Landlords who built bedroom extensions without permission have been ordered to tear them down - or face thousands in fines.
Twenty-four houses on just three streets in Fallowfield, Manchester, have been served with the council enforcement notices.
All have extensions to back bedrooms on the first floor – which the council says are 'out of keeping' with the area and must be removed.
All the extensions are to houses on Braemar Road, Brailsford Road and Moseley Road in the heart of Manchester's student area.
Eight of the houses are owned by one landlord, with two others owning five and six respectively. A further five landlords own one house each.
If an appeal is not lodged, all the landlords will have until September next year to pull the extensions down or face a fine of £20,000 per property.
Nigel Murphy, the council's executive member for the environment, said: "These extensions are not in character with the area, are of poor design quality and affect the appearance of the neighbourhood.
“Why should people play by the planning rules if they see the council not taking action against people who don't?
“The planning department are there to assist people with what they can and can't build and it's my understanding that these people have not consulted with them before putting these extensions up.”
Steve Lamb, a planning consultant acting for four of the landlords, said the appearance of the houses was 'a matter of judgement'.
He said: “These extensions were part of renovations that have improved properties.
“They are fairly small additions to provide a better lay-out.
“My clients accept they do not have planning permission, and they should.
“But if the council considers they are out of keeping then that is a matter of judgement.
“My clients are now considering appealing this enforcement because they believe they a good case to put.”
If the council enforcement action does go to appeal, the final decision will be made by Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government MP Eric Pickles.
Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Extra bedroom = extra money, that's why....
Some of these extension have been there for many years, why has it taken so long to notice? Or has somebody just got a bee in their bonnet and decided that now is the time to make a name for themselves?
These landlords are just trying to whack as many bedrooms as possible onto one building to get maximum money out of the students.
It would really improve the area if they pulled all those dog boxes down!!!
If a property is built without palanning permission and/or building without building regulation approval it is basically uninsurable and as some have tenants this is criminal and bussiness wise gross stupidity. The culprits could of course apply for all the retrospective consents etc, haha. at about £1000 a go.
Steve Lamb says "But if the council considers they are out of keeping then that is a matter of judgement".
Looking at the photo I'd say it's more like a matter of fact.That's got to be the weirdest looking extension I've ever seen.
you got to do what the freemasons ,i meen councilors say otherwise you will have the full might of the law down on you, forms in triplicate with we win on it
I'm with the council on these, although the houses don't look great anyway - those extensions are really vile - they must only be adding a few foot of extra space???
why do these people think they can get away with it, this story is very similar to the man in High Lane Stockport who breached planning laws. If this trend continues ot will become a free for all,
This one is for councillor nigel murphy: one rule for one yet another rule for another, you councillors need to realise it should be one rule for all. Just a little reminder: what about the case of Mr Mahboob Malik of Buxton Road in Higher Lane Stockport (A restaurant boss has been ordered to bulldoze his dream £500,000 home because he never got permission to build it so big), but yet he gets to keep his property with just a few alterations when the bulldozer should have gone in. Rules? You make them up as you go along and we wonder why this country is going down hill fast.
Perhaps they were built to provide more accommodation to cram more immigrants into?
aside from that,fallowfield has no character to be in keeping with. It is a swirling cess pit of litter,filth and cheap crummy takeaway shops and sqalid rental accommodation.
Have these extensions been passed by building inspectors? Poor and shoddy work can lead to fatalities as we have seen down the years, the planning department are there for a reason and the landlords are cutting corners filling their wallets…
I wouldn't say they are an extra bedroom, unless you can cram all your stuff into such a small space. I'd suggest that the council won't do anything at all to the owners as the end of the day, it's the residents (tenents) who will lose out.
I'm guessing the council will settle for additional council tax.
Well, if they've been up for 12 years, no chance. I've heard that after 8 years it becomes difficult.
Why on earth do they need planning permission? They aren't in front of the building line, don't extend more than 3m to the rear and are less than permitted development size (50cu metres in total for a terraced property and 70 cu metres for semi-detached other than in conservation areas or max 10% of the volume of the house). This only applies to houses and not flats. Building Regs permission is all that is required in most cases. Methinks the council is exceeding it's authority. They should only be described as detrimental to the 'visual amenities of the area' if they affect the front elevation or extend above the roof. Even then it's a matter of opinion. It seems the council are trying to interfere where they don't actually have the right by moving the goal posts. In my time as a LA Building Control Officer I've seen a heck of a lot worse that have been allowed. Have the council members given any serious thought of how their actions are going to affect the tenants? Don't think so; I think someone is just exercising their 'authority' to suit themselves.
Did I read correctly? According to the article if the owners don't dismantle the extra building, they will have to pay a fine of £20,000. I know what I'd do. They'll earn the money back quite quickly through rent.
Simple solution is to ignore the council and start a 'Dale Farm' kind of campaign saying that your Human Rights are being infringed and get the left wing protesters and United Nations involved in a 10 year campaign that will cost the council millions. Stand up to the council.
Anyone would think the council wasn't trying to look after the pennies (!)
What a eyesore,they look like mini conservatories built half way up a wall, very wierd looking! they should be knocked down they look dangerous as though they could just fall off in a bad gust of wind. Landlords are just so greedy.
All the extensions are the same, some dodgey builder has told them it's ok as long as it's not on the floor and these muppet landlords have fallen for it. Eyesore the lot of them and i have no doubt they don't conform to building regs and H&S of rented accomodation. Rip them down before they fall down.
Out of keeping with the area?
No, if they looked nice they wouldn't be in keeping with the area but as it is the area is a dump & these 'extensions' fit in nicely.
lookng at the picture the only visual blight to the area seems to be the po-faced council jobsworth in the foreground.
The return of the slum landlord, Thank you 30 years of irresponsible capitalism
I have lived on Brailsford Road for over twenty years and speak to several of the landlords on a regular basis.
Only this summer, one landlord told me that an insider had told them that a 'new member' of the planning committe was a zealot and planned to pull all the Dorma Extensions down.
However the landlord was confident that 'nothing would be done' because his extention had been 'up for more than 5 years'.
It is my understanding that these 'extensions' cost less than £2000 and are classed as temporary with a guarantee of 5 years???
I do not know how accurate this information is but can tell you that the landlord who provided this information told me that it was a 'quick and sure fire way to increase his income'!!!
Extensions aside has anyone bothered to check the fact that the majority of these houses do not have a back door and therefore fail to meet Health and Safety rules for multi-occupancy?
I am aware that the Police have checked out several properties and apparently passed the information on but no action appears to have been taken.
I would have thought that it was far more important in terms of life than the extensions.