CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
Developer sues objectors (Fife)
(16 posts)-
Posted 8 years ago #
-
Outstanding!
Also very revealing about expected profit margins...
Posted 8 years ago # -
Developer expects 50%+ profit margins!
Posted 8 years ago # -
Indeed: >50% profit margins! Nice work if you can get it!
#edit: Kaputnik beat me to it..
Posted 8 years ago # -
In fact, we're both wrong? It's >100% profit margin!
Spend £X on the builds, and charge twice as much for them. You get your money back and the same again in pure profit.
Just. Wow.
No wonder developers can afford so many brown envelopes.
Posted 8 years ago # -
It's not April 1st is it?
Posted 8 years ago # -
This isn't as clear cut as it first appears - "under the terms of your legal missives under real burden".
So I guess people have bought a new house on a new development, and part of their title dead's is a clause saying they must not lodge objections to changes to the estate design.
So they have signed an agreement to not object as part of their title deads, then objected.
Thoughts?
Posted 8 years ago # -
It'll keep the lawyers in business.
Suspect one of the key questions there will be: It a fair contract term to remove someone's right to object to as yet unannounced plans that may or may not happen?
Posted 8 years ago # -
If my solicitors hadn't pointed out the potential dangers and liabilities of that clause, I'd be passing the bill on to them.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Sue your customers. Yeah, that'll work.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I'm not a lawyer but presumably the ease with which people could submit objections under an alternative name/address would mean the developers would need to start by proving who submitted the objections. They would then need to show the objections made a difference and possibly how much difference each one made.
Once they have done that they would still need to show why they have split the bill 9 ways when there were 11 objectors on the planning application.
http://planning.fife.gov.uk/online/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=neighbourComments&keyVal=NVSZ2DHFHIZ00&neighbourCommentsPager.page=2Posted 8 years ago # -
Interesting that the developer's first priority was to sue residents of its development, rather than make a submission to the Scottish Government
RubberstampAppeal department.Posted 8 years ago # -
Perhaps it's a new business model. Get people to sign a no objections contract then submit an application for an inappropriately large block of flats which isn't within the guidelines set out in the local development plan.
Presumably the projected profit margins are also inflated by the fact the land's value is based on this block of flats not gaining planning permission.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I would guess it is humour or something as cant imagine a situation where a council is held legally responsible if correct process followed , what next a voter held responsible for government decisions
Posted 8 years ago # -
The development was not given permission for 2 reasons. One of which was the proposed mechanical ventilation (I assume for windowless shower/WC/bath rooms) was inadequate and failed to provide sufficient "residential amenity".
Will the developer be suing his architects (or self) for proposing to build substandard housing and thereby damaging his bottom line when permission is refused?
The other reason is best summed up as "too big, too obtrusive and too ugly" therefore contrary to the local development plan.
None of the reasons for the development being prevented were "your neighbours complained".
Posted 8 years ago # -
"Perhaps it's a new business model."
From personal experience, the threat of litigation does seem to be a model that other contractors use. I got people in to refurb my windows. Poor workmanship soon emerged and the firm refused to put right but withdrew their men without completing anything. There followed increasing threats from them for payment ending in a summons to the sheriff court. I countersued and they withdrew their complaint on the day of first hearing.
I hope these owners hold their ground in the face of this bullying. I think the local Council should at least provide some pro bono legal advice to them.
Posted 8 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
