Council officer changes his decision on curtilage

[the bandit]

With the wealth of knowledge i ask this question

We bought a property knowing there was an enforcement case ongoing regarding some out buildings.

The bank who repossed the property wrote to the council asking for the info on the case. The council wrote back and said it involved out 5 buildings that were built within the residential curtilage but they were outside permitted development inwhich the previouse owner had built them.
When we bought the property ( we were aware of the enforcement case )they repeated this to us in writing. A month later they sent a diagram of the buildings that were unlawfull and the 2 buildings that were safe as they were built agreed they were built under PD ( picture shows 5 ringed in red and the 2 in green ) and in this letter they say if we don't respond within 7 days they will issue an enforcement notice.
In the mean time we submit new plans etc but don't agree.
6 months later we now get an enforcement notice stating that all 7 buildings are outside the curtilage of the property and so they want all 7 buildings demolished.

When i questioned the planning officer replied that the residential curtilage issue was only his opinion of a planning office and so not binding ( i understand that ) and that the legal department had made this decision however this case was opened in Oct 2009 and he took over the case from someone in Dec2009 so surely he wasn't alone in this opinion.
2 other officers have also been with him on various site meetings last year including his team leader and they never question the curtilage.
My question is this. There were only 2 solutions for the council to determine that the buildings were illegal.
1 :There strongest point is that there built outside of the curtilage therefore surely they had decided the curtilage when the case was first opened
2 : That there built outside of PD
By telling the bank that 2 buildings were safe ( 1 an indoor swimming pool ) did that not inflate the value of the property.

So my point is: Has the planning department or planning officers misled the bank and myself as to the enforcent case of this property and do they not have a duty of care to make sure there facts are correct.

Secondly
For the council to issue an enforcment notice do they have to start an enforcment case because although there is was a case opened the facts have changed.

[Mollers]

We have 5.5 acres attached to our curtlage. To obtain permission to build outside of our curtlage is close to impossible as we would be building on agricultural land.

Whatever the ins and outs of your case, If your your local authority want the two buildings outside of the curtlage gone, you might aswell book a digger.

[the bandit]

Originally Posted by Mollers

We have 5.5 acres attached to our curtlage. To obtain permission to build outside of our curtlage is close to impossible as we would be building on agricultural land.

Whatever the ins and outs of your case, If your your local authority want the two buildings outside of the curtlage gone, you might aswell book a digger.

I understand if you have agriculture land that it's impossible to build on

That's not the case here it never was agriculture land and the issue is if the council thought that when they first opened the case in Sep 2009 and decided on the curtilage area the case would now be closed.
The building work started in 2007 and there were complaints so they had from 2007 to determine curtilage. It's only now that they have changed there minds about curtilage and possoble the reason for this is i did P ss them off. But thats not reason enough.

[Poly]

You need specialist legal and planning advice. If your original solicitor let you get into this muddle in the first place they may not be the best point of call.

[jwalker]

Linky