Can I sue the Council?

[Busby15]

SMBC have insisted that in order for me to be granted planning permission to convert from commercial to domestic I need to bring an unadopted road up to adoptable standards. The road in question has been in existence since 1800s and according to historic maps was there before many others, I have discovered that the road used to be called German St but the name changed sometime between 1911 and 1920 to Garden St. The council knew nothing about this change of name till I pointed it out to them. They always assumed it was Garden St.

[sherrardk]

Sorry, I haven't got any legal help to offer but what do you want to sue them for? Not knowing of a name change? Not allowing you to do what you want to do? You will need to give more information if you want the people who can help actually help you.

[Postdog]

I think we know why the name changed though.....

[dotty.]

There's a bit missing here, have you checked the council planning committe minutes to confirm that they did or did not authorise the change, if the road was unadopted then the council have no legal obligation i don't think

[Busby15]

Okay apologies for being vague, the highways dept insisted that I had plans drawn up for street improvement + a stage 1 safety audit +stage1 desktop contaminated landrepo

[Busby15]

oops! As I mentioned before I don't own the road. There is a workshop which my Mother owns and 7 weavers cottages which have been there since early 1800s, the workshop was built around 1935.From historic maps this road and these cottages were there long before any other houses & roads which were constructed much later and adopted. It is a cul de sac but is used by people from another road as a car park. The council admit it is a public highway. When I discovered it was once called by a different name I wanted to find out more details. I've checked the 1911 census and it gets even more confusing, it appears to have two names.The3 cottages at the top are in Garden st and the 4 down the side are in German st. So whats going on? I agree changing it because of ww1 seems plausible. So my gripe is why is it unadopted, when all the other roads that came later were?

[Questoz]

It's not a good idea to sue anybody at any time - especially anyone with more money than you. Of course, a lawyer may tell you otherwise because - whatever the outcome - he/she will make money.

[bednobs]

he hopes to gain in the fact that he dosen't want to comply with the councils edict he should pay to get the road up to scratch before he is granted planning permission to build 3 houses http://www.theanswerb...o.uk/members/busby15/
seriously busby, if you want the PP you have to comply with the council's conditions!

[Busby15]

Although it would cost thousands to upgrade the road, its not all about the money but the principle. I have just discovered the weavers cottages existed prior to 1835 and as such the highways act of 1835 states that ownership of roads in existence than transferred from the parishes to local councils. Funnily enough it was called by a different name(nothing German in it) and has taken me many hours of census searching to find it.

[bednobs]

in all honesty, how long do you want to wait? it's been going on since last year already, and you are already spending so much time (money?) to, it seems, prove a point of principle to the council. If the money is doable and you want to get on, my advice would be to just pay it instead of spending hours of your life on searches that will in all honesty probably prove fruitless and do your head in, finding more elaborate ways of getting out of it (suing the council because they didn't know about a name change???!?!?)
Even if the council eventually (in 6 months? in 2 years? 3 years? five years?) decide that it is their responsibility , do you think they will do it immediately? I suppose it depends on how long you want this to go on for. By the time you have proved your point of principle, another local government may well be in place, one who dosen't look as favourably on your planning application, and you might not get permission at all!

[dzug2]

Well let's assume for the sake of argument that 'ownership' of the road passed to whoever the council were at the time in 1835. Not necessarily a true assumption - it could have been a private road both before and after. What evidence do you have either way?

That still does not make it mandatory for the council to improve the road - it can take the view that it is adequate for its current purpose and leave well alone. If you want to change the use of the road then it sounds legitimate that you should pay for whatever improvements are needed for that new use.

[redcrx]

many councils ask for "extras" when looking at planning permission.
A newbuild estate may only get permission if money is paid towards the local community services, like schools, libraries etc.
I dont see how this is any different, you want to build your houses, the council want the road structure to those houses to be brought to standard at the same time.
are they going to adopt the road once its done?

[Davethedog]

The council own the road, but they are saying if you want your building changed, you have to pay for the upgrade. I would think that they know thier "ground" and you wouldn't be able to sue.

I appreciate its galling, but unless you have the money to challenge the ruling, I think you have to accept it

[bushbaby_de]

This is a standard planning obligation. The whole point is that if you want to create a new dwelling, you are responsible for the costs of bringing the road up to adoptable standard. The Council will then adopt the road, and responsibility for its upkeep. If you don't want to upgrade the road then you can't create the new dwelling. Nothing to sue for there. If you don't want to agree to the obligation, don't sign the s106 agreement - but expect the planning permission to be refused. If you've already signed - why do it if you didn't agree?