Enforcement Shock: Landowner Faces Action Despite 10-Year Caravan Use..
- teessidetoday
- 1 day ago
- 3 min read
Hartlepool Borough Council set to commence enforcement proceedings on a landowner who was unaware a caravan situated on the land required planning permission, however a decade on, its claimed he's now set to action by the local council...
24th June 2025
A Hartlepool landowner is said to be facing enforcement action by Hartlepool Borough Council, despite a residential caravan being situated on the land for several years without any known objections.
HBC Exposed has learned the council is preparing enforcement proceedings against Mr. Steven Bates, the current owner of Moorhouse Stables at Brierton Moorhouse, Dalton Piercy, located on the outskirts of Hartlepool. Mr. Bates, who reportedly purchased the equestrian premises in 2021, recently discovered the long-standing complication surrounding the site’s residential caravan after he approached a local estate agent to obtain a valuation. The routine valuation process reportedly triggered deeper scrutiny from Hartlepool Borough Council, who have since refused an application for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Existing Use or Development—a legal step aimed at formalising the caravan’s longstanding presence on the land.
Despite there being no objections raised in several years regarding the caravan's siting, the refusal reportedly opens the door for formal enforcement action to be considered by the local council. where, according to the council, is necessary “to remedy a breach” of planning rules.
A Complicated History
The caravan in question—a static mobile home—has reportedly been on the site since at least 2013, linked to earlier planning approvals connected to the livery business. It formed part of Option One in Mr. Bates’s application, which sought a straightforward path of retaining the existing caravan as residential accommodation for the business.
A more complex Option Two was also explored, involving potential construction of a new permanent dwelling to support the livery business. However, early discussions with Hartlepool Council reportedly highlighted concerns around that proposal also. Instead, council officers suggested that seeking a Certificate of Lawfulness might be a more realistic path—one which has now been shut down following the councils recent refusal, despite it being suggested previously by the local council as a way forward to remedy the issue...
Planning Law Changes Complicate Matters
Mr. Bates now finds himself caught in the middle of a timing trap, thanks to changes introduced by the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 (LURA).
Under previous planning rules, residential breaches like this one could be immune from enforcement after four years. However, its claimed as from April 2024, the new law extended that period to ten years—unless the breach was already "substantially complete" by 25th April 2024.
In Mr. Bates’s case, the caravan’s presence appears to date back more than ten years, but the lack of formal recognition before now has led to much uncertainty. His application attempted a “two-pronged” approach—arguing the breach satisfies both the old four-year and the new ten-year rule—but this has seemingly been dismissed by the planning authority..
What Enforcement Covers
According to a document seen recently, Hartlepool Borough Council’s enforcement relates to:
The siting of a residential unit (the caravan)
Associated timber decking and railings
The creation of two areas of concrete hardstanding
And the siting of a truck body on the land.
The council’s own assessment concedes that “the siting will not/does not adversely affect the long-term character and appearance of the open countryside.”
Yet enforcement's still being pursued at the cost to the public purse.
The decision appears to be coming under the direction of Tony Hanson, Hartlepool Borough Councils Director of Neighbourhoods & Regulatory Services, however its claimed the matter will likely end up before the governments planning inspectorate who will ultimately decide whether the council was right or wrong to pursue the landowner a decade down the line....
