Listed building consent delay

[mivec]

I moved earlier this year to a half timber framed listed building. It is in a good condition for it's age except that some cement render has been used on some infill panels to the front elevation which needs to be removed and replaced with lime. One beam has been completely rendered and is now showing signs of decay. The render needs to be removed, the timber accessed and either repaired or worse case replaced. All part and parcel of owning an old building.

We found a specialist builder, agreed costs, renegotiated the asking price and went ahead and bought with the intention of having the work done this summer, allowing the lime to dry before the autumn/winter sets in.

Although it is essentially a like for like repair we assumed we would need listed building consent, especially as it is also in a conservation area and the newly formed South Downs National Park. Also for the benefit of avoiding the VAT although that now isn't possible.

I originally contacted the local council to explain what we needed to do back in March, before we bought. They thought it all sounded straight forward and were happy for us to apply. I submitted the application mid May, allowing about 12 weeks before the planned work start date of the beginning of August.

As of today I am still waiting to hear anything from them.

Apparently from 1st April (quite apt!) the National Park Authority took over managing all planning applications and have had problems in do so ever since.
From what I can work out my local council will still deal with the application once validated and approved by the National Park Authority. The local council seem as frustrated as I am with the delays.

I have made numerous phone calls to enquire about the delay and did receive one back to say they did receive my application the day after I submitted but it's in the queue awaiting validation. At the end of May they had only got round to validating applications submitted on 13th April.

At the end of June I also sent an email explaining that the work needs completing this year otherwise further decay will be caused to the fabric of the building. If they required my application to go through the standard 8 week consultation process they would need to validate in the next week or confirm that they would be happy for us to commence work while the application was in progress. I have not had a reply to this either.

My question is where go I go from here?

Do I just go ahead and start the work? My builder, who has extensive experience of working on listed buildings want to.
Or send an email stating that I am going to start the work unless they reply to say not to within a set time period?

If I should wait for the permission to come through is there any comeback on them due to the delay?

If the work is pushed back to next spring the decay will be worse, the repairs more extensive. The approved quote will also not be valid and the option of an already sourced replacement beam no longer available. This could all add up to a considerable increase in costs to me not to mention the further unnecessary damage to the building.

 

[Flyfisher]

Firstly, I don't think I'd panic over the prospect of another winter before doing the repairs. If you're really worried about what's going on under the cement render then, frankly, I'd just remove the render and cover it all over with a breathable membrane tolet it dry out and to protect it over the winter period before new lime render could be applied. What's the worst that could happen? Someone from the council forcing you to replace the render that 'just fell off'? :wink:

However, that's just a pragmatic and admitted slightly naughty temporary 'patch' to a frustraing situation in which you've done your best to follow the rules.

I don't know how consistent the planning process is around the country but my experience here is that the local council operates to a definite process with well-defined milestones. They allow up to 13 weeks but both my previous applications have only taken 8 weeks.

Have you been dealing with your conservation officer? I would ask their advice. If the work is urgent and the CO approves of your proposals then they should be able to reassure you that it would be OK to proceed ahead of the formal LBC.

Alternatively, just do the work and argue that it's a repair and therefore doesn't need LBC. If they argue that it's not exactly like-for-like, ask them to confirm in writing that they want you to use cement render - somehow I doubt that letter would be forthcoming. Don't quote me on that though. :wink:

 

[88v8]

I'd just get on with it. They've had their chance to comment.

Ivor

 

[Penners]

Broadly, I agree with Flyfisher's comments above.

I certainly wouldn't worry that one more winter is going to add markedly to any damage that the building has already suffered. But that aside, I can well understand your frustration in wanting to get on with the work.

It's worth keeping in mind, however, that your delay only amounts to two months, which is not untoward in dealing with such matters (I'm sorry to say).

For what it's worth, here's what I would do:-

I would write (politely - bolshiness won't get you anywhere) to the National Park Authority, pointing out that they received your application in mid-May and that, because of the extraordinarily wet summer we have experienced, you are seriously concerned about the continued deterioration of the building in its current state. In particular, you do not want the building to have to suffer another winter in this condition, and it is therefore vital that your builder is allowed to start work now, in order to complete the necessary repairs before winter starts.

Go on by saying that, in view of the fact that your planned repairs comply with all the very best policies and practices for the conservation of period buildings, you feel completely confident that they will allow your application. You therefore propose to allow work to commence in two weeks from the date of your letter, unless you receive their instructions not to do so.

I would then write to the CO, enclosing a copy of the letter to the Park Authority, and saying that you very much hope he/she will understand and agree with your proposals and your handling of the matter.

In both cases, I would write proper snail-mail letters - not emails.

The above suggestions come with no expert qualification or endorsement, other than a number of experiences of dealing with COs.

 

[worms]

In addition to Penners' advice, I would pick someone from the list of Members of the Authority (listed here), copy them into the correspondence and try to have a friendly chat with them. One of the National appointees seems to be from a planning background and a couple of the Independent Members are on a standards committee.

 

[MatthewC]

I sympathise, Mivec, as I found out to my cost that the entire process can be very frustrating, arbitrary and time-consuming. Personally, I would agree with the above and go ahead anyway, and cover my actions with a variety of suitable letters as Penners suggests. Just be careful about what you tell them in future - I learned a long time ago in the RAF not to ask a question to which I might not like the possible answer!

I also agree with Penners about the possible damage due to another winter; I completed the purchase in October and immediately started on the roof as it had holes in both roof and ceilings. I justified this as a repair and was happy to demonstrate that when Enforcement came! If I was to do my restoration again I would have a very different approach with Planning and conservation.

 

[plasticpigeon]

I can't give you advice but if I were in your shoes, I'd just get on with it and then argue your case if it comes to that, it will be obvious that you have done things properly. I'm certain that where I live in Birmingham, even if I demolished a listed building I would probably be granted retrospective planning permission!

 

[Roger H]

The zero VAT rating for works requiring LBC still runs until 1st Oct 2012, even if your consent came after March 2012.

HMRC - ..."The position regarding the changes announced at Budget is as follows:

Supplies of building materials or construction services supplied in the course of an approved alteration to a listed building made on or after 1 October 2012 will be subject to VAT at the standard VAT of 20%. Any approved alterations completed by 1 October 2012 can be wholly zero rated.

Under transitional relief, if a written contract was in place before Budget day (21 March 2012) the supplies of building materials and construction services under that contract can continue to be charged at the zero rate until 20 March 2013. Any work performed after that date will be standard rated.

Contracts entered into on or after March 21 2012, will have the level of work completed up to the 1st October 2012 charged at zero rate with the remainder after this point charged at the standard rate of 20%. A fair apportionment must be made of the work done before and after the change."....

 

[Keithj]

What Penners said. Write and tell them you're doing it - copies to the relevant persons such as CO.

You're not "bodging" or doing something unsuitable. They should be supportive, not negative.

 

[Penners]

The zero VAT rating for works requiring LBC still runs until 1st Oct 2012, even if your consent came after March 2012.

But zero-rating doesn't apply to repairs. Only to new alterations. So, for example, if you build an extension on your listed building (with consent) a VAT-registered builder is entitled to carry out this work without charging you VAT. But if you repair the roof, re-plaster the walls and thereby save the building from rotting away to rubble, you have to pay the VAT.

Ludicrous, I know, but that's the situation.

 

[Roger H]

Penners - true, but if it is a like-for-like repair it wouldn't need LBC. Replacement of cement infill with lime would need consent as it is a variation in materials - and zero VAT, for the moment - thanks George :?

 

[Penners]

I hope you're right, Roger H, but I have my doubts. I strongly suspect that Messrs HMRC (who are always looking for wriggle-room) will say that a simple replacement of cement render with lime render is not sufficiently "new work" to qualify for zero-rating.

It's perhaps also worth mentioning, in case the OP wasn't aware, that you can't claim back the VAT element that you have paid out on materials for DIY work. Nor can you persuade retailers to sell you the materials free of VAT. The only reliable way to get new work zero-rated, as I said above, is to employ a VAT-registered builder and persuade him not to charge you VAT.

 

[mivec]

Thanks for all your advice, it's reassuring to know that I'm not wrong in wanting to do the wrong thing i.e. starting before approval.

I spoke to the local council yesterday who said we are 5 days away from having my application validated. I really sense their frustration, they have been told all the right things to say, sorry, everything is being done, they are working evenings and weekends to catch up etc. etc. but it's all said through gritted teeth.

One of my biggest frustrations has been not being able to talk to the CO directly and put my case forward. Our previous house was in a different local authority and we could contact the CO directly before, during and after LBC applications and did so on numerous occasions.. This council has a generic customer services number to field all enquires and the CO, apparently there is only one, will only deal with you once an application is validated. Any direct questions have to be made via email and seemed to be answered by someone in the general planning department. I do have the CO's direct email address an have cc'd him in on all emails but never had a reply.

Given yesterday's information I will hold off until next week and see where we are. At least I should be able to speak to the CO directly then.

That's interesting about the VAT situation, I'll look into it more. I assumed that I needed to have made the application before March.
From my experience paying 0% VAT is all in the builders hands and cleverly worded LBC. i.e. Making alterations to the front of the building, any repairs that may or may not be needed are a consequence of those alterations.

 

[Penners]

One of my biggest frustrations has been not being able to talk to the CO directly and put my case forward. Our previous house was in a different local authority and we could contact the CO directly before, during and after LBC applications

I suspect this is increasingly the case, nowadays. With the cost-cutting climate in today's local authority finances, staff reductions mean that COs are much thinner on the ground, and consequently are extremely busy. So they've had to pull back from a lot of general advisory, pre-application work.

I emphasise that that is my impression - I have no inside knowledge.

 

[Flyfisher]

While all that is undoubtedly true, I suspect it also depends on the CO to some extent. It maybe easier for them to hide behind various procedures these days but that certainly hasn't been my experience. Our CO is easy to contact by email or phone and he has visited our house numerous time (probably about a dozen times) during pre-application discussions over the past 5/6 years. The result is that my LBC applications have been 'rubber stamp' formalities because all the details have been discussed and agreed beforehand.

Having said that, my latest application has not been quite so happy an experience, but that's because of EH and nothing to do with the CO. The application itself is a formality because everything was finally agreed during the pre-application advice stage, but EH's involvement meant that plans agreed with the CO back in November last year were delayed for six months. But that's another story!

 

[88v8]

One of my biggest frustrations has been not being able to talk to the CO directly and put my case forward. Our previous house was in a different local authority and we could contact the CO directly before, during and after LBC applications

I suspect this is increasingly the case, nowadays. With the cost-cutting climate in today's local authority finances, staff reductions mean that COs are much thinner on the ground, and consequently are extremely busy. So they've had to pull back from a lot of general advisory, pre-application work.

I emphasise that that is my impression - I have no inside knowledge.

When last I spoke to them, our CO had 4,000 buildings to look after, and a department of two, including the CO. Obviously it's more important to spend Council money on the 'disadvantaged' than on irreplaceable listed buildngs. Although I believe that the Enforcement department is well staffed, but then that produces a revenue stream whereas the CO is just a cost... how accountants think... if think is the word.
Nevertheless our CO is accessible and gives general guidance and pre-application comment, one of the Good Guys, thank heavens.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

I spoke to the local council yesterday who said we are 5 days away from having my application validated. I really sense their frustration, they have been told all the right things to say, sorry, everything is being done, they are working evenings and weekends to catch up etc. etc. but it's all said through gritted teeth.

Validated, or approved? If the former then that is a quite outrageous delay of two months before they will even admit they've got the application, and start looking at it. (Unless there were other bits of information they needed from you before it was a valid application, after you first submitted it.)

 

[Flyfisher]

Well spotted - that's an important distinction. My last application took two weeks to be validated because they needed clarification of a few points and I was away for a week, so entirely my fault really. But it only took a couple of days before they told me they needed more info, so the ball was always in my court.

Once validated the council formally acknowledged the application and the clock started ticking towards approval. Hard to see how they could reasonably improve on that.

 

[mivec]

I spoke to the local council yesterday who said we are 5 days away from having my application validated. I really sense their frustration, they have been told all the right things to say, sorry, everything is being done, they are working evenings and weekends to catch up etc. etc. but it's all said through gritted teeth.

Validated, or approved? If the former then that is a quite outrageous delay of two months before they will even admit they've got the application, and start looking at it. (Unless there were other bits of information they needed from you before it was a valid application, after you first submitted it.)

Yes it's validated, not approved.

Assuming they do validate next week it will be almost 11 weeks to officially acknowledge receipt.
I'll only then find out if they require any further information and it's anyones guess as to how long that could take.

If it's all ok and the 8 week planning process starts, approval will effectively be at the beginning of October.

 

[Roger H]

Ridiculous - if your application is in order it should take days to validate, not months - possibly delaying validation may be a ruse to avoid triggering targets to decide applications within 8 weeks? Stats are sent to central government by each authority (previously, failure was tied to financial penalty under the planning delivery grant) - failure to hit target will make the authority look bad. You can appeal against non-determination

I'd just proceed with all of those elements of the work that constitute 'repair' - they don't need lbc anyway. You could also argue that removal of the cement is in order to avoid decay of the fabric and a legitimate measure not requiring consent.

'Local planning authorities occasionally do not validate applications on the basis
that they consider the quality of the supporting information to be inadequate. In
such cases, the applicant may appeal to the Planning Inspectorate under section
78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 with the relevant ground for
the appeal being non-determination within the 8 or 13 week determination
period.'

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/1505418.pdf