Forum Topic

What is wrong with planning

I note that yet another planning application has been made in our local conservation area and yet again the plans breach the conservation rules.Why is it that these are getting as far as public notices when they breach the Conservation rules from the outset?It wastes everyones time and money and relies on those who can be bothered to take time to object...if they notice.The whole point of a conservation area is that the rules prevent such applications in the first place. But obviously things in Hounslow are either bent or inept so theres a good chance of getting things through.Why is it some get away with it and others do not?It seems that Hounslows Planning dept needs either a huge clearout, an investigation or a full explanation of it's huge degree of inconsistency.

Anthony Waller ● 4794d22 Comments

That does sound the best option and there has never been a better time. I've never known so many so disgusted and worn down by party politics.They have talked for at least a generation about reform and New this and new that but in the end it's the same old story.It would take a lot of independents of good capability and a genuine depth of honour and integrity - and as tough as old boots to bring a change but I think the electorate is ready for that and know it ain't coming from the big 3 or nut case extremist groups.

Anthony Waller ● 4790d

Either that or you get yourself elected to a position from which you are able to overhaul the system and replace the current mess with a culture which acknowledges that the local authority is there for local people, and conducts itself accordingly.Reading your post George this may actually be the easier option in the long run.

Phil Andrews ● 4790d

Phil your post was illuminating.If you get satisfaction at the various three level stages then fair enough. The system worked even though you had to struggle. If it goes to the Ombudsman a Council can rectify as much as it likes. But you just say to the Ombudsman that you want the complaint left on the record, and if they want a reason then it’s because it was totally unnecessary for your time to have been so wasted even if there was rectification. Had the Council not been negligent, etc then the complaint would never have got so far through the system. Or you can ignore the LGO’s invitation which gives them a headache although I would not do that myself.But once you get to know the tricks there are ways to beat the duckers and divers. If you are suspicious that complaints will get ‘lost’ then you copy in your complaint to a senior officer, which puts the officer who is actually dealing with your complaint on notice that he is at risk of being incompetent.In your first level complaint you throw the book at the Council. You cover every possible detail. That’s the difficult bit. Then when level 1 officer rejects the complaint, you simply send that plus your original complaint to level 2 officer (with a copy to that senior officer) and just say not happy – please deal with at next stage. You say nothing else. If no response has been received in a reasonable period you demand that that level of the process has been exhausted through inattention and say you want the complaint to be escalated to level 2 there and then because you have further proof that the junior officer is seriously incompetent and not fit to deal with your correspondence.On receipt of second level response, (assuming still not happy) you have a choice. You either say not happy as before and ask for the level 3 officer to respond (again copying all documents to the senior officer), or you deal with a couple of points and then put it back into the complaints procedure.What I am saying is that the first letter has covered the issue so effectively that you don’t have to do any more real thinking or fact finding. It’s a game of ping pong to get it to the level where you really want it dealt with.Level 3 complaints worry the Council because they don’t want any bad statistics at LGO level. So there is a much better chance of obtaining capitulation. A bit more home work is required if writing to the LGO. You have to argue why the answers are not satisfactory and assert that the complaints procedure has been exhausted in full.Now to focus in to what this thread seems to be about, people are complaining about standards and ongoing incompetence rather than a once off. So as I said earlier you also ask for procedures to be changed. If the LGO persuades the Council to do this and they then confirm they have rectified the procedure, then I would never agree to the complaint being withdrawn. I would simply say that I wanted proof positive over a period that the changed procedures were continuing to provide satisfaction. I would be very tempted also to ask for copies of their revised internal procedural guidance circulars to establish the truth of the Council actually having changed its procedures. Everyone is different. You either fight in the trenches or the Council rides roughshod over you. It’s your call. You win some and you lose some.

George Knox ● 4790d

The complaints process is a war of attrition.  There are three stages to go through before one can appeal to the Ombudsman.  At Stage One (where your complaint is effectively considered by the same people that you are complaining about) your complaint is invariably rejected and usually the same happens at Stage Two.  Throughout this time the complainant has to circumvent the usual plethora of obstacles - complaint not received, complaint not responded to, complaint responded to inadequately, response unclear, response lost in the post etc etc.It is at the third stage - member level - that the complainant has the most chance, but by this time most will have already given up.  Officers are paid to deal with complaints, after all, whilst members of the public are not and usually have to make a living elsewhere.After that there is the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO), who in my view and limited experience tends towards the local authority's side in any event, but the sting in the tail is this - if the LGO finds that the local authority has behavde improperly it will usually give the council the opportunity to rectify its mistake before making a judgement.  If the mistake is rectified, the complainant is then invited to withdraw the complaint and, if that happens, the case is recorded as "complaint withdrawn", in other words effectively an unsuccessful complaint.  This is how LBH and other councils are able to boast that few complaints made to the LGO are upheld.You really couldn't make it up if you tried.

Phil Andrews ● 4791d

Sorry Adam if I have read this wrong.You are saying you worked with and became aware of inept staff misleading their paymasters and strange practices at both Hillingdon and Hounslow?And yet in your next paragraph, you want councils to take those who are raising these very concerns to court?If you are privy enough and witness what is going on then you are in a position to whistleblow and bring these to book.If I had hard evidence or that sort of access I most certainly would and I suspect, so would most of my neighbours who also feel that something isn'y quite the full shilling at LBHIt's the very fact that everything seems so inpenetrable and the complaint proceedure so laborious that makes it so difficult for anyone on the outside to afford or be able to make a serious complaint.

Anthony Waller ● 4791d

Sounds familiar.

Asif Rana ● 4791d

During the time of the 2006-2010 administration the Director of Environment sought to have a leading community activist and spokesperson for a civic group representing thousands of Isleworth residents deemed a "vexatious correspondent", which would have enabled his department to officially ignore all her correspondence, as it had already been largely doing unofficially.This is the attitude that prevails at fortress Lampton, and the fact that he could even think of doing such a thing under an administration that included several community councillors gives some idea of how much power these chief officers have traditionally wielded, and of the confidence that must have existed that the majority Conservative Group would be prepared to go along with his proposal.  Only when we threatened to create merry hell was it dropped.A local authority that was imbued with a proper attitude towards community consultation would have responded to such a proposal with a P45.

Phil Andrews ● 4791d

"Also, as part of that consideration, by law the public have to be notified on a planning application, either by way of individual consultation letters or by way of a site notice"Adam - that is the perfect world you are talking about. However in the real world, in the Borough of Hounslow, it doesn't happen  like that.  We were recently advised by letter about a planning application and the date of expiry to object was just 4 days away. A quick  community gathering revealed that  of  27 houses in our close, only 8 had received the letter - some  on different days. The letter was very basic and to get more details of the application one was directed to Hounslow's website where one thought one would be able to view the application and maps etc in detail.  However.....guess what.... the Application hadn't been downloaded on Hounslow's website yet despite the imminent closing date. Hounlow's Planning Dept is simply not fit for purpose.

Steve Taylor ● 4791d

Well - my  'experience' of the inept Planning Dept  is that my letter advising me of my 'right' to address the SDC arrived after the closing date to apply for permission to speak. I thus emailed the Director of Planning asking that the matter be deferred. I followed up with a telephone call but his PA said he wouldn't speak to me so I asked if he had received my email. She confirmed that he 'would have' received it because she could see it on her system.  I then emailed the Chair of SDC and all the SDC members and asked that my 'objection speech' be read out at the meeting and presented as an objection to the application for which I was denied the opportunity to speak.  The Chair  went ahead with the application hearing until  one astute and professional Councillor drew her attention to my email.  The Chair gave a little smirk and a silly giggle and proudly informed the meeting that she had not read any emails all afternoon because she had been for an eye test and couldn't see properly.  I was later informed that objectors  have no 'right' to address the committee - its a privilege  which is granted  at the whim of the chair. Oh yes....you couldn't make it up!

Steve Taylor ● 4791d

The only way to know for sure is to attend the relevant planning meeting pertaining to the specific issue.In my own experience, the planning officers provided an incorrect date for the meeting, told us that we had no right to speak, at all, at such a meeting, then at the meeting itself, did not present our case, although it was on the agenda to do so.The case against us was so biased and one sided there was no hope and no redress.Councillors were then asked to vote.  Guess which way they voted?Adam has given his thoughts as above.

Asif Rana ● 4791d

Whether ana objection is Nimbyism or genuine sort of does not matter. Due process requires that an objection is considered and that reasons are given for the response to the objection.The problem appears to be that there is very little access to how decisions were arrived at.I wonder what Adam thinks about this.

George Knox ● 4791d

I actually have some sympathy with Planning Officers if they have to give credence to every 'complaint' and have to decide whether it is genuine or just NIMBYism.However, any such sympathy is lost as my own experience is even worse than as stated in your third paragraph, Phil.

Asif Rana ● 4791d

I have worked with conservation panels in Ealing, Brent and Camden and Malvern and they have clear conservation rules. In the main,they are adhered to vigourously. But, residents in them are advised on what they can and cannot do before shelling out for an application. They are given clear guidance and therefore very few applications proposing to breach the parameters are made.It is not left to chance that there may be an objection or two from residents.So why does that not happen here?We are not talking about Listed buildings etc.Secondly, this does not seem to happen in Old Isleworth or the Butts.Or does it?I have now turned up and observed - out of curiousity 3 recent performances of planning committee.I use the word performance because all were more pantomime than discussion and If I could pin what is going on on any one person I would call the police in.At one meeting, the council were voting on their own proposal. As also mentioned by another poster, many objectors had no idea of a selective candidate application to voice objections. Most got notifications post meeting.Ward Councillors who also turned out to be voting members had also failed to convey requested responses to several objectors most of whom had never been to such a meeting or process.The planning officers made a presentation and the main issues were dismissed with no rationale. The map/diagram projected had the main area of objection removed from it.A few councillors make weak and irrelevant questions including one that is of concern to a former party colleagues own benefit.The serious issues involved were never discussed and nor were they even presented to the councillors.The way they were going to vote was predicable by the smirks on several councillors faces.But without discussing the key issues.So  what exactly was going on?  Are the planning officers inept?Who removed detail from an ordanance survey map.?Why were so many whispers and smirks of a classroom standard going on? Why were no pertinant questions asked and why were objections ignored with disdain?Did the officers just do what the councillors wanted? Did the councillors manipulate officers? Are officers and councillors in cahoots? Why are residents held in such contempt?If it's not bent then it's extremely slanted and very incompetent and wholly unprofessional.I remember sitting through meetings in Brent 20 years ago and the whole charade is very similar. History records what happened eventually. I believe it is more the latter - at least I hope it is. If I were moneyed and had the time I would bring about a full investigation.The best is that I have indeed put my name to a group who are indeed submitting to the ombudsman and will submit my observations in full.

Michael Brandt ● 4791d

AdamWhat would your immediate feeling be if you were told that a chief officer had tried to lobby the leader of a political group in support of a planning application?  The leader of the political group in question not himself being a member of the relevant planning committee?

Phil Andrews ● 4792d

And, as George suggests, if anyone is so convinced that the Planning Department is 'bent', then why aren't they going to either the Ombudsman or the Police ?.Was I 'bent' for the five years I ran Hounslow's Enforcement Team ?.  Did I suddenly see the light afterwards ?.  Ironically enough during that 5 years I saw some 'interesting decisions' made by certain Committees, yet I was essentially paid off by Hillingdon after under 9 weeks of employment because I realised that certain Officers were covering up their mistakes by misleading the public and I refused to follow suit.When I read posts like this I'm always left with the wish that Councils would take such posters to court so that other people might think twice before accusing professional Officers of corruption.

Adam Beamish ● 4792d

Just to start at the beginning :1) There are no such thing as "conservation rules" in respect of the determination of planning applications.  There are Conservation Area Statements for most Conservation Areas, and planning policies at both local, regional and national level relating to Conservation, but none of these are "rules".2) Any planning application, as long as it contains sufficient information to be capable of being determined, has to be validated and considered by the Council.  Also, as part of that consideration, by law the public have to be notified on a planning application, either by way of individual consultation letters or by way of a site notice (and, in the case of an application, within a Conservation Area, by way of a notice in the local press).

Adam Beamish ● 4792d

Yes I get fed up with some remarks on these forums which remind one of neo nazis.However what you say of course is off beam. We do have the democratic right to challenge an authorities procedures and the right to ask for change. The Ombudsman.The trouble is that people can't be bothered. Or they are cynical about the outcome. If a case is presented strongly enough then it is worth giving this option a try.But continual complaining is not going to help so much even if the Councillors read the blogs.

George Knox ● 4792d

Much as I think planning (and traffic officers) usually inhabit a parallel universe which demands that people stick their heads up their rears - I think that's rather O.T.T. You cannot expect councillors to be behind every officer every time they speak to a member of the public, the trouble is some officers just want an easy life and frankly cannot be arsed, but there are some very good and helpful officers. I don't think any one party can be blamed on this, if you have been given duff information then complain to your councillor.

Vanessa Smith ● 4792d

In other words, techniques that were used by the Nazis in Germany and by stalin in Soviet europe.Nice to see Labour of ALL parties using this and allowing this.It won't be long before the Arab spring arrives here with this sort of abuse and manipulation.

Michael Brandt ● 4792d

I'm not sure it's that the residents can't be bothered to complain, more a case of the system making it difficult for them to know how to go about doing so.  Residents also need to feel that their complaints will be listened to and taken seriously, which certainly is not the case now at senior officer level.I can site at least two instances in which potential complainants were not advised of their right to speak at a planning meeting until after the date when applications to speak at that meeting had closed.  That gives one an idea of how seriously Hounslow takes the idea of community involvement in the process.

Phil Andrews ● 4792d

Have to agree, Too many seem to get away with doing what they like and get away with it.It does not help that they are not advised by the authority in the first place, leaving it for residents to complain - most of whom cannot be bothered until it is too late.

Michael Brandt ● 4792d

Would that it was only Hounslow - watch some of the property programmes on the T.V. or even look closer to home in Richmond for bizarre and totally incomprehensible decisions and demands. It is my view that they do, because they can.

Vanessa Smith ● 4794d