Works in default and recovering the authority's costs
Section 178 lets a local planning authority do the work an enforcement notice required and recover its expenses from whoever owns the land at the time. There is no appeal against the bill.
When an enforcement notice is not complied with, the local planning authority can go onto the land, do the work itself and send the owner the bill. Section 178 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 gives it that power, and the expenses are recoverable from whoever is the owner of the land at the time the work is done. That last point catches buyers: the liability follows the land rather than the person who built the thing.
Works in default is not an appeal route and there is nothing to appeal against. By the time an authority is contemplating entry, the notice has taken effect, the appeal period has gone, and the only live questions are whether the authority is acting within its powers and whether the sum it eventually claims is reasonable.
When an authority may act itself
Three conditions have to be in place. An enforcement notice must have taken effect, the period for compliance must have expired, and the steps required by the notice must not have been taken. At that point the authority has two parallel options: prosecute for the offence of failing to comply under section 179, or carry out the steps itself under section 178. It can do both.
Most authorities prefer prosecution first, because it costs them nothing up front and often produces compliance. Direct action gets used where the breach is causing active harm, where the owner cannot be traced or has no means, or where a prosecution has already failed to produce results.
The steps the authority may take are those required by the notice and no more. A notice requiring removal of a structure does not authorise the authority to regrade the land or remove a fence it dislikes. Read the notice and compare it with what was actually done, because authorities occasionally overreach and the cost of the excess is not recoverable.
Notice before entry
The authority must give notice of its intention to enter the land, and the rights of entry provisions in the 1990 Act require advance notice where a dwelling is involved. Officers will usually write first setting out what they intend to do, when, and what it is likely to cost.
That letter is the moment to act. Options at that stage:
- Comply with the notice yourself, which is nearly always cheaper than letting the authority do it
- Agree a short extension in writing, with a programme the authority can monitor
- Apply for planning permission retrospectively under section 73A, which does not suspend the notice but may persuade the authority to hold off
- Point out any mismatch between the proposed works and the steps the notice actually requires
Obstructing a person exercising the authority's powers of entry is an offence in its own right, so physically preventing the work is the worst available option.
How costs are calculated and recovered
The authority may recover expenses reasonably incurred. In practice that means the contractor's invoice, site security, waste disposal, professional fees for supervision, and an administrative charge where the authority's scheme of charges provides for one.
The person liable is the owner at the time, and section 178 then allows that owner to recover the sum from the person who actually caused the breach. For a landlord whose tenant built an unauthorised structure, that is the route: pay the authority, then pursue the tenant under the lease or in contract. It is cold comfort where the tenant has gone, which is why forfeiture and reinstatement clauses in commercial leases matter.
| Who pays | Basis | Recourse |
|---|---|---|
| Owner at the time of the works | Expenses reasonably incurred by the authority under section 178 | May recover from the person who caused the breach |
| Person in breach | Liability to the owner | None, beyond disputing the amount |
| Subsequent purchaser | Charge on the land where the sum is unpaid | Price adjustment or retention on completion |
Registration as a local land charge
Where the sum remains unpaid it does not simply sit as an unsecured debt. Such charges are registrable, and authorities register them so they appear on a local land charges search. The practical effect is that the debt surfaces when the property is sold or mortgaged, and a lender will require it to be discharged.
Check the local land charges register and the local authority search results rather than relying on the seller's word. A property with a history of enforcement should prompt a specific enquiry about whether any direct action has been taken and whether expenses remain outstanding.
Challenging the amount claimed
There is no appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against the sum. The authority recovers it as a civil debt, which means the forum for a dispute is the county court and the test is whether the expenses were reasonably incurred.
Grounds that have substance:
- The works went beyond the steps required by the notice
- The contractor rate was above a reasonable market rate for the work, evidenced by comparable quotations
- Items charged are not expenses of carrying out the works, such as unrelated legal costs
- The claimed sum includes work the owner had already completed
- The authority acted while a valid application or legal challenge made entry premature
Grounds that do not work: that the notice was wrong, that permission should have been granted, or that the owner did not know about the notice. Those arguments belonged at the appeal stage. Keep photographs and dated records of the site condition before entry, because without them a dispute about scope becomes one person's word against another's.
Illustrative example. An owner left a notice requiring removal of an unauthorised hardstanding uncomplied with for 14 months. The authority removed it, restored the ground and claimed its contractor cost plus supervision. The owner disputed the restoration element on the basis that the notice required removal only. The parties settled on a reduced figure. The structure of that argument is the usual one. The outcome depends on the notice wording.
Effect on a sale of the property
A pending or completed direct action is a material matter on any sale. Buyers' solicitors will see the enforcement history on the local search, and a live notice runs with the land, so the buyer inherits the obligation to comply.
For a seller, the cleanest route is to comply before marketing. For a buyer, the questions are whether any notice remains outstanding, whether the authority has taken or threatened direct action, and whether any sum is registered. Where the answer to the last one is uncertain, a retention from the purchase price is a reasonable protection.
Lenders take a firmer line than buyers. A valuation that notes an outstanding enforcement notice will often be qualified, and some lenders decline to proceed until the position is resolved.
Avoiding default action
Comply, or get the breach regularised. Those are the only two routes, and both are cheaper than direct action.
Where the works might be lawful, a lawful development certificate application is the formal way to establish that, and it is the only way to confirm the position with any certainty. Where they are not, a retrospective application under section 73A gives the authority a decision to make, and a Planning Statement that addresses the harm identified in the notice head on is what makes the difference between a refusal and a permission. Appeal decisions on comparable breaches can help frame that case, and the note on using appeal decisions in a planning application explains how to deploy them.
If none of that is available, do the work. An owner who removes the structure a month after the compliance date pays a contractor. An owner who waits for the authority pays the authority's contractor, the authority's supervision costs and the authority's administrative charge, and finds the sum registered against the title. You can see how the supporting documents for a retrospective application fit together across the report index.
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.
Frequently asked questions
When can a council carry out enforcement works itself?
Once an enforcement notice has taken effect, the compliance period has expired and the required steps have not been taken. Section 178 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 then allows the authority to enter the land and carry out those steps. It can also prosecute for non-compliance under section 179, and often does both.
Who pays for the works?
The person who is the owner of the land at the time the work is done, which can be a purchaser rather than the person who committed the breach. That owner may then recover the sum from whoever caused the breach, which is the route for a landlord whose tenant built the unauthorised development.
Can the amount be appealed?
Not to the Planning Inspectorate. The authority recovers its expenses as a civil debt, so any dispute goes to the county court and turns on whether the expenses were reasonably incurred. Arguments that the notice was wrong or that permission should have been granted belonged at the appeal stage.
Will the debt show up on a property search?
Yes, where it remains unpaid. Such sums are registrable as local land charges and appear on a local authority search, which means a lender will require discharge before completing. Buyers of properties with any enforcement history should raise a specific enquiry about direct action and outstanding expenses.
What should I do when the warning letter arrives?
Compare the works the authority proposes with the steps the notice actually requires, then either comply yourself, agree a written extension with a monitored programme, or apply retrospectively under section 73A. Complying is almost always cheaper. Obstructing the authority's officers is a separate offence.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.