You might also be interested in
Replies (2)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
The Master Wishmaker Limited's approach was a bit inconsistent, but its not un-usual for planning permission dates to chop and change, as do plans and completion dates, sometimes it takes years to get planning permission in the first palce.
What was the problem?
The reason for the tribunal's decision was all to do with the timing of the planning permission. There were two separate planning applications; the first in September 2013 which was later withdrawn; the second in November 2013, by which time the work was finished.
There can be other non tax unintended consequences with planning permissions and timing
We had a property that was (and held planning permission as) an existing bar/restaurant.
We applied for planning permission to convert to offices, this was granted.
Then a prospective tenant came along to take the unit as a bar/restaurant, however in interim the top of the structure had been demolished.
From a point of planning law the demolition , notwithstanding it was preparatory works to a further application to alter existing bar/restauarant, was deemed to be the commencement of the new office planning permission, accordingly the property was now, re planning use, an office.
The in progress planning application to retain use but merely alter/amend (change the bar restaurant) was now invalid as the property was now an office not a bar/restaurant, no tonw use as a bar/restaurant needed a change of use back.
Accordingly we then required to make application for change of use from office (albeit not actually built or existing) to bar /restaurant (the physical building that then existed (minus top floor))
So, the moral, when two planning uses exist at the same time (existing and new) works on property will be deemed a commencement on the new permission irrespective of intent. (Albeit these days commencement notices do reduce the risk of inadvertent change of use)