Another Validation 'Refusal'

[Gary Prentice]

1 minute ago, EdwardC said:

Where does it say that in the legislation/regulations in respect of an S211. Ignore the guidance, it's just that, guidance. It doesn't have to be slavishly followed, hence I said lawful.

I'm not 100% sure that the word 'written' is in any legislation, but as the legislation reads, to paraphrase, 'it shall be a defence that the authority had been informed and six weeks have elapsed' you'd be surely on the back foot if you hadn't submitted it writing. You're more or less guilty when you stand in the dock, and relying on a tree officers memory of a drunken evening several weeks before......

 

"So, Mr Smith, you are employed by Little Fiddling Council? And the defendant is claiming that in the early hours of morning of the first of January he notified you of his intention to remove the tree in question?"

 

"I can not recollect receiving a notification, your Honour!" 

 

"And why is that?"

 

"I was pissed as a fart, your Honour!"  

[Gary Prentice]

1 minute ago, EdwardC said:

So how can an LPA demand that notice is served on the form via the Planning Portal.

Surely the first question is how a LPA can demand that notice is provided using the 1App form, rather than on the back of a beer mat?

 

So back to my previous post, much safer to provide a written submission to the TO, on the back of a beer mat, than just tell him in the kebab shop. 

[Wolfie]

Surely the first question is how a LPA can demand that notice is provided using the 1App form, rather than on the back of a beer mat?
 
So back to my previous post, much safer to provide a written submission to the TO, on the back of a beer mat, than just tell him in the kebab shop. 

But take a pic of the beer mat, just in case it gets thrown out with beer towel that's used to mop up his sick.

[Gary Prentice]

TBH I tend to find that successful applications and notifications are those written on a well stuffed brown paper envelope. 

 

Edited March 17, 2018 by Gary Prentice

[Khriss]

Strictly - a text to the TO constitutes a legal time stamped notification , if all else fails K

[Gary Prentice]

18 minutes ago, Khriss said:

Strictly - a text to the TO constitutes a legal time stamped notification , if all else fails K

You just need a handy teenager around to type it though! And probably a teenage TO to understand the abbreviations and language involved. 

[Adam M]

On 20/03/2018 at 12:07, Gary Prentice said:

You just need a handy teenager around to type it though! And probably a teenage TO to understand the abbreviations and language involved. 

1/3/08 21 RNGWUD RD PUK2BBOSHT HTH KTHNXBI NEPROBS INBOXMEBABE XXX

Edited April 1, 2018 by Adam M

[Gary Prentice]

You couldn’t make it up.

The LA refused to validate the application for three weeks, until I changed the references on my plan to match their thirty odd year old TPO plan

 

So eleven weeks after that, I rang them to ask why I haven’t received a decision notice?

 

”It hasn’t been determined yet!”

 

I did apologise, eventually, to poor lad in planning when he told me. Seems like they are apply ‘rules’ when it’s for their own benefit.

 

 

Edited May 13, 2018 by Gary Prentice

[Paul Barton]

Appeal! You know you want to! 

[Gary Prentice]

1 hour ago, Paul Barton said:

Appeal! You know you want to! 

They were a bit more ‘appealing’  when proper arbs were involved in the process, and why should I waste yet more of my time due to the LAs incompetence?

 

A complaint to the councils CEO may be the first port of call.

 

This same council argued the toss about numbering trees previously. They backed down when I asked if, as the tree of whatever TPO ref no. Was shown on the other side of the fence (in next doors garden) on their plan, why were we arguing over tree numbers when I could just go ahead and fell it anyway? 

 

This app is annoying, no TO would spend more than two minutes on site determining it. It doesn’t warrant the aggravation and delays involved.