OK, well in this instance you have to accept that you are dealing with an Enforcement Officer who is barking mad and act accordingly.

The other property with the larger gap now looks much worse than it did before.

In my view they can ask you to rearrange the panels to 'minimise their impact' but they cannot ask you to remove them (as long as you meet the other conditions). That would give them the power to decide the size of PV you have on your roof and that simply goes beyond the terms of the permitted development conditions that have been set by the legislation. An LPA could always argue that 2 panels have less impact than 3 and 1 has less impact than 2. It would only end with zero panels on any roof and is quite an illogical approach for any LPA to take.

The conditions you have to comply with for permitted development are:

- solar PV or solar thermal equipment shall, so far as practicable, be sited so as to minimise its effect on the external appearance of the building;
and
- solar PV or solar thermal equipment shall, so far as practicable, be sited so as to minimise its effect on the amenity of the area;

The crux is 'minimising the effect' as regards 'siting' 'so far as practicable'.

So you only need to show that you (your installer) have done all that is 'practicable' to 'minimise' the effect of the 'siting' of the panels. To have 14 panels on your roof I think you have already done that. It's difficult to see what other arrangement of 'siting' the 14 panels would be better at 'minimising the impact'. It is quite possible to come up with other siting arrangements that (subjectively) increases the impact compared with what you have at the moment. (Creating an unnecessary gap down the middle would be one such example.) You could show that you have taken the 'minimal effect' approach by submitting half a dozen or so alternative panel arrangements that have been considered and rejected as having greater impact than the arrangement you have chosen.

I think the Local Plan stuff is a red herring as control of permitted development is outside their remit.

All this assumes that permitted development rights have not been removed for your property.

Thank you for all this input and support everyone! You start to think that you are going crazy.
I am going to start the documents this weekend as we need to apply for planning permission to appeal (at the cost 300 pounds which we find completely ridiculous!)
Essentially a guy up the road complained, not even in our Close. He cannot even see it from his house, only when he drives down the road. Our neighbours actually support our panels and even though they noticed them in the beginning, they do not see them anymore. The two panels they want removed are not even seen by our neighbours due to the position of their windows.
The enforcement officers and his boss have been trying to get us to tell them the ROI of the array for some time but we have refused as it is not needed under any legal requirement. They also wanted us to move the array down by 300mm so that you can see more of the top of the roof... I said this was ridiculous and, as we were the required distance from all sides of the roof, would not hold up. So they backed down on that one.
Bit nerve wrecking going up against them but am so mad I think that will carry me

Flavia, you can get 15 minutes of free planning advice from the RTPI Planning Aid helpline - see http://www.rtpi.org.uk/planning-aid/ call 0330 123 9244 - although they may not be able to tell you much more than you have already learned here.

You may also qualify for further free consultation if you are eligible - see http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/1139791/Eligability-Criteria.pdf

Posted By: FlaviaI am going to start the documents this weekend as we need to apply for planning permission to appeal (at the cost 300 pounds which we find completely ridiculous!)

I too find this completely ridiculous. Surely the only matter in dispute is whether or not this installation meets the requirements for permitted development. If it does then it's none of the planners' business. If not then, indeed, you'd need to apply for planning permission. I'd have thought that if you needed to apply for anything then it'd be a Certificate of Lawful Permitted Development.

Sorry, don't know how much a CLPD application costs beyond that it was £75 for a small wind turbine in the Highlands a while ago and a vague idea that it's usually half the cost of the equivalent planning permission.

personally on those bungalows I think they would have looked better with the "new" stepped arrangement, but without the awful gap - but not enough for a planning enforcement notice!

I'm staggered that you have an enforcement notice though as

a) those panels look fine.
b) enforcement is usually a very last resort used by councils as it's horrendously expensive

Be very careful that you appeal before the time limit though, as I believe it's a one and only chance- and if you don't submit a VALID appeal in time, the enforcement notice stands and can't be un-done.

I guess the £300 is because you are appealing under ground A that planning permission should be granted. You may want to consider whether this is the correct ground - and balance the cost of the £300 against what it would cost to remove the 2 panels. Ground C (that there has been no breech of planning control) may be relevant here - in effect there is no breach because it's permitted development. You may save 300 quid but the inspector, if he finds that the panels are not "permitted development" will not consider the "would I have granted planning permission for these" angle, which I think is the point of ground A - so it depends on how bullish you are on your chances.

above is layman's opinion!

I agree with everyone too - your planning department using it's enforcement powers in this way is also irresponsible, in the current economic climate/budget cuts etc. Wasting taxpayers money on such trivia seems to indicate your planning department is grossly mismanaged.

I would be tempted to write, enclosing the 2 pictures, to the head of your council/head of the planning department and chairperson of the planning committee asking for an explanation/justification of such expenditure. And if you can be bothered write also, enclosing a copy of the letter, to the Ministers responsible for planning and energy ie Secretary of States drawing their attention to what is happening. You might find suddenly all your problems disappear overnight.

PS see..

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/appeals/enforcementappeals

PPS I believe there would be no fee but as with all appeals the planning authority can apply for costs. You could also consider applying for costs or at least tell the local planners that would be your intention.

personally I'd just write back to them explaining that as their enforcement notice is unlawful you have no intention of complying with it, and they have no lawful means to enforce it so you suggest they retract their unlawful notice and ensure their staff are given better training in the actual legislation and the correct interpretation of it.

If they disagree then explain they will need to take you to court in order to enforce their notice, at which point they will certainly have their case thrown out, have costs awarded against them and set a precedent that ensures they have to amend their current interpretation of the legislation.

don't spend any money or further effort on this other than that letter - their notice is not lawful, it carries no legal weight and they can do nothing about it without a court order anyway, and they can't get a court order for an unlawful notification (although you will have to remember to turn up in court and defend your position if they do take it to court).

They're trying it on, and chances are they even know it, or if they don't then their legal department will soon set them straight when the enforcement officer takes it to them.

Whatever you do DO NOT apply for planning permission, or even a certificate of lawful development as this makes it look as if you acknowledge that there is some question mark over it's legality - there is no question, it is permitted development regardless of what a council officer might think about it this is the law.

You could always threaten to sue the council for the unwarranted stress they've caused you for good measure if you were so inclined, and probably for the unwarranted reduction in your house valuation if they refuse to remove the unlawful enforcement notice. It doesn't sound like this planning officer is likely to listen to reason, but he'd have to listen to the council legal department and insurers if they get notification of an intention to sue the council. If you really felt the urge you could get the other affected residents together and sue the council collectively for unlawfully preventing their legal right to enjoy their property as they wish - case law would be this.

http://www.clarkslegal.com/Article/1124/Renewable%20Energy,%20Judicial%20Review%20and%20Human%20Rights
http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2011/08/11/rocing-the-law-a-successful-human-rights-damages-claim/

eta - if you were to go the collective route, then any residents who'd had planning permission unlawfully refused could well be entitled to claim for loss of the FIT income they would otherwise have been entitled to receive, so a lawsuit of several dozen residents could well amount to million pound total damages claim against the council which would hopefully make all councils in the UK sit up and take notice (ie their insurers would ensure compliance).

I'd do what Gavin says. This is almost certainly bullshit from a very biased officer and someone with some clue coming back and telling them so should stop it happening to others.

Apologies! My screen only updated after I posted the above.

Gavin, thank you for this!! I feel a bit of sanity returning to my mind :-)
That is what has been niggling me. If we apply for planning permission are we not admitting that we have done something wrong??
Will in to this and be back shortly with an update.

Thanks again!
Flavia

Posted By: wookeyI'd do what Gavin says. This is almost certainly bullshit from a very biased officer and someone with some clue coming back and telling them so should stop it happening to others.

As would I - but this depends upon your character/situation - i.e. There's not much going back from this.

If you (and family) are not planning on selling in the nearby future, are fairly resistant to stress, tenacious/bullish in standing up for you rights, can cope with some costs and don't mind picking over (lots of) legal documents then this could be a good course of action.

I might add - don't plan on needing any good feeling at the planning department in the near future too

The way the system normally works is this.....

If you build something that they think needs planning permission they will contact you by letter. That will probably be a letter of intent and will say something like... "We are writing to advise you that, if we don't recieve a planning application by date, it would be our intention to initiate enforcement proceedings". Sounds scary but you should really just treat this as an invitation to go talk to the planners and find out the real issue and how they feel about what you have built. Argue your case.

If you agree with the council and agree the work you have done does need Planning Permission then you might as well submit a planning application. I'm sure many people are scared into submitting a planning application when they have done nothing wrong.

If you don't agree with the council (eg you believe it's covered by Permitted Development Rights) and do nothing they will/may eventually issue a formal Enforcement Notice. It will instruct you to put things back as they were (eg remove the new building or your solar pannels or whatever) within a certain number of weeks.

You then have the right to appeal the Enforcment Notice. I don't think there is a fee for this. It will take time for the Appeal Inspector to issue a date for the appeal hearing so the planners will be obliged to extend or suspend the enforcement period until then.

At the appeal they will discuss the grounds for the council issuing the enforcement notice. In your case you would argue that it's covered by Permitted Development Rights. If you win then all well and good. the Enforcement Notice will be removed.

If you loose the Appeal that just means the work is not covered by Permitted Development Rights. The Appeal Inspector will give his reasons why he thinks Planning Permission s required. This does not mean you have to take the panels down. It just means you need planning permission for them.

At this point you would need to submit a planning application. Before you do you would read the Appeal Inspectors comments carefully. For example he might have said that Planning Permission is required BUT he that he would be minded to approve it if it came to appeal. That would be a strong hint to the council to grant planning permission. The enforcement notice will be suspended while your planning application is considered.

Whatever happens.. If your planning application is refused you can go back to the Appeal Inspector again.

I agree with Gavin and would hold off on the planning application until you have exhausted other options.

Flavia,
These forum chaps are, indeed, well meaning and well informed, so their advice is worth a lot.

Many Planning Authorities will write a letter giving you the impression you have to do one thing or the other BUT it will be their opinion (or that of the officer concerned) - in effect they are asking you to do something (ie remove two panels or apply for planning). They may make it sound like they are telling you to do something but they can only ask or request. Only when they serve an Enforcement Notice are they telling you to do something and you can appeal against that anyway.

The Enforcement Notice MUST clearly state that it is an Enforcement Notice and state the Act or Regulations that it is made under, why you have contravened those regulations and it MUST also clearly state how you can appeal against the Notice, if it misses these out then it is not a valid notice.

Please make sure that you are reacting to an Enforcement Notice and not just a snotty letter from the planning Department. The appeal against the Enforcement Notice will not require you to apply for planning - you will be appealing that you have met PD and therefore don't need Planning permission.

Posted By: Flavia...as the panels in their entirety have not been sited to minimise their effect on the external appearance of the building and on the amenity of the area.

I wonder if that's a deliberate omission of wording from the legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/2056/made

says, in Conditions, A2 (a):

solar PV or solar thermal equipment shall, so far as practicable, be sited so as to minimise its effect on the external appearance of the building;

My emphasis. Also similar wording in the following condition for amenity of the area.

Putting panels in the shade is unlikely to be considered practicable by anybody sane.

Assuming it's PD then their reasons 2 and 3 are irrelevant, I'd have thought.

So from the helpful comments above, I stay clear of Planning applications even though the enforcement officer is doing his utmost to position this as my only way out. And go for point (3)?

None of us are lawyers (or at least admitting to be) but, yes, I'd agree that that's the way the comments have been pointed.

Oh and...

Supplement to PPS1: Planning and climate change

Renewable and low-carbon energy generation:

20. In particular, planning authorities should:
– not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate either the overall need for renewable energy and its distribution, nor question the energy justification for why a proposal for such development must be sited in a particular location...

In other words you can argue the garage roof (partly shaded) is unsuitable and they should not question that. If they do refer them to the above.