Development of a studio built in a garden

This forum is for Garden Law problems that don't fit into the other categories. Please treat it with respect.

Moderator: Angelisle

Post Reply
Paddock
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:37 pm

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Paddock »

Chunga wrote: Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:04 pm

The developer has now submitted his seventeenth identical planning application.
Doesn't it cost about £500 a time to make a planning application?

Paddock
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

It seems that there is a company with a very similar name Articlus Ltd. which does architectural drawing and is based at 11 Woodford Avenue Ilford IG2 6IF.

Its director is named as Ahmed Munir Choudury. It appears to be linked in some way to Fridum Specialist Construction.
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

Hammersmith and Fulham planners have been playing games with the Developer. When he put in three identical applications simultaneously, they rejected one. accepted another and ignored the third. The only differences between any of them and indeed the dozen or so that he has done before, were the numbers of windows in the roof, and whether or not they could be opened. As the planners knew very well that one of the members of the planning committee invariably rejects any plan that has bedrooms, without ventialation, this was the design that they chose to pass up.

The Developer, of course chose to return, since he does DIY drawings on his laptop and pays only a £200 fee for each submission. This time, they intervened after the identical set of drawing, replete with all the errors that have been in every one since the outset, was again submitted, with some trivial variation in either the number of roof windows or the number that could be opened. They induced him to submit new drawings, with a lower roof line, But he seems to have forgotten that if he lowers the roof, he also needs to excavate further underground.

No doubt the Developer was duly encouraged by this help and old his bankers that planning approval would be there in a jiffy. But the planners decided to reject it a few weeks later, on the same grounds that all the others have been rejected, that the Developer is trying to build a slum.

Hammersmith Enforcement now accepts that he has willfully destroyed the top half dozen lines of bricks in the front wall. This has allowed rain and frost to penetrate. So this wall is now in possible danger of collapse and is now shielded by an ugly grey hoarding. And the building will have to be submitted to new build controls rather than the more lenient restoration controls.

He has yet to submit a Party Wall notice although he claims that letters sent to neighbours by registered post several months ago, included this. Fortunately the contents have been photographed, and was just his usual rant against councilors, planners and objectors. Meanwhile he will have to excavate a full five metres below pavement level, and his top floor will be just one metre above the pavement, in line with the ground floor of neighbouring buildings.
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

The developer has submitted a new set of drawings - his 15th. He does this without payment to the council, as the planners try to explain that repeated submissions of his erroneous home-drawn plans, that vary not a whit from all the previous ones, is unlikely to succeed. As the planners put it "one of the drawings has an omission."

He has omitted the ground floor, which should have contained two bedrooms, and would have been slightly above pavement level, with a full-length window on to the street, going down to floor level. He has kept the plan for a staircase leading from the front door up to the bedroom floor. He has kept the basement floor roughly where the original studio floor was but plans for a dungeon underneath it.

Since the property is entirely boarded up and he has refused access to party-wall surveyors, what are the odds that he will simply install the floor when nobody is looking. The drawings submitted to Building Control bare little relation to those submitted to planning and feature pillars and other reinforcements that cannot be seen anywhere else.
He will dig still further down into the ground, to have a hole 5-6 metres below street level. An entire room is planned to fit underneath what was the original floor of the studio.

He has claimed that his partner is actually living in this building site, in order to claim a Council tax rebate. Doe anyone have any ideas of how to stop this farce?
SwitchRich
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:34 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by SwitchRich »

I've mentioned this before but surely going to the papers to get publicity around this should be a way to focus people minds?
Is there a reason why you have not tried this?
There are many examples in the press when an egregious developer has had his actions highlighted publicly it forces local government to get tough.
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

Thank you for the excellent suggestion.

I have spent a lot of time trying to interest both the Daily Mail and the Evening Standard in this story. The selling point had to be the original artist, who sadly was not as famous as John Constable. the Mail correspondent, very friendly and helpful was that his editor always told him to ask himself "What will the readers in Rochdale make of this? " The Standard was hopeful thatat lest one of the objectors would be rich and famous. It does ive good coverage to development rows involving pop stars and footballers.

Actually one of the Conservative (opposition) councillors on the planning committee brought along the correspondent from a London web paper, who wrote an intellligent and sympathetic aricle. Maybe he can be persuaded to do an update.

Although councillors have received libelllous and threatening letters. police will only take action once several have been sent.
SwitchRich
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:34 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by SwitchRich »

What about building a website detailing this properties location and timelines of all his actions. Including being aggressive and making threatening actions.
You could take a bunch of pictures of what has happened so far and how it is damaging the area. A facebook group too would be a way of reaching out.
I am aware however you have never posted any pictures here? Is there a reason for that too? If you want to get the press involved you kinda need to tell everyone about the place, what this developer is trying to do and why it is so bad. Are you worried it might harm your interests in the area by doing so?

Part of the issue is there is a lot of information needs to be digested before any new person can be brought up to speed with what has actually gone on. And a website might be the place to detail the timelines of all the repeated planning applications etc.
Also to complicate things I remember reading some of uk_mickys posts and he said there is an argument for what is a ground floor and what is a basement at this particular property.

I guess the forum can only go on what you have given us which apart from the "story" is not very much. To bring it to life you'd need the street names, and pictures of what was there before and how it is now. Then you could pull people along. Content is king here I think.
If you're able to tell us all the details I'm sure collectively we might be able to help?
ukmicky
Posts: 5207
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by ukmicky »

Be careful with what you put on the website.
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

Thank you both for your advice. With pending litigation and strike-offs, it is inopportune to expand further.
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

The developer is now sending defamatory emails about councilors, planners and objectors to everyone whose email he can find. He has asked Asagba-Power to help him as a black man against a council that is prejudiced against him. As he has threatened Asagba-Power with decapitation, help is unlikely from that source. He faces court action on this and a second court action for blockading a neighbour`s property with a barrier he has constructed to seal off the only fire escape.

As matters are sub judice, I cannot comment further until the judges decide.
SwitchRich
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:34 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by SwitchRich »

Wow! When do you think any judgement might be forthcoming?
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

Hammersmith Council has agreed to settle and to pay costs. The developer, who is also a defendant, has failed to reply. Bridge Invest Ltd, the micro-bank which funds his activities, is unaware of how its money is being divested. The following was sent to the chairwoman of the planning committee, just before the council caved in.

This was in response to Mr A’s e-mail on 6 August, which was copied to her, colleagues and staff at the council.

"He has made many previous allegations that are entirely false but which we can no longer ignore. We need to correct the record, before judgement.
Since his purchase of the studio almost 4 years ago, he has been consistently aggressive and threatening in his dealings with us (and to council staff). He has submitted 12 planning applications, all of which have, bar one, have been refused by the council, on numerous valid grounds.
His behaviour has imposed huge stress on councillors, local residents, planners, and the planning committee, as everyone had to grapple with his chaotic approach, ever repeated proposals and aggressive manner. He has never sought to approach anyone to discuss his plans. In fact he has misled both residents and his bankers in claiming that he would just refurbish it.
Given the physical and structural bond between neighbouring buildings and the studio, all work should be lawful and prevent damage to other homes. He has blocked a fire escape, which has led to other court proceedings.
Not a single one of his applications included the technical report or assessment for development proposed (contrary to the council’s own planning policy) and his drawings have all been confusing and erroneous. He has used neither architect`s nor engineer`s advice.
It is not possible to assess the impact upon next door buildings of his flawed proposals. Nobody can have any confidence that he intends to undertake the development with proper care. He has broken many laws, including false claims for council tax rebates, with immunity.
His latest e-mail concerns unauthorised work at the studio. His e-mail refers to matters relating to the Party Wall Act and building regulations. It fraudulently claims that the fact that foundations have not been undermined means that there has been no breach of planning control.
Work undertaken without planning permission includes excavating 5 skips of soil or 40 tonnes. More soil was removed in over one hundred sacks, two weeks ago.
The party wall surveyor forced his way in after two years of blocking refusals, now confirms excavations of over a metre below the basement floor level. He also confirms destruction of historic décor from the front wall of the studio. This work has been undertaken without planning permission or discharge of relevant planning conditions. There has been no supervision by engineers and conservation experts, as required by law.
The excavation that has been undertaken constitutes development which would require planning permission. The council adopted a borough-wide Article 4 direction which specifically and deliberately removes permitted development rights for subterranean excavation. The reason the council adopted the Article 4 direction was to control unregulated double basement development. This is precisely what has been done. It will, if continued, impact adjoining properties.
On 30 June 2020, planning permission was granted under delegated powers. That will now have judicial review, as the council lawyer preferred to take leave rather than reply by the deadline. Several pre-commencement conditions have to be met before work can start, lawfully.
Planning enforcers have been informed many, many times with photographs of illegal work. These have been brushed aside, with ridiculous comments such as 40 tonnes of earth were “ mere dust from under floorboards. “
The lawyer, who authored this sent it in view of the falsehoods, with which councillors and staff have been bombarded. These points will be put to the High Court judge as will Mr A`s murder threat to a planner. He will determine the truth. Further defamatory comments will also go before the judge.
We would be grateful if you would kindly circulate this to your colleagues and staff who were in receipt of the defamatory and dishonest comments, which have been made against both residents and them.
SwitchRich
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:34 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by SwitchRich »

Hi Chunga,
Thanks for the update. What I don't really understand is why the council caved and will pay costs? Could you explain that bit?
Or is that just part of the outrage of this whole thing?
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

The planners made an unbelievably crass error. They slipped out a delegated approval to designs that had already been rejected by the planning committee and at appeal. It is Yes Minister all over. Or perhaps Asagba Power whose life has been threatened released a bum steer in order to draw attention to the incompetence of other parts of the council. Nobody will use the powers that parliament gave them to deal with such pests.
Chunga
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:55 am

Re: Development of a studio built in a garden

Post by Chunga »

The council has agreed to quash its deeply flawed application. Meanwhile the developer is sending libels about councillors and objectors, to everyone whose email he can get. The council has broken the Data Protection Act by letting him have objector`s emails, which he is using to threaten them. Meanwhile its legal costs are mounting daily, while it pleads poverty in delaying payment of the costs of objectors.

Are other council`s this incompetent?
Post Reply