Re: Re: False information on planning application?

@shadow wrote:

I did not think that the language was extreme, merely factual. Nor was I speaking about the case above. This is a matter of the principle. It may be an oversight where information was misrepresented. It still follows that the LA has no means whereby they can prove it one way or another. Fraud can take any form and it may not be one of loss but one of gain (unfairly or illegally).

“Planning permission CAN be granted on lands not under the ownership of the applicant. It happens quite often.” This is correct but the issue of invalidation has to do with an error being made, regardless of what the error was. My understanding is that an application with an error may be invalidated later.

Perhaps a planning barrister may qualify the above.

The process of validation rests with the planning officer not a Planning Barrister.

The matter you raise, shadow, seems to be a side issue and not related to the core issue raised by Zelamon in post No. 4.
This was centering on whether showing less land than the applicant actually owns may invalidate the application.
I fail to see how this view can be supported unless the no-show is material to the assessment in some way.

Showing less land in the application than is owned limits the permission to the land included in the red line AFAICS, but little else seems to arise.

The planning process is not intended to deal with all matters which may be material at validation stage – this is a tick-box check process.
This is a winnowing process whereby obviously incomplete application documents are thrown back to the applicant to avoid wasting LA time and resources.
When an application is deemed to be valid it moves to the next stage of assessment, it doesn’t get granted permission – it gets put under the planners microscope.

Should an issue be discovered or raised by an objector during the course of the five week planning assessment process it will be dealt with.
If ownership of other lands or an alleged mis-statement is deemed to be material issue then it will be addressed at that stage.

But its important to realize that this is not necessarily going to become material – planning law addresses planning issues.
Apart from having the necessary legal interest or consents to make the application – that’s usually it.
Planning law doesn’t supersede the law of the land.

W should try to remember; –

“De minimis non curat lex.”

“The law does not concern itself with trifles.”

ONQ.