UKTC Archive

RE: Offensive behaviour

Subject: RE: Offensive behaviour
From: Vowell Anthony R CDE/EDP
Date: Dec 20 2001 18:01:24
To reply to Bill....Yes the developers can abate a nuisance, but it appears from what Julian writes that the developers went beyond what they could legally do, and that opens a whole new can of worms.
And whilst we are on the question of using TPO's to refuse permission, does anyone else out there have experience of their DC's trying to get you to place a TPO on a site, in order to try and refuse permission?
-----Original Message-----
From: []
Sent: 18 December 2001 18:20
Subject: Re: Offensive behaviour

While in principle I think you're bang to rights Jules, let us consider the scenario thus:

The LA TPO the tree then refuse the builder plannig permission as development will affect the tree.

The builder then goes to the tree owner and says "your tree is devaluing my site therefore you owe me £Xk to compensate me for my financial loss"

The tree owners then go to the LA and say "your TPO has just cost us £Xk, therefore we expect compensation!"

Therefore by ignoring the tree the LA have saved everybody a pile of loot and trouble.

Now I don't like the above one little bit, but if what I think Charles Mynors said a couple of years ago is correct; that is "a neighbour has an absolute right to abate nuisance whether or not a TPO is in force" then I don't think that anyone is going to achieve anything.

There were a lot of dropped jaws when Charles announced that one but I'm sure thats what he said. Anybody else there (Midlands Branch AA meeting) to testify?

Of course if you only have a right to 'abate nuisance' then perhaps there's an argument to be had but my understanding is that if the above is true, then if the famous Leeds City Council v Sun Timber Company had gone to appeal then the Noble wigs would have let em off! (sorry "orf")

It seems to me that devaluing a plot of land is definitely a 'nuisance.'

Maybe the Town Planners have got an unwritten agreement that they always refuse permission on other grounds.

And remember that by definition "you cannot be a nuisance to yourself." Therefore the Planners can refuse permission because of trees on the plot but not because of trees off the plot.

Tricky one; I'd love Charles to get his book published so we can argue the toss about such matters in this forum. (Assuming any of us can afford it; I bet it costs more than Giles Biddle's tome!)

Looking forward to the comments on the above.

Mae'r e-bost hwn ac unrhyw atodiad iddo yn gyfrinachol ac fe'i bwriedir ar 
gyfer y sawl a enwir arno yn unig. Gall gynnwys gwybodaeth freintiedig. Os yw 
wedi eich cyrraedd trwy gamgymeriad ni ellwch ei gopo, ei ddosbarthu na'i 
ddangos i unrhyw un arall a dylech gysylltu 'r Cyngor ar unwaith.
Mae unrhyw gynnwys nad yw'n ymwneud  busnes swyddogol Cyngor Gwynedd yn 
personol i'r awdur ac nid yw'n awdurdodedig gan y Cyngor.
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the named 
recipient only. The content may contain privileged information. If it has 
reached you by mistake, you should not copy, distribute or show the content 
to anyone and please contact Gwynedd Council at once.
Any content that is not pertinent to Gwynedd Council business is personal to 
the author, and is not necessarily the view of the Council.