Agricultural ties secured by obligation, not condition

An agricultural tie can sit in a planning condition, in a section 106 obligation, or in both at once. That last possibility is the one that costs people money. Removing the condition under section 73 does nothing to the obligation, so a dwelling can be released from the occupancy condition and remain tied by a registered agreement that binds every future owner.

Check which you have before spending anything. The decision notice shows the conditions. A local land charges search, and the title register, will show whether an agreement was completed alongside the permission.

Why some ties sit in an obligation

Conditions have limits, and a section 106 agreement covers what a condition cannot.

A condition can restrict occupation of a dwelling to someone employed or last employed in agriculture or forestry in the locality, together with a surviving spouse or civil partner and resident dependants. That is the classic agricultural occupancy condition, and for a straightforward rural worker's dwelling it is often all that is used.

An obligation is used where the authority wants more than a restriction on who lives there:

• To tie the dwelling to a specific holding, so the house and the land cannot be sold separately.
• To require something positive, such as the removal of an existing mobile home or the cessation of a temporary permission.
• To restrict the sale or separate disposal of part of the unit.
• To secure a financial contribution or a monitoring fee alongside the occupancy restriction.
• Where local policy or the authority's practice is to use an agreement for rural worker dwellings as a matter of course.

The tie to the holding is the substantive difference. An occupancy condition controls who occupies. An obligation can keep the house and the farm together as a single asset, which is a much heavier restriction and one that valuation reflects.

How the two are enforced differently

This is where the practical consequences diverge, and the difference is not symmetrical.

The immunity line matters most. Where a dwelling has been occupied in breach of an occupancy condition continuously for the statutory period, the position can become immune from enforcement and a Lawful Development Certificate can confirm it. Time limits for enforcement in England were extended by the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, so check the current period and its commencement before relying on any of that.

No comparable immunity exists for a section 106 obligation. Twenty years of unrestricted occupation does not release it. The authority can still seek an injunction, and any buyer's solicitor will find it on the search.

The five year rule under section 106A

Section 106A provides two routes.

By agreement, at any time. The authority and the person bound can agree to modify or discharge the obligation by deed. Where the authority is content, this is the quickest route and it avoids the statutory test altogether.

By application, after five years have passed from the date the obligation was entered into. The grounds are narrow. Either the obligation no longer serves a useful purpose, in which case it can be discharged, or it continues to serve a useful purpose but would serve that purpose equally well if modified in the way proposed.

Note what is not a ground. That the restriction reduces the value of the house is not a ground. That the applicant has retired, or would prefer to sell on the open market, is not a ground in itself. The question is whether the planning purpose behind the restriction still has work to do, which on an occupancy tie means whether there is a continuing need for that dwelling to house a rural worker.

The application and the appeal route

The application goes to the local planning authority, with the deed, a plan, and the evidence. There is a prescribed period for determination, and the authority can discharge, modify as proposed, or refuse.

Where the authority refuses, or fails to determine within the period, section 106B provides an appeal to the Secretary of State, handled by the Planning Inspectorate on the same basis as a planning appeal.

Two procedural points worth planning around. The five year clock runs from the date the deed was completed, not from the date of the permission or of first occupation, and on older schemes those dates can be years apart. And where the obligation binds land in more than one ownership, everyone bound needs to be a party to any deed of variation, which on a fragmented holding takes longer than the application itself.

Evidence that the need has gone

The authority is being asked to accept that the planning purpose has been exhausted. That requires evidence rather than assertion.

1. Marketing. Councils normally expect the dwelling to have been offered for sale or to let, for a sustained period, at a price or rent reflecting the restriction rather than the open market value. Keep the agent's particulars, the asking price with the valuation basis, the dates, the enquiry log and every rejection.
2. The valuation basis for the restricted price. A property marketed at an unrestricted price has not been tested, and a marketing exercise on that basis will be given little weight.
3. Local need evidence. Whether other holdings in the locality have vacancies, whether other tied dwellings nearby are empty, and whether the agricultural enterprise that justified the dwelling still exists at a scale that needs resident labour.
4. The functional position on the holding itself. If the original permission was justified by a functional need for a stockman to be on site, and the enterprise is now arable contract farmed, say so with the cropping and contracting records.
5. Where the tie links the house to the land, evidence about the land as well: whether the holding has been sold, split or let, and what remains.

A Planning Statement that sets out the original justification, what has changed and why the purpose no longer bites gives the case officer a structure to work with. Officers see a lot of applications that argue hardship and very few that engage with the statutory test.

Illustrative example: a 1987 permission for a dairy stockman's dwelling, granted subject to an occupancy condition and a section 106 tying the house to the 68 hectare holding. The dairy closed in 2009 and the land is now let on a farm business tenancy to a neighbouring arable farmer. The owner applies under section 73 to remove the condition and, separately, under section 106A to discharge the obligation, supported by 14 months of marketing at a restricted price with 11 recorded enquiries and no offer, plus the tenancy agreement and cropping records. The authority modifies rather than discharges the obligation, releasing the house from the tie to the land while keeping a local occupancy restriction, which is a common landing point.

Lenders, valuation and resale

The restriction is a live commercial issue, not just a planning one.

Lenders treat tied dwellings cautiously. Some decline them, others lend at a reduced loan to value, and a valuer will report the restriction and value accordingly. A tie to a specific holding is worse than an occupancy restriction alone, because the buyer pool is narrower still.

That has three consequences. A sale can fall through at the mortgage valuation stage even where the buyer qualifies under the tie. Refinancing a farm business against a tied dwelling is harder. And the discount, whatever it turns out to be on the valuation evidence, is the reason people pursue release in the first place.

Where the dwelling is part of a wider diversification plan, the tie interacts with the rest of it, and the arguments overlap with those in our note on farm diversification workshops and offices.

Which route to pursue first

A sensible order of work.

Establish exactly what binds the property: read the decision notice, order the deed from the authority or the title, and check the local land charges register. Identify whether there is a condition, an obligation or both, and confirm the date the deed was completed.

Then approach the authority informally before applying. A pre-application discussion tells you whether they will contemplate discharge, modification, or nothing, and it shapes the marketing exercise you are about to spend a year on.

Run the marketing properly, at a restricted price, with records. Then apply for both releases together, because dealing with one and not the other leaves the property no easier to sell than before.

Enter your postcode on PlanScope to draft the supporting documents, and browse the full list of report types if a wider application is coming.

This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.