Is this Legal?

Planning permission is tied to the land and not to the person the only way I could see you recoupinging your losses is by possibly sueing your brother for the unlicened use of your (your Architects drawings depending on contract type) plans as they should be copyrighted he would need to obtain permission to use them.

Kieran

Did his building accord with your permission?

Yes the drawings and plans were the exact same as the ones that I had been using. He has admitted doing it and there would have been no reason why he couldnt have got planning permission in his own name. My worry is that I if I tried again to get planning permission in an urban area, that I wouldnt get it because of this

The copyright issue is the way to go

I don’t really know, but I don’t think it would make any difference to you as far as subsequent planning applications are concerned, the planning permission goes with the site.

Normally the Authority in rural areas include a condition stating that the applicant must live in the dwelling for the first 7 years, if this was one condition then the dwelling was not built in accordance with the permission.

@paddy2005 wrote:

Normally the Authority in rural areas include a condition stating that the applicant must live in the dwelling for the first 7 years, if this was one condition then the dwelling was not built in accordance with the permission.

in my experience rural planning permission is tied to the “applicants or memebers of the applicants immediate family”… so if that was a condition then theres no problem from a planning point of view…

if copyright is an issue then its between the designer and the brother, not the OP… most wouldnt bother making an issue once they have been paid for the application….

Yes I think that was a condition that i live in it for 7 years, He is not living in it, he is renting it out. I also would have thought that even though immediate family members can also use the planning permission to build a house, that I would need to consent to it or at least would have some rights in regards to it. All your answers are very helpful thank you

@cafe wrote:

Yes I think that was a condition that i live in it for 7 years, He is not living in it, he is renting it out. I also would have thought that even though immediate family members can also use the planning permission to build a house, that I would need to consent to it or at least would have some rights in regards to it. All your answers are very helpful thank you

eh, no….. you wouldnt need to give any consent if the planning condition allocates a right to immediate family members to implement the permission.

You certainly do have him in contravention of the planning permission if he is renting it out…. the occupancy condition strictly ties the applicant to living in the dwelling for 7 years…

but, to be very frank with you, what do you hope to achieve by causing problems at this stage?? it certainly is a case of shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted…..

If your PP was related to S.47 of the 2000 Planning and Development Act get a legal opinion on the meaning and intent of this Section, the wording of the condition inthe grant of permission and a general legal view of the situation. I would accord with Henno though, I don’t know what you hope to achieve by following this course of action.

I dont know if this applys here but if an occupancy clause is part of the conditions then would the change in occupancy of the dwelling be subject to approval from the Authority and as stated above the current occupant is renting out the dwelling therefore at the moment must not have a housing need. As shown on the attached.

But then how is applied ?.

Thanks Paddy2005 for posting that. I have a dependant child and the area the house was proposed to be in was very built up and so extremely hard to get planning permission in (or so I was told), However having a child I obviously was considered to be in need and my brother would not have been.
If condition 8a of above does apply in this case then he would not have qualified (single childless young male) or been considered to be of the same housing need.

also I am interested in 8c, I know that he would not have said he is renting out house so im curious to find out who he said is living there, me or him? I have my reasons for thinking he might have said me, which I do not want to get into.

cafe…. do you not have a copy of your own conditions??? theres no point reading into anyone elses, there is no corelation….. most local authorities have their own phrasing for these conditions… perhaps post your actual occupancy condition here….

also…. the fact you have dependant children makes no difference in a planning application.

you havent stated if this dwelling was in a rural area when you need to show compliance with local housing need, or in an urban area where you dont…..

if you DID need to show a housing need then the fact it was parents land you were applying on would mean that you meet the criteria…. however, it also means that your brother meets the criteria….. children dont come into it…

It is an urban area, I don’t have a copy of it to hand, my solicitor has it, I have an solicitors appointment next week. Thanks for comments.

@cafe wrote:

It is an urban area, I don’t have a copy of it to hand, my solicitor has it, I have an solicitors appointment next week. Thanks for comments.

well, if its in an urban area its safe to assume that ‘housing need’ would not have been an issue….
nor would there (usually) be an occupancy condition tying the applicant to living in the dwelling… thus allowing the unit to be rented without issue…

paddy2005s conditions are applicable to a rural dwelling where occupancy conditions are imposed…

it doesnt sound like theres much of a case to be made…