Couple Ordered to Demolish House - any update?

A world without planning controls would be a terrible place. They are there for a very good reason.

Only as good as the enforcement that goes with them.

Many tradespeople (anecdotally) could have built direct labour by putting the materials through their business to expense them and paid cash for labour to use up cash they had as their own income. The advantage of putting money into one's own house is that there is no CGT if you eventually decide to sell.

I'm obviously not saying or suggesting that happened in this case. Or that anything was not above board.

I agree, however its unlikely tgat he could have build tge house completely that way unless his business was turning over several million a year. Even using cash, direct labour and through a business that house would have 600k++ cost

I had a look at the Meath CoCo planning site and I noted a couple of things. Firstly the Murray's were refused permission for a dormer type house in June 06 but in March 07 they applied for permission to retain their 2 storey house. So in that 9 month period which was a time that you would have to wait a year or more to get a contractor or trades people they constructed a substantial sized house. This leads me to believe they had a contractor lined up before the first planning application and were intent on building with or without planning permission.

Secondly, and this may settle a difference of opinion from earlier, there have been 5 planning refusals for proposed houses across the road / lane from the Murray's property.

They hadn't broke ground in Nov 2005, so it was some going alright. He had his own building company though. He owned the land across the road where the same person was refused 5 times for various reasons .

Edit;

the 5 refusals were not all for the same person but had the same surname

It must be seriously frustrating for the Council to be fair. They are trying to implement enforcement of planning laws but are toothless to do so because of the way the system is setup.

Surely when and appeal fails they would have enough time to issue enforcement notification and act on it before the Murrays could lodge another appeal. One thing is for certain this can't go on forever.

I'm sorry but exactly how is it is any of your business where they got the money to build the house from?

A Judge showing empathy for a defendant in a court case because of changed circumstances doesn't bestow any rights on you or anyone else to delve into their personal financial history.

In a sad attempt to strengthen your silly argument you actually made it even weaker by stating "with no mortgage!"

How you can state for a fact they built the house without a mortgage is an absolute mystery.

Do you really believe everything you see written on boards.ie?

You must be very gullible and also very ignorant of how banks operate their business.

Or, maybe, you actually already know the intimate details of the Murrays financial affairs.

Perhaps you might enlighten us how you know for a fact the house was built without a mortgage.

I've read your post twice and have no idea what point you are trying to make.

The banks don't give mortgages for new house builds unless you have planning permission to build the house. And they require a registered professional (architect etc) to sign a legal document saying you built as per your granted planning permission.

They did not have planning permission, therefore it can be assumed they did not have a mortgage.

I think it's your last line is confusing Rose,

So yes, it's extremely unlikely that they built without a mortgage.

Explain how you get a mortgage without planning permisssion?

From an Irish solicitors' website

"Why is planning permission important?

It’s imperative to check and understand the planning status of a property that you intend to purchase as the bank will only lend you money if everything is in order. If there is anything dubious about the planning, your solicitor will need to write to the bank giving them full details of whatever the issue is and asking if they will still be willing to give you a mortgage."

So I think it's safe to at least question if they had a mortgage. (Okay I should add "No Mortgage Likely in my opinion" at the end just be be clear.)

Also, I built around this time and had to go through a strict system planning a mortgage approval with many documents to both the council and banks. (The Council even wanted a sample of the rock used for the external wall to be brought into the office for reference/approval)

In fact, I think there was also an approx. 10K/15 service fee to be paid to the council as part of the build (Road access, Lights, etc.) I think water and sewage connections were extra again…Is this another fee that this couple did not pay?

In the end, I don't particularly give a crap what you or others might think, if I want to discuss the ins and out of how they might have funded this ILLEGAL development I will. They are not Victims in all of this, they are lawbreakers, and pretty ruthless ones at that, for their blatant disregard for planning laws by building a 6000ft house.

They have now brought this case (Appeal) to the Public court system and made these statements in their defence, which the Judge is reacting to, and therefore open for discussion.

Of course it can be “financed” without planning with savings, personal loans, family loans, lottery win etc. but unlikely to be mortgaged.

Might there be a rare snail that has now taken up residence in the gardens and grounds of the house that can’t be disturbed as it’s a protected species and at risk of extinction? 🤪

Haha, sh*t, my bad. Edited now.

what are you actually talking about. You literally cannot mortgage a house without planning permission. I’ve worked in mortgage sales for a large bank. You are calling everyone and their aunt ignorant when it’s you being ignorant. They simply do not have a mortgage on that property. It is also irrelevant.

I'd love to believe that you worked in mortgage sales for a large bank but something doesn't quiet add up.

Were you actually qualified for that particular job, how long did it last and why did you leave?

Mark Twain also said ,"Never argue with a fool as onlookers might not be able to tell the difference"

So I'll leave you to it.

if everyone could just put Rows Grower on the old ignore list that would be great! Another fine example of a poster ruining a thread.

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, not sure if he meant the spelling though.

When the penny drops Shoog self reflects.

He took one for the team of Karen's who lost the plot.

I did respond. But no point responding to WUMs. Ignore list activated.

I call BS. A mortgage is based upon the saleability of an asset and always has been. The bank has always done due diligence to establish if the asset is valuable enough to meet the price of the mortgage if the property has to be repossessed. A property without PP is unsellable and has been for decades. Nothing has changed in this regard.

No, simply no.

Basic due diligence of a bank was to ensure the asset had the value it was claimed to have and none approved new builds have always been subjected to significantly more scrutiny than second hand houses because of the intrinsically higher risks involved. They are harder to get in every aspect so the chances that this particular property was build using a mortgage on this property are zero.