®Planning appeal decision
55 Sportsman Lane, Hatfield, CM3 2NP
without planning permission the material change of use of the land by the unauthorised residential occupation of a mobile home
- Authority
- Braintree District Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Change of use
- Inspector
- Franks Z
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The issue in ground (d) of Appeal A is whether that at the date when the notice was issued, no enforcement action could be taken in respect of the alleged breach of planning control.
- The main issue in Appeal B is whether the Council's decision to refuse to grant the LDC was well-founded.
What decided it
The Inspector's finding, applying the legal test for abandonment, that the previous owners had not intended to abandon the residential use of the site despite periods of low or no occupation and its deteriorating physical condition.
Judgments cited: Panton & Farmer v SSETR & Vale Horse DC [1999]JPL 461; Trustees of Mynach Estate v Taff-Ely BC [1985] JPL 40; Hughes v SSETR [2000]80 P&CR 397; Hartley v MHLG [1970]1QB 413
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.