I live in a conservation area. The house opposite is going to rack and ruin and is a bit of an eyesore. It has dozens of slates missing from the roof.
Do Councils have powers to force owners to maintain their house in a conservation area - or anywhere else for that matter?
I suspect not. Very good at saying no to UPVC windows etc, but I doubt they have powers to compel maintenance.
Tim
Very limited. They can intervene if a building is actually dangerous, but that's usually limited to boarding up or fencing off. If it might fall over onto a highway they will shore it up.
If the building is occupied they may have more options under housing legislation, plus there is an identifiable owner/landlord to pursue for the costs.
Owain
In message snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com, Murmansk snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com writes
(Scotland) Not quite the house. This house has two Victorian outbuildings, probably stables and tack room. Both form part of the rear wall of the garden, public pavement on the other side. One of the buildings started shedding slates and the LA wrote to the then owner (not me!), insisting the roof be repaired as falling slates were a danger to passing pedestrians. The owner ignored the letter and follow ups so the LA employed a local contractor who removed the whole roof - slates, beams, the lot. Just left the four walls with all the debris within. The LA sent the bill to the then owner. Job done.
Ask the council to issue a Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Section
215 notice.The property does not have to be in a conservation area.
If they know ho actually owns it they can, I believe take control if its listed or dangerous to anyone nearby, but I don't think merely in a conservation area cuts much Ice. Its an old dodge like accidentally burning it down, to get planning permission for something else. Brian
Same in England. Not sure the LA have any say to force an owner into keeping a building "looking nice", though if something is done that breaches a conservation areas rules (or listing) they can enforce those rules. Otherwise its only when a building becomes a danger to the public can they take action. Ultimately with the LA getting the required works done and billing the owner. Who may then have to be taken to court to get the meoney, then send in the baliffs...
It was explained to me in another context by a listed building official. 'Listing a building means it cant be changed legally, by human intervention, so any changes made that contravene its status must be corrected by the owner. But it excludes applying the law to Nature, which is why the owner of those listed Nissen huts, is waiting for the corrugated iron to rust through, so he can develop the site'
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required