Homeowner who touted planning law must rip down extension

On further investigation officers discovered that the owner of the property – Michelle Naimah Sharif (56) – had not obtained any planning permission for this development, and was ordered to cease construction immediately.

However, works continued into the summer leading to the council issuing a Planning Enforcement Notice, ordering that the works be demolished. An option was included that would allow a single-storey extension to be built, in line with previously granted planning permission.

The council rejected a subsequent application for the retention of the development, which was then appealed by the homeowner. This appeal, however, was dismissed by the planning inspector in February 2022.

In their notes, the inspector said the unauthorised development “…is out of keeping and it is poorly related to the rear [of the property]. It is visually obtrusive and discordant and it is not sympathetic to its host or the surrounding built environment. It does not contribute positively to a strong sense of place and it detracts from the overall quality of the townscape.”

The inspector also noted harm caused to the living conditions of neighbours because of the works.

Despite this extensive engagement and the ruling of the planning inspector, the owners of the property still refused to comply with the Planning Enforcement Notice, resulting in the council taking legal action.

At a hearing held at Manchester Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, Sharif pleaded guilty to an offence under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

The sitting district judge fined Sharif £5,000 and ordered them to pay a victim surcharge of £2,000. They were also ordered to pay Manchester City Council £12,745 in respect to legal and investigatory costs.

The requirement that the extension must be demolished is still in place.

Councillor Gavin White said: “This has been a long-running saga caused by the inexplicable refusal of this homeowner to comply with a legal order.

“Planning law is incredibly important and is put in place to protect the rights of residents as well as preserve the amenity of communities which could be negatively impacted by a rogue development. In this case, the council’s position was fully vindicated by the planning inspector and then the district judge.

“We will continue to ensure this extension is demolished and that this case is finally resolved.”