Ashwells Road (Known as Karma Court), Pilgrims Hatch, BRENTWOOD, CM15 9SG

the making of a material change of use of the land from agricultural use to a mixed use of agricultural use and residential use and car sales and car storage use and also unauthorised operational development by the siting of a mobile home on the land which, given its degree of permanence, facilitates the unauthorised residential use, shown for the purposes of identification only on the attached plan and shaded brown, and also the siting of a portacabin which is used as an office for the car sales/car storage business on the land, shown for the purposes of identification only on the attached plan and shaded green, to facilitate the unauthorised material change of use of the land

Authority: Brentwood Borough Council
Appeal type: enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure: Inquiry
Development: other · Change of use
Inspector: Phillips A

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

The appeal on ground (b): whether the mobile home and portacabin constitute operational development ('buildings') and whether the site comprises one or two planning units
The appeal on ground (d): whether, at the date the notice was issued, the alleged uses had become immune from enforcement action through the passage of time
The appeal on ground (g): whether the periods for compliance specified in the notice are reasonable

What decided it

The appellant failed to produce sufficiently robust evidence to establish continuous, uninterrupted use over the relevant immunity periods, so the alleged breaches had not become lawful through the passage of time.

The Inspector found that the Council's position struck an appropriate balance between the appellant's and his son's Article 8 rights and the public interest in remedying the ongoing harm caused by the unauthorised development, protecting the openness of the Green Belt and the character and appearance of the area.

Judgments cited: Skerritts of Nottingham Ltd v SSETR & Harrow LBC (No. 2) [2000] JPL 1025; Kestrel Hydro v SSCLG & Spelthorne BC [2015] EWHC 1654 (Admin), [2016] EWCA Civ 784; Burdle & Williams v SSE & New Forest RDC [1972] 1 WLR 1207; R (Ocado Retail Ltd) v Islington LBC [2021] PTSR 1833; Snook v Secretary of State for the Environment (1977) 33 P & CR; Collins v SSCLG [2013] EWCA Civ 1193

Read the decision letter on the Inspectorate’s site

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.