seems to be accepted practice nowadays for a developer or individual to bulldoze ahead with their plans, regardless, and then apply for retrospective planning permission. A very arrogant attitude towards the rules.

My particular beef is with developers who blithely promise to incorporate a percentage of affordable homes into their plans in order to persuade a local authority to rubber stamp planning permission, and then - lo and behold - when the development is completed there isn't a single affordable property to be seen!

Yes, the fiddling about with affordable homes has happened here too. Also the local authority specified that there should be no gas in the high rise blocks - and they were built with gas central heating.
There are also problems with parish councils and controls of conservation areas. In one area we know well the boundary of the conservation area is kinked to avoid the house of one of the members of the committee. Obviously UPVC windows and satellite dishes are banned, but they are regularly installed and it is ignored. A resident was allowed to use plastic flashing and unsuitable materials for his Grade 1 Listed Building because he said he couldn't afford the suitable alternatives. The original planning permission and Historic Buildings permission had specified lead and particular materials.
We got planning permission for a dormer but the parish council blocked it on conservation grounds, despite the fact that almost all the houses around do have dormers. We appealed to the DOE and permission was granted, the inspector couldn't understand why it was ever refused. This often happens to second home owners like ourselves in this area.
Our neighbours have been trying for 12 years to get permission to build a well designed new ecohome. Eventually they have got it but we have to question why it took so long when there are other homes getting permission in one sitting of the planning committee.

oh gosh, corruption, its the people not the systems, I agree, but ... don`t start me!

You are not meant to fell trees where I live because they are protected. Most new houses being erected fell the lot and just pay the council fine which is very small. Result is that the natural beauty is rapidly disappearing - one of the reasons we bought here in the first place.

Yet another reason for government to look st land taxes. The country needs homes, not banked land.

In answer to the OP's question, in my experience it often is and depends on 'who you know'.

Plans were passed next to where we used to live for storage units. We had someone from the planning department round to assure us that the view we had from our roof terrace wouldn't be affected.

When the build was near completion it became evident that 50% of our wonderful view was going to be restricted because the build was actually higher than planning permission had been granted for.

Knowing the history of this developer, his tendency to exceed what had been passed and once his builds were completed, to apply for change of use, we thought all was lost. When I spoke to his secretary she told me that his response was "do whatever you must do", so we did.

We complained and thankfully when a return visit to our property was made and with our agreement, he was ordered to lower the rear of the build but was still allowed to have the front higher than the original planning application.

Once completed, one of the storage units was turned into a dance studio which had far from adequate sound proofing and became a real noise nuisance.

Thank goodness we moved.

eazybee

The shape of things to come.

Rayner set to hit English councils that block new housing with tougher sanctions.
Councils could be forced to approve new housing developments – overturning locally agreed plans – under stricter rules or risk handing over control of their planning departments to Whitehall officials.

Rayner already has considerable powers to overrule councils that block housing developments but is believed to be frustrated with continuing delays in the system.

Yes, green belt is at risk everywhere, locally we have a lot of city overspill having to be housed.

The shape of things to come.

Rayner set to hit English councils that block new housing with tougher sanctions.
Councils could be forced to approve new housing developments – overturning locally agreed plans – under stricter rules or risk handing over control of their planning departments to Whitehall officials.

Rayner already has considerable powers to overrule councils that block housing developments but is believed to be frustrated with continuing delays in the system.

Grammaretto

A couple of years ago a couple in Midlothian were forced to demolish their home because they hadn't been given planning consent.
They also thought that they would be able to apply retrospectively.
Midlothian couple lose battle to save 'dream' £650k mansion from demolition - Edinburgh Live share.google/lJ1yc9vayVENv06Ye

Yes Joe Bloggs is on a hiding to nothing most cannot afford to fight the council

A couple of years ago a couple in Midlothian were forced to demolish their home because they hadn't been given planning consent.
They also thought that they would be able to apply retrospectively.
Midlothian couple lose battle to save 'dream' £650k mansion from demolition - Edinburgh Live share.google/lJ1yc9vayVENv06Ye

Councils have an obligation to build a target number of home each year so they are not too fussy if a developer doesn’t play by every rule. In this area local nymbies fight every planning application tooth and nail, they all want more houses built, but not in their part of town.

Planning Committees are well aware if the cost of opposing a developer and usually negotiate what they can in planning gain and pass the application.

There was plenty of corruption years ago, now of course anyone who doesn’t get their way screams corruption.

I don't think turning an existing building into 30+ apartments is unreasonable. We have a new village ov 3,000 houses being built in the lovely countryside near us and most accept it the issues are more with the services.

I would be interested to know what the council's reply was regarding the HMO though.

In our previous village home a local farmer wanted PP for a small development of four or five houses. People didn’t have any objections, it was a brownfield site so not particularly beautiful to look at. The farmer offered a plot of land for a new school in exchange for PP but was told that was akin to bribery of the council and was unacceptable.

I then asked about a much bigger development in a nearby town, where PP had been granted in exchange for land for a leisure centre and was told that that was considered planning gain and therefore was acceptable! That really opened my eyes to how councils work.

It isn't the planning that is corrupt- it is the sneaky developers who are to blame.

Previous to Thatcher's so called housing revolution (disaster) LA's were no longer allowed to build houses and their budgets for building other things was slashed by repeated governments.

The old Victorian hospitals etc have been left to rot so only big bucks developers can now buy them for next to nothing.

In this way, it is a corrupt and unfair system.