Man rented out annexe as separate home in planning breach

3
Skip to next photo
1/1
Show caption
1/1
This article is brought to you by our exclusive subscriber partnership with our sister title USA Today, and has been written by our American colleagues. It does not necessarily reflect the view of The Herald.
Close Icon

Find, save and share Public Notices that affect you in the area.

Search the Public Notice Portal What is the Public Notice Portal?

What is the Public Notice Portal?

The Public Notice Portal carries statutory public notices published in local newspapers and is the fastest and most effective way of finding out what is happening in YOUR neighbourhood.

Search the Public Notice Portal

A man rented out his annexe as a separate home in breach of planning conditions, an inspector has ruled.

Richard Mockford was served with an enforcement notice from Wealden District Council concerning the annexe at his property in Broad Oak, near Heathfield.

Permission granted in December 2021 allowed part of an existing garage to be converted and a first-floor extension built to form the annexe.

A condition required it to be used solely for purposes ancillary to the occupation and enjoyment of the main property.

But the council claimed the annexe was being rented out as a separate house and launched enforcement proceedings.

The garage to the right hand side of the main property was converted into an annexe in 2021 (Image: Google)

Mr Mockford subsequently lodged an appeal against the notice. 

Planning inspector Chris Preston dismissed the appeal on November 2, upholding the notice.

Mr Preston said that the annexe was rented to a young couple who lived independently of the main house's occupants and appeared to have no family or other obvious connection with them.

There was "no indication" that the couple interacted with the residents of the main property in any way beyond being neighbours, he said.

The separation "clearly" amounted to two separate households, he added.

Mr Mockford had argued that no breach had occurred, and the occupation fell under agreed planning conditions. 

But Mr Preston said this view was "misguided".

He found that council tax was paid directly by the occupants of the annexe, indicating it had been registered separately for that purpose.

He also dismissed an argument that the planning condition was generic and not sufficiently specific.

"The fact that it does not explicitly state that those residing in the annex must have a connection with those living in the associated dwelling does not make the condition imprecise," he said. 

Mr Preston acknowledged the presence of facilities for day-to-day living did not in itself make an annexe a separate dwelling, citing the example of an elderly relative living in a 'granny annexe'. 

But he said that was "clearly not the case in this instance" and the use of the annexe was "just like any other rented flat or accommodation". 

The notice requires the letting and use of the annexe as a separate home to stop and the occupants' possessions to be removed.

Get involved
with the news

Send your news & photos