Family ordered to pull down illegal back garden building

thisisoxfordshire: Karan Turna, 17, and Jugraj Turna, 13, doing schoolwork in the study-cum-gym at the bottom of their garden in Dene Road Headington Karan Turna, 17, and Jugraj Turna, 13, doing schoolwork in the study-cum-gym at the bottom of their garden in Dene Road Headington

OXFORD city councillors have ordered a Headington family to take down a £25,000 back garden building used as a study centre and gym.

Tursem Singh Turna owns the house in Dene Road and his brother Kuldip Singh Turna lives there with his wife and three sons.

On Wednesday members of the East area planning committee ordered the family to demolish the building in the back garden, after they failed to comply with an enforcement notice requiring demolition.

In September the family applied for planning permission but it was refused. They are taking the issue to an appeal.

The building, which has a pitched roof, occupies about 25 per cent of the space in the back garden.

Councillors have agreed that it has to come down and that direct action could now be taken, with staff going onto the property to carry out the demolition.

Tursem Singh Turna and Kuldip Singh Turna said they were disappointed with the committee’s decision.

Kuldip Singh Turna lives there with wife Harjinder, and three sons Akash, 18, Karan, 17, and Jugraj, 12.

Akash said: “I’m doing A-Levels at Oxford and Cherwell Valley College including maths and I would like to go to Oxford University.

“We use the outbuilding as a study space and for gym equipment including a treadmill – it seems ridiculous that it is going to have to be demolished.”

Architect Sanjive Corpaul, speaking on behalf of the Turna family, said they had spent £25,000 on the building, and £12,000 on legal fees, but would continue to seek legal avenues to retain it.

He added: “The family has not properly understood all the legal implications of the planning process but the legal appeal route is not yet over by a long way.”

thisisoxfordshire:

The exterior of the contested building

The family is now trying to get a certificate of lawful development for the building on appeal.

A magistrates’ court hearing brought by the council against the family is due to be heard on May 19.

City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal.

He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time.

“I would much rather not take direct action until the other routes have certainly failed.”

 

PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS

LAST year the Government introduced new permitted development rights to allow for larger house extensions as well as alterations to commercial properties. Key changes include allowing the following without the need for planning permission:

  • Larger single storey rear extensions to residential properties
  • Larger extensions to
  • industrial and warehousing premises, shops and offices
  • Conversions between office and residential uses
  • More flexible uses of shops, offices, residential institutions and agricultural buildings
  • Easier conversion of premises for school uses
  • Telecom installations in conservation areas
  • If people want to go ahead with one of the above they will still need to notify their local council through a prior notification application.

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:46am Fri 7 Mar 14

alu355 says...

What does the fact that he is studying A-levels have to do with this?

You can't just build a large habitable outbuilding like this in your back garden without following the proper procedures.
The architect involved should have known this.
What does the fact that he is studying A-levels have to do with this? You can't just build a large habitable outbuilding like this in your back garden without following the proper procedures. The architect involved should have known this. alu355
  • Score: 79

9:08am Fri 7 Mar 14

Sandy Wimpole-Smythe says...

City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal.

He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time.



Grow up Goddard.
City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal. He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time. Grow up Goddard. Sandy Wimpole-Smythe
  • Score: 44

9:11am Fri 7 Mar 14

GPOWELL says...

City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal.

He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time. "

Not a good example John, Putin has no legal authority to move into the Crimea! Putin is a bully and a thug and doesn't are what other people think.
City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal. He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time. " Not a good example John, Putin has no legal authority to move into the Crimea! Putin is a bully and a thug and doesn't are what other people think. GPOWELL
  • Score: 41

9:12am Fri 7 Mar 14

GPOWELL says...

That should be "doesn't care"
That should be "doesn't care" GPOWELL
  • Score: 3

9:33am Fri 7 Mar 14

Myron Blatz says...

These 'garden sheds' and their counterpart 'garage extensions' have become increasingly common across Oxford - especially where existing semis have become 'legally extended HMOs' and where garage doors often hide an extra couple of bedrooms variously described as 'personal gyms' or 'laundry rooms' or even just somewhere for the children to play! Personally, I blame years of City Council trying to wriggle out of doing its job (and not just recent government financial cutbacks) in the planning department, and inability to enforce regulations until some time after these additional buildings have been built - with those built of wood, apparently, not even needing planning permission any more.
These 'garden sheds' and their counterpart 'garage extensions' have become increasingly common across Oxford - especially where existing semis have become 'legally extended HMOs' and where garage doors often hide an extra couple of bedrooms variously described as 'personal gyms' or 'laundry rooms' or even just somewhere for the children to play! Personally, I blame years of City Council trying to wriggle out of doing its job (and not just recent government financial cutbacks) in the planning department, and inability to enforce regulations until some time after these additional buildings have been built - with those built of wood, apparently, not even needing planning permission any more. Myron Blatz
  • Score: 34

9:54am Fri 7 Mar 14

Christine Hovis says...

Of course we don't want the "beds in sheds" developments across Oxford. The Inspector's report shows that the space has the potential to be used as a dwelling - however charmimng the story of it being a study space for the young man.

So, planning should be enforced. But, I can't see how Councillor Goddard thought his analogy was helpful. Planning is needed, but plenty of people already equate it with authoritarian power without this.
Of course we don't want the "beds in sheds" developments across Oxford. The Inspector's report shows that the space has the potential to be used as a dwelling - however charmimng the story of it being a study space for the young man. So, planning should be enforced. But, I can't see how Councillor Goddard thought his analogy was helpful. Planning is needed, but plenty of people already equate it with authoritarian power without this. Christine Hovis
  • Score: 22

10:07am Fri 7 Mar 14

alu355 says...

I guess the large TV on the wall and hifi are also used for studying
I guess the large TV on the wall and hifi are also used for studying alu355
  • Score: 50

10:27am Fri 7 Mar 14

Oflife says...

Sandy Wimpole-Smythe wrote:
City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal.

He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time.



Grow up Goddard.
It's Oxford, the most police state like city on Earth, and I have travelled a bit. Run by grumpy visionless jobsworths who if this was WW2, would be working for you know who.
[quote][p][bold]Sandy Wimpole-Smythe[/bold] wrote: City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal. He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time. Grow up Goddard.[/p][/quote]It's Oxford, the most police state like city on Earth, and I have travelled a bit. Run by grumpy visionless jobsworths who if this was WW2, would be working for you know who. Oflife
  • Score: -6

10:39am Fri 7 Mar 14

Andrew:Oxford says...

alu355 wrote:
I guess the large TV on the wall and hifi are also used for studying
It's en-suite too...

So at least there is no lost time returning to the house for comfort breaks.
[quote][p][bold]alu355[/bold] wrote: I guess the large TV on the wall and hifi are also used for studying[/p][/quote]It's en-suite too... So at least there is no lost time returning to the house for comfort breaks. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 34

11:15am Fri 7 Mar 14

monkey_tennis says...

This family also have purchased The Fairview Inn on Glebelands which was purchased under the premise of them running it as a pub, which is hardly ever open (closed Sun, Mon, Tues, Weds and Thurs and only open 6pm-9pm Fri and Sat), where one bar has been closed and looks as though it is being renovated as a living space as opposed to a public area. One suspects that permission hasn't been sought for this either. I appears that the front lounge area is being kept as a bar (although only rarely opening) to tick the box that it is still technically a pub. Either way this needs closer scrutiny too.
This family also have purchased The Fairview Inn on Glebelands which was purchased under the premise of them running it as a pub, which is hardly ever open (closed Sun, Mon, Tues, Weds and Thurs and only open 6pm-9pm Fri and Sat), where one bar has been closed and looks as though it is being renovated as a living space as opposed to a public area. One suspects that permission hasn't been sought for this either. I appears that the front lounge area is being kept as a bar (although only rarely opening) to tick the box that it is still technically a pub. Either way this needs closer scrutiny too. monkey_tennis
  • Score: 62

12:06pm Fri 7 Mar 14

TiarasOceanView says...

Cripes..
Trending in Oxford NOW!
Putin vs Ali Khan.
Ridiculous!
Cripes.. Trending in Oxford NOW! Putin vs Ali Khan. Ridiculous! TiarasOceanView
  • Score: -2

12:32pm Fri 7 Mar 14

dant40 says...

Mmmmm Let's just say council house near Brooke's university as a shed like a summer house and fitted with power with bed, and items that someone lives in there and the mother rents her rooms out to summer school and others who come and go though the year. The person who lives in this shed started at the age of 13/14 and still does. Is this normal the council said there's not much they can do she's allowed a shed. And for renting rooms out they was not INTRESTED it still carrying on.
Mmmmm Let's just say council house near Brooke's university as a shed like a summer house and fitted with power with bed, and items that someone lives in there and the mother rents her rooms out to summer school and others who come and go though the year. The person who lives in this shed started at the age of 13/14 and still does. Is this normal the council said there's not much they can do she's allowed a shed. And for renting rooms out they was not INTRESTED it still carrying on. dant40
  • Score: 16

1:09pm Fri 7 Mar 14

Bicester1962 says...

“The family has not properly understood all the legal implications of the planning process " What a loads of rubbish, of course they did, they were just trying it on and have been caught out. make them demolish it and pay all the associated costs too.
“The family has not properly understood all the legal implications of the planning process " What a loads of rubbish, of course they did, they were just trying it on and have been caught out. make them demolish it and pay all the associated costs too. Bicester1962
  • Score: 69

1:10pm Fri 7 Mar 14

hammerthebarstewards says...

What is it with these people? Do they think that they are above the Law?
Any fool can see that this building is for LIVING IN, they are probably renting it out! Why would anyone need an architect to build a garden shed/room?
Knock it down, set an example to these people who are flouting the Law for financial gain!
What is it with these people? Do they think that they are above the Law? Any fool can see that this building is for LIVING IN, they are probably renting it out! Why would anyone need an architect to build a garden shed/room? Knock it down, set an example to these people who are flouting the Law for financial gain! hammerthebarstewards
  • Score: 61

1:12pm Fri 7 Mar 14

SimonBe says...

Wonder if they have seen that has been built at the bottom of 33 Dene Road's garden? Their's is relatively modest in comparison!
Wonder if they have seen that has been built at the bottom of 33 Dene Road's garden? Their's is relatively modest in comparison! SimonBe
  • Score: 19

2:54pm Fri 7 Mar 14

bart-on simpson says...

The green building between Claymond and Waynflete roads could fit 10 summer students easily!
The green building between Claymond and Waynflete roads could fit 10 summer students easily! bart-on simpson
  • Score: 13

3:42pm Fri 7 Mar 14

bart-on simpson says...

monkey_tennis wrote:
This family also have purchased The Fairview Inn on Glebelands which was purchased under the premise of them running it as a pub, which is hardly ever open (closed Sun, Mon, Tues, Weds and Thurs and only open 6pm-9pm Fri and Sat), where one bar has been closed and looks as though it is being renovated as a living space as opposed to a public area. One suspects that permission hasn't been sought for this either. I appears that the front lounge area is being kept as a bar (although only rarely opening) to tick the box that it is still technically a pub. Either way this needs closer scrutiny too.
If true, that will the Councillors on the Licensing Board busy won't it?
[quote][p][bold]monkey_tennis[/bold] wrote: This family also have purchased The Fairview Inn on Glebelands which was purchased under the premise of them running it as a pub, which is hardly ever open (closed Sun, Mon, Tues, Weds and Thurs and only open 6pm-9pm Fri and Sat), where one bar has been closed and looks as though it is being renovated as a living space as opposed to a public area. One suspects that permission hasn't been sought for this either. I appears that the front lounge area is being kept as a bar (although only rarely opening) to tick the box that it is still technically a pub. Either way this needs closer scrutiny too.[/p][/quote]If true, that will the Councillors on the Licensing Board busy won't it? bart-on simpson
  • Score: 19

6:49pm Fri 7 Mar 14

alu355 says...

For £37,000 they could have moved to a bigger house. Would be interested to see how this cost £25,000 to put up.
For £37,000 they could have moved to a bigger house. Would be interested to see how this cost £25,000 to put up. alu355
  • Score: 28

1:06am Sat 8 Mar 14

Oxfordguy79 says...

Sandy Wimpole-Smythe wrote:
City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal.

He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time.



Grow up Goddard.
I totally agree with your comment here, how immature and stupid is it to make a reference about Putin, and Crimera. He really should not be allowed to make such comments which are having a very bad effect on Ukraine.
I agree with the "Grow up" comment totally, this is totally unacceptable behaviour.
But I also agree that they should stay strong about the demolition of this building as it has been built without any approval at all, and this should be a strong warning to all the other extensions, dwellings etc that are being built/have been built without any planning permission from people trying to take advantage of the system, and then playing the "I didn't know we could not do it" route.
By this time they claim that they have already spent so much money on building that they should be able to keep it. Come on who in there right mind would spend out 25k or more on something they don't have permission to build, you might as well chuck your money down the drain.
And as for the architect who drew up the drawings, you should have to take some form of responsibility for this as well, or was you happy to just take the fee for preparing these drawings without a care for anyone else ? And even if done under building regs, who came to look at this in the different stages to prove that it is actually safe or was that avoided as well ? If so, it could be a completely unsafe building, and a danger to those using it, and those living near it.
More needs to be done, as this isn't the only building in Oxford without the correct paperwork, there are hundreds, if not thousands possibly. Pull your finger out and start prosecuting.
[quote][p][bold]Sandy Wimpole-Smythe[/bold] wrote: City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal. He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time. Grow up Goddard.[/p][/quote]I totally agree with your comment here, how immature and stupid is it to make a reference about Putin, and Crimera. He really should not be allowed to make such comments which are having a very bad effect on Ukraine. I agree with the "Grow up" comment totally, this is totally unacceptable behaviour. But I also agree that they should stay strong about the demolition of this building as it has been built without any approval at all, and this should be a strong warning to all the other extensions, dwellings etc that are being built/have been built without any planning permission from people trying to take advantage of the system, and then playing the "I didn't know we could not do it" route. By this time they claim that they have already spent so much money on building that they should be able to keep it. Come on who in there right mind would spend out 25k or more on something they don't have permission to build, you might as well chuck your money down the drain. And as for the architect who drew up the drawings, you should have to take some form of responsibility for this as well, or was you happy to just take the fee for preparing these drawings without a care for anyone else ? And even if done under building regs, who came to look at this in the different stages to prove that it is actually safe or was that avoided as well ? If so, it could be a completely unsafe building, and a danger to those using it, and those living near it. More needs to be done, as this isn't the only building in Oxford without the correct paperwork, there are hundreds, if not thousands possibly. Pull your finger out and start prosecuting. Oxfordguy79
  • Score: 21

3:42am Sat 8 Mar 14

The New Private Eye says...

GPOWELL wrote:
City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal.

He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time. "

Not a good example John, Putin has no legal authority to move into the Crimea! Putin is a bully and a thug and doesn't are what other people think.
An armed mob depose an elected president and put in their own Government which immediately pass laws discriminating against the Russian speaking majority, these people ask Putin for help and he provides it. Can you imagine the response from the police and army here if thousands of armed thugs converged on Downing Street demanding Camerons head? But back on story, we all have to abide by planning laws, just tear it down and save our money on legal fees
[quote][p][bold]GPOWELL[/bold] wrote: City councillor John Goddard said he was not in favour of taking action now, but wanted to await the outcome of the appeal. He added: “We are in a strong position – rather like Putin in the Crimea. Our troops can move in at any time. " Not a good example John, Putin has no legal authority to move into the Crimea! Putin is a bully and a thug and doesn't are what other people think.[/p][/quote]An armed mob depose an elected president and put in their own Government which immediately pass laws discriminating against the Russian speaking majority, these people ask Putin for help and he provides it. Can you imagine the response from the police and army here if thousands of armed thugs converged on Downing Street demanding Camerons head? But back on story, we all have to abide by planning laws, just tear it down and save our money on legal fees The New Private Eye
  • Score: 4

9:45am Sat 8 Mar 14

zorro? says...

It does not matter what a building cost or what it is used for, it is ether right or it is wrong and this buiding is wrong. If you do not know the planning procedures then ask and the city planners will guide you.
If the city planners tell you that what you are doing is wrong, do not ignore them. Because it may cost you
£12,000 in legal fees and be made to pull your building down.

John Goddards silly comments do not help
It does not matter what a building cost or what it is used for, it is ether right or it is wrong and this buiding is wrong. If you do not know the planning procedures then ask and the city planners will guide you. If the city planners tell you that what you are doing is wrong, do not ignore them. Because it may cost you £12,000 in legal fees and be made to pull your building down. John Goddards silly comments do not help zorro?
  • Score: 27

10:25am Sat 8 Mar 14

Doctor69 says...

Not surprised they needed to build this space. How many people living in one house!?!

I don't buy the line about not understanding the planning process. What a load of rubbish. They knew it wasn't on but built the building anyway. Sooner the council go in and flatten it the better. Maybe then people will learn?
Not surprised they needed to build this space. How many people living in one house!?! I don't buy the line about not understanding the planning process. What a load of rubbish. They knew it wasn't on but built the building anyway. Sooner the council go in and flatten it the better. Maybe then people will learn? Doctor69
  • Score: 27

11:23am Sat 8 Mar 14

OxfordStu says...

The council completely ignored complaints about our neighbours building a similar structure that didn't have planning permission and is far too close to the fence on either side, maybe I should complain again and cite this as an example.
The council completely ignored complaints about our neighbours building a similar structure that didn't have planning permission and is far too close to the fence on either side, maybe I should complain again and cite this as an example. OxfordStu
  • Score: 40

12:32pm Sat 8 Mar 14

JanetJ says...

Doctor69 wrote:
Not surprised they needed to build this space. How many people living in one house!?!

I don't buy the line about not understanding the planning process. What a load of rubbish. They knew it wasn't on but built the building anyway. Sooner the council go in and flatten it the better. Maybe then people will learn?
5 people in one house? not that unusual surely?
[quote][p][bold]Doctor69[/bold] wrote: Not surprised they needed to build this space. How many people living in one house!?! I don't buy the line about not understanding the planning process. What a load of rubbish. They knew it wasn't on but built the building anyway. Sooner the council go in and flatten it the better. Maybe then people will learn?[/p][/quote]5 people in one house? not that unusual surely? JanetJ
  • Score: 6

3:14pm Sat 8 Mar 14

EMBOX2 says...

If you don't understand the planning process, get a proper architect who does.

This whole thing stinks of trying to get one over on the system; and they've failed. As for the lad wanting to go to Oxford University, sorry pal, I doubt if you're at OCVC (or whatever its called this week) you're likely to get very far.
If you don't understand the planning process, get a proper architect who does. This whole thing stinks of trying to get one over on the system; and they've failed. As for the lad wanting to go to Oxford University, sorry pal, I doubt if you're at OCVC (or whatever its called this week) you're likely to get very far. EMBOX2
  • Score: 33

8:52pm Sat 8 Mar 14

shippondame says...

Bicester1962 wrote:
“The family has not properly understood all the legal implications of the planning process " What a loads of rubbish, of course they did, they were just trying it on and have been caught out. make them demolish it and pay all the associated costs too.
Our country is being ruined by people carrying out building construction work such as this illegally. What a feeble excuse from their legal representative. Make sure you don't use him if you have a legal problem.
[quote][p][bold]Bicester1962[/bold] wrote: “The family has not properly understood all the legal implications of the planning process " What a loads of rubbish, of course they did, they were just trying it on and have been caught out. make them demolish it and pay all the associated costs too.[/p][/quote]Our country is being ruined by people carrying out building construction work such as this illegally. What a feeble excuse from their legal representative. Make sure you don't use him if you have a legal problem. shippondame
  • Score: 31

8:55pm Sat 8 Mar 14

shippondame says...

Pull the other one its got bells on. Hope they are paying all legal costs in this matter.
Pull the other one its got bells on. Hope they are paying all legal costs in this matter. shippondame
  • Score: 29

7:44am Sun 9 Mar 14

zorro? says...

Look on the bright side if they removed this building they could have a lovely garden to sit in, in the summer and study.
Not sure about the flat screen TV and music centre.
Look on the bright side if they removed this building they could have a lovely garden to sit in, in the summer and study. Not sure about the flat screen TV and music centre. zorro?
  • Score: 21

8:57am Sun 9 Mar 14

cowleyman says...

far to many off these buildings going up across all parts off the city. people are just not abiding to the rules. lots are getting away with it..they should be made to demolish them.
far to many off these buildings going up across all parts off the city. people are just not abiding to the rules. lots are getting away with it..they should be made to demolish them. cowleyman
  • Score: 29

6:21pm Sun 9 Mar 14

Doctor69 says...

JanetJ wrote:
Doctor69 wrote:
Not surprised they needed to build this space. How many people living in one house!?!

I don't buy the line about not understanding the planning process. What a load of rubbish. They knew it wasn't on but built the building anyway. Sooner the council go in and flatten it the better. Maybe then people will learn?
5 people in one house? not that unusual surely?
6 actually. Not massively huge but overcrowded none the less.
I bet the building is used for more than studying and a gym.
[quote][p][bold]JanetJ[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Doctor69[/bold] wrote: Not surprised they needed to build this space. How many people living in one house!?! I don't buy the line about not understanding the planning process. What a load of rubbish. They knew it wasn't on but built the building anyway. Sooner the council go in and flatten it the better. Maybe then people will learn?[/p][/quote]5 people in one house? not that unusual surely?[/p][/quote]6 actually. Not massively huge but overcrowded none the less. I bet the building is used for more than studying and a gym. Doctor69
  • Score: 15

11:57am Tue 11 Mar 14

the wizard says...

Can't believe it, does nobody recognize that it is a broken down tardis !!!!! Its probably got a cellar and a hidden loft which both have numerous rooms, kitchens etc. Sorry old son, you are not the sort of law abiding person you would like others to believe, a chancer who thought he could get away with it more like. If the appeal finds in this guys favour these buildings will be springing up everywhere, so I doubt very much that a president will be set in this case for fear of mass repetition.
Can't believe it, does nobody recognize that it is a broken down tardis !!!!! Its probably got a cellar and a hidden loft which both have numerous rooms, kitchens etc. Sorry old son, you are not the sort of law abiding person you would like others to believe, a chancer who thought he could get away with it more like. If the appeal finds in this guys favour these buildings will be springing up everywhere, so I doubt very much that a president will be set in this case for fear of mass repetition. the wizard
  • Score: 11

7:16pm Tue 11 Mar 14

fairy godmother says...

My friend lives on Cowley Road and when she was away on holiday a few years ago a large building like that appeared two doors down from her. She phoned the council and they said the family said they were using it for a large pool table. Well all I can say is they must have put the pool table there first and build around it ???? Also Ridgefield Road gardens are full of very large "sheds" . Also people are still buying family houses and turning them in to flats . And also also lots and lots of them still have no HMO's. I do not blame any of those people its Oxford City council that are letting them get away with it all.......
My friend lives on Cowley Road and when she was away on holiday a few years ago a large building like that appeared two doors down from her. She phoned the council and they said the family said they were using it for a large pool table. Well all I can say is they must have put the pool table there first and build around it ???? Also Ridgefield Road gardens are full of very large "sheds" . Also people are still buying family houses and turning them in to flats . And also also lots and lots of them still have no HMO's. I do not blame any of those people its Oxford City council that are letting them get away with it all....... fairy godmother
  • Score: 17

12:56am Fri 14 Mar 14

boxfish says...

Well, looks as though Oxford is on the way to this kind of situation

http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/fea
tures/3873783/Slumdo
gs-of-Southall.html
Well, looks as though Oxford is on the way to this kind of situation http://www.thesun.co .uk/sol/homepage/fea tures/3873783/Slumdo gs-of-Southall.html boxfish
  • Score: 6

1:15am Fri 14 Mar 14

TiarasOceanView says...

boxfish wrote:
Well, looks as though Oxford is on the way to this kind of situation

http://www.thesun.co

.uk/sol/homepage/fea

tures/3873783/Slumdo

gs-of-Southall.html
Couldn't quite get to that particular example, but easily found what referring to Boxfish.
Seems there is no rhyme, reason, or rules anymore. Sad.
[quote][p][bold]boxfish[/bold] wrote: Well, looks as though Oxford is on the way to this kind of situation http://www.thesun.co .uk/sol/homepage/fea tures/3873783/Slumdo gs-of-Southall.html[/p][/quote]Couldn't quite get to that particular example, but easily found what referring to Boxfish. Seems there is no rhyme, reason, or rules anymore. Sad. TiarasOceanView
  • Score: 2

11:37am Fri 21 Mar 14

Critical says...

bart-on simpson wrote:
monkey_tennis wrote:
This family also have purchased The Fairview Inn on Glebelands which was purchased under the premise of them running it as a pub, which is hardly ever open (closed Sun, Mon, Tues, Weds and Thurs and only open 6pm-9pm Fri and Sat), where one bar has been closed and looks as though it is being renovated as a living space as opposed to a public area. One suspects that permission hasn't been sought for this either. I appears that the front lounge area is being kept as a bar (although only rarely opening) to tick the box that it is still technically a pub. Either way this needs closer scrutiny too.
If true, that will the Councillors on the Licensing Board busy won't it?
This really does need looking in to.
[quote][p][bold]bart-on simpson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]monkey_tennis[/bold] wrote: This family also have purchased The Fairview Inn on Glebelands which was purchased under the premise of them running it as a pub, which is hardly ever open (closed Sun, Mon, Tues, Weds and Thurs and only open 6pm-9pm Fri and Sat), where one bar has been closed and looks as though it is being renovated as a living space as opposed to a public area. One suspects that permission hasn't been sought for this either. I appears that the front lounge area is being kept as a bar (although only rarely opening) to tick the box that it is still technically a pub. Either way this needs closer scrutiny too.[/p][/quote]If true, that will the Councillors on the Licensing Board busy won't it?[/p][/quote]This really does need looking in to. Critical
  • Score: 5

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree