Class Q planning granted on working farm

[George from SJM Planning]

would he be able to get them on permitted development?

No, he would have needed Full Planning Permission for them. He may have got Class Q initially for each one but then reapplied for full Planning Permission using the Class Q as a fallback position. Then once they are built the Class Q was not enacted so there are still 0 Class Q conversions on the holding so he then reapplied for the next buildings and then repeat the process.

Actually building out a Class Q conversion is a PITA so most developers will get the Class Q and then use that as a fallback position when reapplying for full Planning Permission which then gives them more flexibility.

 

[Dry Rot]

I'd also have a look at the tenancy agreement. There may be a clause allowing the landowner to resume land for a non-agricultural use.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Check the application forms online. There is a question about agricultural tenancy, see if this has been answered correctly. If not, email the planning department and point out the error; there isn't much they can do to be honest but it might stir them up a bit.
Then get yourself some legal advice; Landmark Chambers in London are our preferred legal advisers for these types of issues.

I'm not sure whether a part Q is legally useable of the council have made a mistake. The law says the right to develop only applies if all the rules are complied with. The council don't actually issue permission under part Q, they are really only confirming that they believe the site complies and so the development complies with the law. If the council subsequently find that is not true I strongly suspect they could take enforcement action against an illegal development.

As George has posted, many part Q sites are then subject to a full planning application anyway. If your landlord does this then you'd object on the basis that the part Q was illegal and so no precedent for conversion has been set.

I think the only other option would be to seek judicial review on the basis that the council have not applied the rules correctly.

 

[George from SJM Planning]

I'm not sure whether a part Q is legally useable of the council have made a mistake. The law says the right to develop only applies if all the rules are complied with. The council don't actually issue permission under part Q, they are really only confirming that they believe the site complies and so the development complies with the law. If the council subsequently find that is not true I strongly suspect they could take enforcement action against an illegal development.

As George has posted, many part Q sites are then subject to a full planning application anyway. If your landlord does this then you'd object on the basis that the part Q was illegal and so no precedent for conversion has been set.

I think the only other option would be to seek judicial review on the basis that the council have not applied the rules correctly.

I would concur with @holwellcourtfarm I would contact the council and tell them that the certificate was issued on incorrect information and the proposal would be unlawful if enacted. You may wish to engage a solicitor to prepare a letter to go to the head of planning, head of enforcement and the landlord stating that if the Class Q is enacted it would be unlawful and you would expect enforcement to act.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Also, issue of full PP on land or a building under agricultural tenancy terminates the tenancy on that part of the site. I don't think part Q can do that (hence the rule requiring the tenant to agree to the application, effectively surrendering their tenancy on the building in question).

We agreed last year to our landlord seeking part Q on an old 60x30 machinery shed on land we'd rented since 1982. I signed a letter drawn up by solicitors confirming my approval to the application to enable it to proceed. (They then marketed the barn at £250k and were trampled in the rush!).

Either your landlord was honest and the council officer lacking competence or your landlord (or their agent) has falsified evidence of your agreement. One other possibility: you don't have any business partner in the tenancy who might have signed their agreement to the application do you?

At best it's going to end with lots of bad feeling between you and the landlord though.

 

[Wildman]

The local council have granted our landlord class Q planning permission to convert the working farm we occupy into residential dwellings, does anyone have any experience of the situation we find ourselves in?

We occupied the buildings most recently under a contract farming agreement which has now lapsed so no actual tenancy in place. The landlords agent described the buildings as “under utilised” but used photographs in the application for class Q showing our sheep housed in the buildings. We have used these buildings for 30 years and are still using them at present.

 

[George from SJM Planning]

We occupied the buildings most recently under a contract farming agreement which has now lapsed so no actual tenancy in place. The landlords agent described the buildings as “under utilised” but used photographs in the application for class Q showing our sheep housed in the buildings. We have used these buildings for 30 years and are still using them at present.

I'm no expert in tenancies and legal agreements and I doubt Planning Officers are either but if there is no tenancy in place I would suggest the Class Q would be upheld.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

We occupied the buildings most recently under a contract farming agreement which has now lapsed so no actual tenancy in place. The landlords agent described the buildings as “under utilised” but used photographs in the application for class Q showing our sheep housed in the buildings. We have used these buildings for 30 years and are still using them at present.

Ah. If no tenancy is in place then I suspect the landlord is correct and you've lost the use of the buildings. Even a contract farming agreement is no security of tenure. As I understand it you are effectively just a paid contractor, albeit in a particular type of contract, using the buildings on behalf of the landlord.

 

[Two Tone]

I'm no expert in tenancies and legal agreements and I doubt Planning Officers are either but if there is no tenancy in place I would suggest the Class Q would be upheld.

Is it possible to get a Class Q in an AONB?

 

[George from SJM Planning]

Is it possible to get a Class Q in an AONB?

No, Class Q is not permissible on Article 2(3) so that rules out AONB'S, Conservation Area's and National Parks

 

[George from SJM Planning]

No, Class Q is not permissible on Article 2(3) so that rules out AONB'S, Conservation Area's and National Parks

It also doesn't apply in Wales.

There may be separate Local Planning Policies supporting the reuse of unused rural buildings in areas where Class Q is not available.

 

[Kidds]

I don't think anybody has suggested talking to the landlord about it, everyone seems to suggest going to the planning department and scuppering his planning permission.
I am not a landlord as such but if a tenant did that to me they would be embarking on a very miserable journey and from what has been said you aren't even a tenant.

 

[Formatted]

Actually building out a Class Q conversion is a PITA so most developers will get the Class Q and then use that as a fallback position when reapplying for full Planning Permission which then gives them more flexibility.

I am a district councillor and we often get applications like this that come to committee

 

[Goweresque]

We occupied the buildings most recently under a contract farming agreement which has now lapsed so no actual tenancy in place. The landlords agent described the buildings as “under utilised” but used photographs in the application for class Q showing our sheep housed in the buildings. We have used these buildings for 30 years and are still using them at present.

If you are not an actual tenant then you have no say in the matter I'm afraid. The owner can do what he likes with his property.

 

[Brisel]

We occupied the buildings most recently under a contract farming agreement which has now lapsed so no actual tenancy in place. The landlords agent described the buildings as “under utilised” but used photographs in the application for class Q showing our sheep housed in the buildings. We have used these buildings for 30 years and are still using them at present.

Get legal advice, not forum advice.

Your CFA should roll forward on the same terms from year to year. It looks as though you do not have tenure of the buildings as such, but speculation in this thread is only based on the basic detail you have provided here. The devil is in the detail, so get a professional to look at your case and the written agreements.

 

[betweenthelines]

I think the OP should keep quiet. ATM he seems, by his own admission, to be using buildings he has no right to use FOC with the landlord turning a blind eye.

 

[Brisel]

I think the OP should keep quiet. ATM he seems, by his own admission, to be using buildings he has no right to use FOC with the landlord turning a blind eye.

Have you read post #26?

 

[betweenthelines]

Yes, OP says no tenancy in place, last agreement was CFA so I presume the OP voluntarily relinquished any previous "rights" to enter into CFA.

He has no more right to use the buildings than you or I. Op doesn't "occupy" the "working farm" in any legal sense as claimed in his initial post.

As far as the landowner is concerned, the CFA has finished and he is free to do whatever the law allows with his buildings.

 

[RS1600BDA]

My understanding of Class Q and have done two is that the buildings need to have been redundant for over 10 years and not in use.
Class Q will not get you full PP until the building is converted to residential then you might be able to knock it down and build a new build. I had this which is crazy as one of the buildings would cost £600k to convert but the same building as a new build would cost £250k. If the building falls down during conversion all permissions are lost.
Also Class Q only gives you a residential garden the same size as the footprint you are converting. That area must be all round the building otherwise the land is deemed as agricultural.

 

[Kidds]

My understanding of Class Q and have done two is that the buildings need to have been redundant for over 10 years and not in use.
Class Q will not get you full PP until the building is converted to residential then you might be able to knock it down and build a new build. I had this which is crazy as one of the buildings would cost £600k to convert but the same building as a new build would cost £250k. If the building falls down during conversion all permissions are lost.
Also Class Q only gives you a residential garden the same size as the footprint you are converting. That area must be all round the building otherwise the land is deemed as agricultural.

Not sure how good my understanding of Class Q is but it is different to yours. One of us is wrong and it isn't me.
Either way the entire planning act covering Class Q is on the internet for anybody to read. Generally it is pretty clearly written.