Couple Ordered to Demolish House - any update?

Internet Police

Does anybody know if it is possible to lobby or petition the supreme court and/or the council to take action? I'd like to see my begrudgery converted into those smug people reaping what they have sowed.

smelly sock

Internet Police wrote: »

Does anybody know if it is possible to lobby or petition the supreme court and/or the council to take action? I'd like to see my begrudgery converted into those smug people reaping what they have sowed.

Ffs. I'd say youre great fun at a party.

JimmyVik

Mellor wrote: »

If they can afford to drop 6 figures on a temporary 10-year house, then it's there money.
More money than sense if you ask me though

10 years plus is a number out of my arse.
Its probably more like 20 reading this thread

Internet Police

smelly sock wrote: »

Ffs. I'd say youre great fun at a party.

This has dragged on far too long and must be brought to a conclusion. They should be made an example of the consequences for their deceitful actions.

Thoie

Mellor wrote: »

Planning don't do site visits or checks. You are confusing two different departments.
No department could possibly inspect every aspect of every build. Usually it's by a third party who signs a document stating as much. Banks in particular take a interest in that document for obvious reasons.

I agree that a department can't oversee every single thing, but I'd have thought that stopping a significant deviation from plans before it went too far might be something planning enforcement in the council would be interested in.


The woman who came to check my parents' place had council ID, and said she was from Planning, so I assumed she was doing spot checks.

StackSteevens

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

There is a case for massive deregulation of planning, but not in rural areas.

There is a case for more or less anything under the sun!

Of course that doesn't mean such cases are valid, persuasive or meritorious!

cnocbui

beveragelady wrote: »

As well as the fact that we pay for their water as well as our own there's also the fact that rural dwellers don't benefit from things like streetsweeping or streetlights that exist in suburban residential areas, even though a portion of our tax goes towards them. So while one-off dwelling is not ideal the imbalance is not as clear as it might appear.

(I live in a one-off that's about 200 years old in the arse end of nowhere. Bloody love it.)

I for one am glad there are no street lights near me. I was able to get good views and photos of comet Neowise as a result :-)

Could do with the street sweeping to get the gravel off the road which would probably prevent pot holes forming and save money as a result.

Mellor

Thoie wrote: »

I agree that a department can't oversee every single thing, but I'd have thought that stopping a significant deviation from plans before it went too far might be something planning enforcement in the council would be interested in.

Visiting every single development during construction, multiple times in the case of large sites is not feasible.

Unless of course the costs for the same are passed on the the owner/developer.

The woman who came to check my parents' place had council ID, and said she was from Planning, so I assumed she was doing spot checks.

She may well have been from enforcement. Then can do spot checks.
But there's a huge difference between occasional spot checks and inspection on demand.

StackSteevens

Interesting to see that Meath County Council have some 'previous' in the matter of ignoring illegal developments. *

The Ombudsman's conclusion that:-

"While it is acknowledged that the Planning Department was under-resourced and disorganised at a time of an unprecedented increase in the level of planning activity and that steps have since been taken to bring about improvements both in terms of staff numbers and better procedures, nevertheless, the processing of this case, as borne out in the evidence contained in this report, suggest that the system, particularly at planning enforcement level, was unsupervised and poorly managed."


appears every bit as applicable today as it was a decade ago.

The final page of the Report reveals that Meath Co. Co didn't bother to instruct the developer to demolish the illegal building as it could have, but that it paid compensation of €13,000 of rate-payers' money to the complainant.

It would seem that no Council official suffered any form of sanction whatsoever for this display of complete and utter incompetence. Presumably the exact same will occur at the end of this shabby saga.

* https://www.ombudsman.ie/publications/reports/investigation-report-on-a/Investigation-Report-on-a-complaint-made-against-Meath-County-Council(1).pdf

Muahahaha

Hard to believe they got quoted 300k to demolish it. I've always wanted to have a go of one of those wrecking balls and Id say Im not the only one. They could sell raffle tickets for who gets the first strike in and tickets for the spectators too.

partyguinness

There are too many Me Feiners and Pen pushers stuck in cushy Council jobs up and down the country. They have zero appetite for a fight. Why should they. No skin off their noses.

ToTheSea

Well, I certainly hope that this house gets demolished. The Supreme Court needs to definitely put pressure on Meath CC to get it done. Otherwise, it sends a message that you can put the 2 fingers up to the law and get away with it.

For those of you would like to read the court judgements. I had a wee look online to find them.

The High Court

The Supreme Court

Eric Cartman

Beautiful house. Our draconian planning laws are just far too restrictive and you have to take the piss to get anything nice built.

We should massively de-regulate planning. If you want to live in a one off you should be allowed to once you realise that you're not allowed lobby the council for footpaths, street lighting, schools, school busses etc...

that house is an absolute dream. Would love to prop up a 4000 sq ft house with a detached 3-4 bay garage and office, Kildare co co will never allow me though.

StackSteevens

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Beautiful house. Our draconian planning laws are just far too restrictive and you have to take the piss to get anything nice built.

We should massively de-regulate planning. If you want to live in a one off you should be allowed to once you realise that you're not allowed lobby the council for footpaths, street lighting, schools, school busses etc...

that house is an absolute dream. Would love to prop up a 4000 sq ft house with a detached 3-4 bay garage and office, Kildare co co will never allow me though.

So why not do it anyway?

As this case shows, County Council, Bórd Pleanala and Supreme Court directives aren't worth the headed paper that they're written on. So just tell the KCC planning officials that you're availing of the Murray precedent.

In fact why not build a private aerodrome while you're at it - KCC won't mind!

Donald Trump

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Beautiful house. Our draconian planning laws are just far too restrictive and you have to take the piss to get anything nice built.

We should massively de-regulate planning. If you want to live in a one off you should be allowed to once you realise that you're not allowed lobby the council for footpaths, street lighting, schools, school busses etc...

that house is an absolute dream. Would love to prop up a 4000 sq ft house with a detached 3-4 bay garage and office, Kildare co co will never allow me though.

That's grand.


But how would you feel if I own the land beside you and I decide that my field would make a great spot for a hazardous waste landfill and I'm just allowed to start one without planning permission?


Then the fella the other side of that mansion that you presumably spent a lot of money on decides that he wants to open up a massive industrial warehousing facility.



You wouldn't be too long whinging about the lack of planning laws then :pac:

Eric Cartman

Donald Trump wrote: »

That's grand.


But how would you feel if I own the land beside you and I decide that my field would make a great spot for a hazardous waste landfill and I'm just allowed to start one without planning permission?


Then the fella the other side of that mansion that you presumably spent a lot of money on decides that he wants to open up a massive industrial warehousing facility.



You wouldn't be too long whinging about the lack of planning laws then :pac:

I said deregulate them, not completely lose the plot. In Japan you're allowed residential property everywhere and then some zones you're allowed other things like industrial, commercial etc... but residential is priority 1 , our laws should be like that. Build a house anywhere you like but the toxic waste dump and the industrial complex need to be approved.

ronivek

StackSteevens wrote: »

As this case shows, County Council, Bórd Pleanala and Supreme Court directives aren't worth the headed paper that they're written on. So just tell the KCC planning officials that you're availing of the Murray precedent.

Good luck with that approach!

At some point the house will be torn down: the only question is whether there will be prison time and what the financial cost to the Murrays will be.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I said deregulate them, not completely lose the plot. In Japan you're allowed residential property everywhere and then some zones you're allowed other things like industrial, commercial etc... but residential is priority 1 , our laws should be like that. Build a house anywhere you like but the toxic waste dump and the industrial complex need to be approved.

Japanese police also inspect the parking spot for your car before you're allowed to buy one. In many ways it is a singularly unique nation and there is no way the kind of deregulation that might work there would work here.

Donald Trump

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I said deregulate them, not completely lose the plot. In Japan you're allowed residential property everywhere and then some zones you're allowed other things like industrial, commercial etc... but residential is priority 1 , our laws should be like that. Build a house anywhere you like but the toxic waste dump and the industrial complex need to be approved.

In other words, it would be great if laws were customized for yourself.




How about if you build that nice residential house and then I build an even bigger one across the road, blocking your nice view? Same thing?

smelly sock

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Beautiful house. Our draconian planning laws are just far too restrictive and you have to take the piss to get anything nice built.

We should massively de-regulate planning. If you want to live in a one off you should be allowed to once you realise that you're not allowed lobby the council for footpaths, street lighting, schools, school busses etc...

that house is an absolute dream. Would love to prop up a 4000 sq ft house with a detached 3-4 bay garage and office, Kildare co co will never allow me though.

That's a matter of taste. I think the unit is totally out of place in the local landscape. Houses all over Ireland like that and they look dreadful.

When planning is being considered other peoples interests, the environment and landscape have to be taken into account a rightly so. Thank god people can't just thrie up 4000 sqft houses without due diligence......oh wait......

ToTheSea

ToTheSea wrote: »

Well, I certainly hope that this house gets demolished. The Supreme Court needs to definitely put pressure on Meath CC to get it done. Otherwise, it sends a message that you can put the 2 fingers up to the law and get away with it.

For those of you would like to read the court judgements. I had a wee look online to find them.

The High Court

The Supreme Court

Again, thats not the purpose of the courts, they make a decision. Its for the appelant to seek the order enforced. I understand from reading the articles that the council have their legal team working on it. That takes time

StackSteevens

StackSteevens wrote: »

So why not do it anyway?

As this case shows, County Council, Bórd Pleanala and Supreme Court directives aren't worth the headed paper that they're written on. So just tell the KCC planning officials that you're availing of the Murray precedent.

In fact why not build a private aerodrome while you're at it - KCC won't mind!

What prececent? The court have found against them and thats the precedent if there was one.

Bass Reeves

CrankyHaus wrote: »

The only amazing thing in all of that is the laziness involved. "Not in my remit" should come far behind "the public interest" within public bodies. However in practice the former is imperative and the latter treated like an inbred half-brother locked in the basement.

It's nothing to do with not on my remit. First off GDPR would not allow access to data bases so customer requiring the service would have to provide a planning clearance certificate just like you provide a tax clearance certificate if involved in government procurement services.

Bass Reeves

TheBoyConor wrote: »

Dead right they were too. It is the parent's fault that the have put their kids in this position.

Supreme Court needs to put pressure on the Meath CoCo. Chief Executive to get this demolition job done.

If the state rolls over on this and appears gutless, then planning law isn't worth a fiddlers and every parish chancer and town yahoo will be throwing up houses and sheds and every sort of thing because they know they will get away with it if the hold their brazen nerve all the way through.

Again it is not in the Supreme Court remit. The case between the Murray's and the Meath CC is similar to civil case after judgement it is the CC that has to look for the SC judgement be enforced. It in no other bodies remit

paul71

heldel00 wrote: »

I'm interested in this
- we built our house out in country. Paid ourselves for ESB connection, paid council hefty commencement fees, have tarred at our own cost along the roadway, dug our own well at considerable cost too, would we really be costing state a huge amount?

Public health nurses spending 3 hours of the day driving instead of spending time with their clients, free school transport. You did not pay the cost of the connection to ESB you paid a nominal fee and the cost is borne by other ESB customers. Fie brigades and ambulance service forced to build in coverage of 1 off builds into overall coverage plans, an post driving unnescessary routes. Road traffic accidents due to excessive number of entrances onto r and l roads. Public transport stopping in the middle of now-where adding to journey times. National broadband plan spending billions to deliver to the last few houses. Envirionmental impact of septic tanks and wells far exceeds any fee paid.

Every service the state deliveries is impacted by the ridiculous level of 1 off building in Ireland.

I could spend hours listing the impact the cost your house on delivering services.

Donald Trump

paul71 wrote: »

Public health nurses spending 3 hours of the day driving instead of spending time with their clients, free school transport. You did not pay the cost of the connection to ESB you paid a nominal fee and the cost is borne by other ESB customers. Fie brigades and ambulance service forced to build in coverage of 1 off builds into overall coverage plans, an post driving unnescessary routes. Road traffic accidents due to excessive number of entrances onto r and l roads. Public transport stopping in the middle of now-where adding to journey times. National broadband plan spending billions to deliver to the last few houses. Envirionmental impact of septic tanks and wells far exceeds any fee paid.

Every service the state deliveries is impacted by the ridiculous level of 1 off building in Ireland.

I could spend hours listing the impact the cost your house on delivering services.

You could spend hours. But most of the above is coming out of your hole. No offence meant, but I can't really put it any other way!




(BTW, are you familiar with even rough amounts that people have to "contribute" to their local council for a self-build? You might be surprised)

paul71

Donald Trump wrote: »

You could spend hours. But most of the above is coming out of your hole. No offence meant, but I can't really put it any other way!




(BTW, are you familiar with even rough amounts that people have to "contribute" to their local council for a self-build? You might be surprised)

Yes I am, I also know that the number of one of builds between 2 rural towns in every part of Ireland exceeds the actual populations of said villages. To deny same and cost of same is living with your head up your hole is you so ineloquently put it.

Those contributions cover a nominal amount of the billions we are burdened with. There should be no rural building in Ireland except residential agriculture workers or replacement of agricultural homes.

Widdensushi

paul71 wrote: »

Public health nurses spending 3 hours of the day driving instead of spending time with their clients, free school transport. You did not pay the cost of the connection to ESB you paid a nominal fee and the cost is borne by other ESB customers. Fie brigades and ambulance service forced to build in coverage of 1 off builds into overall coverage plans, an post driving unnescessary routes. Road traffic accidents due to excessive number of entrances onto r and l roads. Public transport stopping in the middle of now-where adding to journey times. National broadband plan spending billions to deliver to the last few houses. Envirionmental impact of septic tanks and wells far exceeds any fee paid.

Every service the state deliveries is impacted by the ridiculous level of 1 off building in Ireland.

I could spend hours listing the impact the cost your house on delivering services.

Meath is a big county but that travel seems excessive? They also must have a different healthsystem there as I recall getting the option of a home visit for a newborn but after that it was go to them, an post don't deliver to me, if they did I would have to have a post box on their route, who pissed in your cornflakes with misinformation

paul71

Widdensushi wrote: »

Meath is a big county but that travel seems excessive? They also must have a different healthsystem there as I recall getting the option of a home visit for a newborn but after that it was go to them, an post don't deliver to me, if they did I would have to have a post box on their route, who pissed in your cornflakes with misinformation

When you get to your seventies and eighties you will likely at some stage require a weekly visit from a public health nurse, daily if you are in palative cancer care, and 3 visits a week from a home help. When people point out the cost of this to you and propose a reduction of the service you will be pissing in your cornflakes.

Mellor

Muahahaha wrote: »

Hard to believe they got quoted 300k to demolish it.

Probably because they didn't actually get quote 300k

partyguinness wrote: »

There are too many Me Feiners and Pen pushers stuck in cushy Council jobs up and down the country. They have zero appetite for a fight. Why should they. No skin off their noses.

Zero appetite for a fight?
They fought it all the way to the supreme court. At which point did they not fight it?

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Beautiful house. Our draconian planning laws are just far too restrictive and you have to take the piss to get anything nice built.

that house is an absolute dream. Would love to prop up a 4000 sq ft house with a detached 3-4 bay garage and office, Kildare co co will never allow me though.

To each their own, taste is subjective obvious. But from a design point of view the house is pretty bad fundamentally. The scale or it, or lack of scale in some cases, is possibly hard to convey in photos. But I'd be pretty sure there there was no professional involved in the design. In was built quickly and cheaply in a few months, and it shows.
Even the retention applications where cobbled together with a random engineer - more likely a contractor who could do a bit of drawing.

rn

@paul71 you've a serious chip on your shoulder based on anecdotal evidence. Esb networks connection charge covers connection costs in most incidents. Same for Irish water. Both easily made a profit connecting mine. Health in a rural setting would have same travel costs even if everyone was in a village, because of the distance between villages and randomised nature of locations of people needing care.

I paid 3k to esb networks to bring a cable 200m with 2 poles. About 1/2 day for a crew and materials. A new 28ft esb pole is around 100 euro. I paid Irish water 1.5k to dig a hole and install a connection, immediately beside my neighbours. 2 hours work and a pipe T plus plastic ground man hole.