Is Horsham Council Morally Wrong In This Instance?

[retrocop]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6320099/West-Sussex-carer-lives-converted-horsebox-faces-eviction-Christmas.html?mrn_rm=rta-fallback

Ok. The Council has the law on it's side but A. This man is not a trespasser pitching up illegally on someones land.
B. He doesn't appear to be the cause of any likely health hazard.
C. He works in a very worthy and much needed occupation.
D. He isn't a burden on the state with a pack of ferile kids running amok around his humble abode.
His crime is he cannot find affordable housing within the area he works but feels comfortable and content with his lifestyle. He is not a moaner and certainly does not appear to display any sense of imagined entitlement.
I feel this reflects very badly on the local housing authorities who will more than likely put those who least deserve social housing first before the needs of a poorly paid working man who is trouble to no one.

How do feel about this gentleman's circumstances? Yes I know the Council has the law on their side but morally should they house him first before wielding eviction orders. They are not so robust when evicting trespassing travellers on their own property, after all ,so why chase this man who is on private land with permission.?

[retrocop]

Well if we look at it from a moral point of view then the Moral of this saga is for the landowner to report he has a traveller or squatter on his property and the Council will say tough. You deal with it and get yourself a Court order he's on your property.

[dannyk13]

He could take advantage of this:-
https://urbanistarchitecture.co.uk/the-four-year-rule-explained-certificate-of-lawfulness-application-for-existing-use-or-development/

[retrocop]

Danny
Yes I mentioned that @1154. There is a similar story involving the certificate being granted in Sussex but not necessarily the same council authority.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2114920/Family-built-secret-house-woods-telling-planners-evicted-because.html

[cassa333]

I don’t think he had been there that long or long enough when the council first told him to move on so I’m not sure if the four year ‘rule’ would be applicable.

[jackthehat]

He hadn't been living there to make an application himself for a CoL.
It needs to be done after the expiration of 4 continuous years residence.
Making an application to stave off proceedings being started to remove you is never likely to succeed.

[dannyk13]

cassa, the four year rule applies to when a building etc is constructed.

[dannyk13]

JTH, it was mentioned in an earlier post that he had lived there for more than 4 years.

[woofgang]

I wonder what all the other care workers, who are paid the same as him, do? It sounds to me as though he hasn't applied for council housing.

[jackthehat]

It looks like the notices were actually served on the Owner of the land....
///The Council served an enforcement notice on July 29, 2016 for the "unauthorised stationing of a vehicle for residential purposes" as a new residential use in the countryside is contrary to planning policy.
The owner of the land appealed the enforcement notice to the Planning Inspectorate. Their decision on August 16, 2017 was that the appeal be dismissed and the enforcement notice upheld.
The occupier of the horse box was required to leave the land by February 16, 2018.

Tremmel has been on the land since 2013 but enforcement action started in 2016.

[cassa333]

So not within the four year rule and the three year delay from 2013 to 2016 may have been because they were unaware but got in the legalities just in time.

[dannyk13]

Cassa, the local council served a notice on my neighbour top demolish a veranda which he had built.I gave a statement that I knew the veranda had been built more than four years previously and the council withdrew the notice.

[david small]

If I can interfere and make someone’s life more miserable, then my living has not been in vain....jobsworth dictum.
Live well with all creatures. Common sense.

[Peter Pedant]

I think this is a planning case
dressed up as Robin Hood

if they allow equine converted accommodation then they are allowing residence - - - and later a house !
the big thing is a bog apparently - if they accept one - you can build a house around it

[Peter Pedant]

travellers are a complete non starter
they dont stay a place for five years
( unless it is a prison ) hur hur hur