We successfully challenged two enforcement notices served by Brent Council against the same residential property, eventually securing planning permission for the extensions and alterations as built.
The case concerned a house in a conservation area where the council objected to a series of external alterations, including extensions, replacement windows, dormer alterations and boundary treatments. Brent took a firm line and served an enforcement notice requiring the owner to undo the works.
That is a frightening position for any homeowner. An enforcement notice is not just a warning letter. If it takes effect and is not complied with, the consequences can be serious. In this case, the notice required substantial and expensive works to be reversed.
We were instructed to review the notice and prepare an appeal.
The first appeal was not mainly about whether the extensions were acceptable in planning terms. It was about the notice itself. Enforcement notices must be drafted clearly and precisely. The person receiving the notice must be able to understand what the council says has gone wrong and what they are required to do to put it right.
In this case, the notice was defective. We challenged it on legal grounds, and the inspector agreed that it failed to meet the statutory requirements for clarity and precision. The notice was found to be a nullity.
That should have been the end of the matter. But, to our surprise and disappointment, Brent served a second enforcement notice relating to the same property.
The second notice again sought the removal or reversal of the extensions and alterations. We prepared a further appeal, this time focusing on the planning merits of the development. In other words, we argued that, even if the works needed planning permission, that permission should now be granted.
The appeal explained that the works preserved the character and appearance of the property and the surrounding conservation area. We also argued that the steps required by the council were unnecessary and disproportionate.
The inspector agreed. The second appeal was allowed, the enforcement notice was quashed and planning permission was granted for the development as built.
This was a strong outcome for the homeowner. Brent had served two enforcement notices. Both were successfully challenged. The first failed because it was defective. The second failed because the development was acceptable in planning terms.
The case is a useful reminder that an enforcement notice should not be accepted at face value. A notice may be legally flawed. It may require more than is necessary. Or the development may simply be acceptable, even if it was carried out without the correct permission.
Brent serves more enforcement notices than almost any other council in the country, and is our busiest borough for planning enforcement work, and we regularly advise homeowners, landlords and developers facing enforcement action in the borough. We have particular experience with Brent cases involving unauthorised extensions, conservation areas, HMOs, flats and outbuildings.
It is very important that you do not ignore an enforcement notice.
If you have received an enforcement notice from Brent Council, contact us as soon as possible. The appeal deadline is short, and the sooner the notice is reviewed, the more options are likely to be available.
