Planning request to extend notification time for PD

[^woody^]

Tony is correct.

I wonder if the agreement can be withdrawn, and/or the applicant now just crack on with the work on the basis of the 42 day period being expired?

 

[masamune]

A normal planning approval could be open to challenge if the LPA mis-directed itself when coming to its decision. For example, if it ignored a valid report, or mis-interpreted its own policy guidelines, if it could be shown that an application would have been refused had the LPA directed itself properly.
However, a Prior Notification is not a planning application, and the LPA has no input if no-one objects. Therefore, an LPA could not be held to have mis-directed itself, if no decision was to be made. It is purely an administrative error and if a neighbour suffers by maladministration (in this case, not being notified by the council) the only recourse is to make a complaint, if necessary to the Ombudsman.
The law is crystal clear that, in the absence of any refusal by the LPA after the 42-day period - whatever the reason - then the work can proceed by default.
As preiuosly, OP's architect should have taken a tougher line with the LPA.

Great points everyone and very interesting reading!

I am inclined to agree with Tony's point, not from the applicant's point of view, in the legal context it sounds as a procedural impropriety on the Council's part.

Of course, I prefer to have a sound approval by the book as napoleon says, but as I understand it neighbours have no comeback with me, only against the council?

Ok, this is all a bit theoretical now, say someone now comes up with an objection. Wouldn't that be questionable as I could argue that the consulatation period has lapsed and therefore the council have no option but to approve the application? (just curious)

 

[Nakajo]

Sometimes you have to make a judgment call on the basis of what's most expedient.