Planning Question. Roads Scotland. Passing Place.

[spellright]

Hi,
A friend applied to build a house in 2016.
An attached planning condition was that a service lay-by be constructed outside, and also a passing place some way along the country road that passes the entrance.
In 2018 a registered contractor (from the council list) attended and laid the service lay-by and passing place. Shallow BT cables were discovered near the passing place, at which time the local Scottish council were contacted and sent out their representative (Roads Inspector) who spoke with the applicant and contractor. He verbally advised to make the passing place smaller than on plan, to prevent disturbing the buried phone cables. Basically the tails were omitted. As the contractor had the materials to complete the job as per plans, and both the service lay-by and passing place had been paid for, he laid what he had, deeper than required to use up the materials.
The last my friend had heard about the matter was a meeting in January 2020 where the road inspectors supervisor had said the passing place didn't match the plans. 18 months after the passing place was constructed. My friend agreed and explained how the contractor had been advised to make the passing place smaller by the 'point of contact' that they had sent out to deal with the matter.
The supervisor said that the roads inspector who had verbally told them to reduce the size, did not have the power to do so.
Also, he basically denied that he had done so, and as thos was not in writing the passing place was incorrect.
Last week, 27 months later.. Jan 2020 - April 2022. My friend received a letter stating that due to covid restrictions, the roads department had finally managed to contact BT for a site meeting and they have agreed that the passing place tails can be laid, to a lesser depth over their cables.
The quote from one of the council's contractors was enclosed £4k, and the council also offered to undercut the contractor by £400...
Could anyone please advise if this is reasonable, fair and even legal, due to the time delay?
The planning application was back in 2016, the service lay-by and passing place were constructed in 2018 and the building completion certificate was issued in 2019.
Is this time delay and demand to pay a second time for the passing place legally enforceable?
My friend is concerned that the council will go ahead and complete 'the tails' of the passing place and forward the bill.
I feel a delay of two years and three months is neither acceptable nor fair in these circumstances.
I would understand if it was on the grounds of road safety, but the passing place has been in use by the public since 2018, so it can't be that.

[bednobs]

i think your friend will just have to do what they say

[douglas9401]

Aye, in Scotland Das Kooncil rules.

Odd that they'll undercut their own contractor though, never heard of a council working cheaper in my life.

[Hymie]

This reminds me of a story I read a few years ago where a highway contractor did not follow the specified plans, and effectively made a piece of private property part of the highway.

The property owner complained to the contractor, asking for the road layout to be modified such that it did not take any of his private property.
But the contractor refused, pointing out that he had had the works signed off by the local council and had the relevant official form (whatever it was) to prove it.

The land owner then complained to the local council, who did not want to know about the problem, having signed off the work as being completed as required.
The land owner then complained to the local government ombudsman re the council’s behaviour, which resulted in loss of his land – the last a recall is that the landowner was not having much luck with his complaint to the ombudsman.

All the above happened in England (as far as I recall), so things could be different in Scotland. But nevertheless I would expect Scotland to have some similar process whereby highway works are officially signed off, and given the time period, that those works had indeed been signed off in some way.

I suggest your friend conducts a search on the topic to find out what the process is in relation to this in Scotland. It may very well be that the works were signed off, and if so, your friend could point this out to the local council – and if they now want to make changes, that will be at their expense.

If I were in your friend’s position, I would certainly not be willing to pay anything towards remedial work (even if the original error was my fault), given the length of time that has elapsed since the work was completed.

[Hymie]

Having re read the OP, I see that a building completion certificate was issued in 2019 – so I would assume this states that the works were completed as required.
If your friend has a copy of this certificate, he should tell the local council to sling their hook.

[spellright]

Thanks Hymie,
I believe that the completion cert' is for the house only, not the conditions attached to the planning permission.

[bednobs]

in all honesty, i dont think it's worth it. You are right, it doesnt seem acceptable or fair, but the council have unlimited money (ours!) with which to pursue this and probably your friend doesn't

[Hymie]

Recently the local council wrote to my employer, advising that the property boundary hedging was overgrown and partially obstructing the public pathway. The communication advised that if the obstruction was not removed by a specified date, then the local council would arrange for the work to be done – and bill the company for the work.
Had that come to pass, and the company refuse to pay the bill – the council would have to take legal action to recover those costs.

The same should apply to your friend’s situation, I would expect the council to instruct your friend to have the remedial work done (by a specified date), otherwise they will arrange for the work to be conducted and bill your friend for the work (and have to take him to court if he refused to pay).

But given the delays and the possibility that the work has already been signed off as completed, the council maybe on dodgy ground – especially as they seem to be offering a reduction in price of £400 (for no good reason).

I would advise your friend to get as much information as possible to fight his case; and even if it went to court and he represented himself (explaining why he should not pay), if he lost, I would expect the costs awarded to the council to be of the order of £500 max - and even nothing, given the council’s delay in the matter.