RBWM forced to pay costs on lost planning appeal

Owners of a Hurley farm have won a three-year planning battle against RBWM – including winning appeal costs against it.

RBWM finally declared a decision of 'no further action' this week following an appeal that went decidedly against its favour.

The appellant, Hurleyford Farms, won costs against RBWM after it gave them 'no choice' but to appeal a planning decision, according to the planning inspectorate.

Hurleyford Farms was looking for a relatively small change; the application sought to demolish an agricultural building and replace it with a new one closer to Shepherds Lane.

The main issue was whether the plan would be inappropriate development of the greenbelt.

The assigned planning inspector agreed with Hurleyford Farms that this did not qualify as inappropriate – but the matter did not stop there.

Hurleyford Farms made a bid for appeal costs to be paid by RBWM and, unusually, won.

In any planning appeal, an inspector can overturn a planning decision by the council – but costs are only awarded to the appellant if the inspector deems the other party behaved 'unreasonably'.

Inspector Nick Palmer acknowledged that some of the information provided by the applicant 'was insufficient’ – and the case officer’s team leader 'was justified' in asking for more.

But even with this in mind, RBWM took too long and the applicant received mixed messages.

Exacerbating matters, the case officer was on sick leave and compassionate leave during the processing of the application, which ‘unfortunately resulted in some delay.’

Carrying out a necessary wildlife survey also occupied some time.

But there was still a two-month period after this, during which the council failed to issue its decision, Mr Palmer wrote.

The council’s ecologist confirmed that they had no objection on May 25, 2022 – but the council ‘has not explained why it did not then issue its decision.’

A 'significant amount of time' elapsed after the statutory determination period expired.

"In these circumstances, the non-determination of the application amounts to unreasonable behaviour," wrote Mr Palmer.