Best (or worst) Invalidations

Iano Ludz

With all the talk of validations today i thought i'd give this a go...how about posting some of the best invalidation reasons?? I know it's a major pain in the a** when it happens but sometimes you just have to laugh!!

Applied for extension -Ad read ".....with Attic Conversation..." Stupid Word had changed conversion to conversation!!! ever have a conversation with an attic??? :D:D

sydthebeat

has some stupid ones alright. mostly my own errors though.

• Sile on site notice, shelia in paper.
• Site area for a new entrance not accepted as being 0 sq m

Slig

Coming up to the rural renewal deadline I got some mad ones:
No north point on elevations
No plans or elevations of existing derelict shed to be demolished
levels used on elevations instead of dimensions
No lenghts shown on elevations?

archtech

Here's a few off the top of my head

Not having overall horizontal dimensions on elevations (Waterford City Council)

Not having the floor area of individual units (within a building) indicated on the floor plans of the building

And the award for the most ridiculous

Not having the site layout plan orientated in a similar direction to that of the os map extract even through a north point was illustrated on both (Clonmel Borough Council)

sinnerboy

worst i heard of ( was not me ) was in the case of a multi unit housing development ( remember them ? ) .

LA was not satisfied with site layout indicating house types labelled together with separate sheet showing layout for type A , type B etc. - oh no .

Each type had to be reproduced over and over to indicate the varying orientations . Rain forest ? What rain forest ?

muffler

2 that spring to mind:

First was an application for the retention and completion of new house under construction together with (at the insistence of the LA) the retention of the demolition of an old house. They sent it back because we hadn't plans and elevations etc of the old house that was demolished :eek:

The other was an application they returned as it was not received untill the 15th day. I took great joy at the looks on their faces when I insisted that they had to accept it again (which they did do - reluctantly) as the 14th day was a bank holiday

Poor Uncle Tom

About two years ago, got one back from Waterford County with the reason being "incorrect Townland". A quick check later all townlands were put down the same and all correct. One phone call with validation clerk later we were shown to be correct, but because we were now gone past 14 days of newspaper notice (due to council's error), the application had to be readvertised, site notice and other documentation re-dated and all re-submitted.

Time Lost: Week and a half.
€ Lost: 97.
Apology received: None.
Action Taken: Letter to Manager.
Result: Pi**ing against the wind.

We got the permission but it was a sore result.

No6

Some that spring to mind for me are 1) Invaladitated due to needing a second site notice, fair enough I say, put the application back in with the second site notice but this time invalidated because the notice wasn't yellow ( it didn't need to be but hey!!) got it the third time with yellow notices or 2) invalidated due to only two sets of drawings submitted.(after 2 months)...so I sat down with the Head of admin and aksed were they for real, did they think I couldn't count to six (nicely) and really they had lost the drawings so they withdrew the invalidation and looked for an extension of time so I could send them extra drawings:D

pseudo-tech

I received an invalid application from Kilkenny Town Council for the following reasons:

• No north points indicated on drawings
• No over all dimensions on the floor plans
• No specification of finishes

Worst of all; please submit six copies of all drawings.

Inspected the returned package. Low and behold:

• North points on all drawings
• Dimensions on all drawings
• Specification on all drawings
• Best of all six sets of all drawings.

The best surprise came last. It was a single set of drawings, which matched all the reasons that were stated on the Councils letter of invalidation (not prepared by me?). Rang the Council and requested a meeting. The Planner tried to find other reasons on why my application was invalidated other than the ones indicated on the letter. Would not accept my application been valid as id would have reduced others rights to appeal. Had the cheek to request I return the set of drawings that had been mistakenly sent to me. They were told to politely f*^% off. What a joke.

I walked away realising that none of these people would survive in industry.

pseudo-tech

Apologies for the last post above. The transfer from word to board went bananas. No wonder my application was invalidated!

fitz0

muffler wrote: »

:eek:

The other was an application they returned as it was not received untill the 15th day. I took great joy at the looks on their faces when I insisted that they had to accept it again (which they did do - reluctantly) as the 14th day was a bank holiday

Im working in a planning office for LA atm. We don't accept anything from 14th day onwards. Has to be in on the 13th day or before and if the 13th is a bank holiday then it has to be in before the bank holiday. They were perfectly right to invalidate that.

Since I work in a planning office doing mostly validation (only summer work so I dont do much ) I hate having to invalidate applications. I try to find any way I can to validate it, going as far as drawing on a North point or two if it's obvious which way is north. Maybe Im just naive and should invalidate them.

pseudo-tech

Don't worry fitz0, stay there long enough and you will start to invalidate them. You will loose all reason and develop an unnatural relationship with the power of the pen

muffler

fitz0 wrote: »

Im working in a planning office for LA atm. We don't accept anything from 14th day onwards. Has to be in on the 13th day or before and if the 13th is a bank holiday then it has to be in before the bank holiday. They were perfectly right to invalidate that.

This may be down to a difference in interpretation of 13th and 14th days. The definition I use is that as defined in the Planning & Development Regulations. Applications may be received within a 14 day period from the date of publication in the paper (including the date of publication) For example if the notice is published on the 1st of the month then the LA must accept the application up to the close of business on the 14th day. That application I referred to was returned to the LA after they acknowledged their mistake regarding the bank holiday.

Im more than surprised at your comment regarding applications having to be lodged before the bank holiday if it falls on the 14th day (not 13th now). Article 17 (2) of Part 4 of the 2006 regs clearly states that it can be accepted the next working day after a bank holiday.

(2)
Where the last day of the 2 week period referred to in sub-article (1) is a Saturday, Sunday, a public holiday (within the meaning of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (No. 20 of 1997)), or any other day on which the offices of the planning authority are closed, the application shall be valid if received on the next following day on which the offices of the planning authority are open.

fitz0 wrote: »

Since I work in a planning office doing mostly validation (only summer work so I dont do much ) I hate having to invalidate applications. I try to find any way I can to validate it, going as far as drawing on a North point or two if it's obvious which way is north. Maybe Im just naive and should invalidate them.

No you are not naive. You use a bit of common sense which is to be commended as it saves everyone a lot of bother over something trivial.

Now off you go and get those dates sorted with the planners

fitz0

Oh I was leaving out the date of publication, 14 days it is!

muffler wrote: »

No you are not naive. You use a bit of common sense which is to be commended as it saves everyone a lot of bother over something trivial.

Now off you go and get those dates sorted with the planners

As you can see since Im on here theres not much to do at the minute.

muffler

fitz0 wrote: »

Oh I was leaving out the date of publication, 14 days it is!

OK. We agree on the "14 days" issue but what about the part of your LA insisting that applications must be lodged before a bank holiday if that falls on the 14th day?

Have you had a chance to look at the document I linked to where it states that it can be received the following day?

fitz0

I read it but the bank holiday thing has only happened once since I started and the planner in question (who was teaching me what to do at the time) isn't here that long either. Maybe its just a case of not knowing the regs well enough. We'll see what happens in a week and a half. Id say it was only lack of experience that this happened. Im solely in charge of validation and plotting so Ill make sure this doesn't happen next time.

Slig

fitz0 wrote: »

I read it but the bank holiday thing has only happened once since I started and the planner in question (who was teaching me what to do at the time) isn't here that long either. Maybe its just a case of not knowing the regs well enough. We'll see what happens in a week and a half. Id say it was only lack of experience that this happened. Im solely in charge of validation and plotting so Ill make sure this doesn't happen next time.

Head of validation is a summer student, our tax money at work:D.

Saw this and thought its fairly relevant:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0716/breaking55.htm

BAZM8

Two incidents:

1. Someone from our office was getting a validation done at the public counter:

Cretin on the other side of counter "whats that number there?"
Us " .....it's a dimension??"
COTOSOC " oh, we ask that you write 'dimension' in front of the dimensions"
Us "oh you do, do you? well show me where this is required under the planning act and i'll do it"
COTOSOC " Well it's probably ok this time...."

2. COTOSOC: "you havent outlined other lands owned in blue?"
US "the applicant doesn't own any other lands only the site?
COTOSOC: "well you have to draw a blue line outside the red line!"
US "WTF, How is that other lands?...it's the same lands!"
COTOSOC "It'll be invalidated if you don't"
US "gimme a pen!!"

sinnerboy

Once when lodging an application , the clerk insisted on a photocopy of the structural engineers qualification degree , ( for soil tests ) before processing .

Title blocked drawings and letter heads would not do . The Structural Engineering practice were well established in this town .....

Quick detour to the engineers practice to obtain the photocopy .

Poor Uncle Tom

Havn't got an invalidation in a long while now.

Just want to tempt fate. Lets see what postie brings tomorrow!

sinnerboy

And then there was the time that a fire safety cert application was lodged with the "wrong" application form

The counter clerk was not impressed by the fact that the form had 2 days previously been downloaded from their own website . - Oh no - go over there and fill in the "right" form handed to me ..... which was substantially the same as the "wrong" one .

smashey

We had on a few months back where the application went in on the last day. It was invalidated as being outside the allowed time. :mad: When I pointed their mistake out, I was nicely told there was nothing they coud do.

I called in that favour recently.

Branners

had trouble with the 14th day a few years back myself


just last week i had a Fire Safety Cert invalidated by a certain LA
for not listing the breakdown of the fee in the application!!!

Even though it is not required or asked for on the LA's application Form
they could've just rang me!!
no common sense applied at all


this thread could become quite long i feel

Slig

Similar subject but off topic

Remember a couple of years ago they brought out a standard planning appliation for for the whole country, why did every LA insist on changing it around for the sake of changing it around? From what I could see all Sligo coco did was move the applicants adddress and agents address question from page one to the last page but kept the names on page one. Leitrim coco online application form is a mess, the page numbers dont match, there are spelling mistakes and the page layouts are all over the place.
There were a lot of invalidations around that time as the application forms on the net didnt match the ones at the counter,
There was similar chaos with the new site/newspaper notice for FIs. We actually used the wording on the council website for the newspaper notice and it was invalidated because it was incorrect

fitz0

The reason the application forms were changed was so that the Applicants details aren't made available to anyone who looks at the file. The details are now on a Additional Contact Information sheet. Its to keep those details private.

johnny_adidas

-blue line outside the red

-new drawings for every house orientation in a housing estate

-existing boundaries indicated as being retained intact / why was retention not applied for

smashey

fitz0 wrote: »

The reason the application forms were changed was so that the Applicants details aren't made available to anyone who looks at the file. The details are now on a Additional Contact Information sheet. Its to keep those details private.

Yeah, and the applicant's details then show up on the TTS1.

muffler

smashey wrote: »

Yeah, and the applicant's details then show up on the TTS1.

Keep quiet you. Those forms are exclusive to Donegal only

muffler

fitz0 wrote: »

The reason the application forms were changed was so that the Applicants details aren't made available to anyone who looks at the file. The details are now on a Additional Contact Information sheet. Its to keep those details private.

It is also part of the regs now that a standard application form can be used no matter which county you are in.

I also recall the draft of it on the DoE website a couple of years back where they proposed that the applicant include his/hers PPS number :eek: Thankfully that stupid idea was abandoned

johnny_adidas

fitz0 wrote: »

The reason the application forms were changed was so that the Applicants details aren't made available to anyone who looks at the file. The details are now on a Additional Contact Information sheet. Its to keep those details private.

i dont think this accounts for all the changes every planning authority made to the forms. its ridiculous. there should be one form and the applicant fills in the planning authority name themselves

muffler

Im guilty here myself but can we get back to the topic of invalidations please.

gman2k

Invalidated for using the newspaper notice wording from Kildare CoCo online information pack....at a fee not exceeding the reasonable cost of making a copy.... was not quite correct as per the regs
They stated that all agents should be fully aware of the all the planning and development regulations themselves, and not be reliant on the KCC planning pack.
That's why they go and change the information required from the regs......

sinnerboy

same story with dun laoghaire ....