Scores of householders are ganging up against the council, crying…
“We want our CIL money back. We want justice.”
For the uninitiated, CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) is a cost imposed on development to support infrastructure, such as schools, roads, and community facilities provided by local authorities, including parish and county councils.
Setting the record straight on CIL
Controversy surrounding CIL is not just a Waverley issue. High charges imposed on developers and householders cause national concern, particularly from baffled householders who have inadvertently failed to complete vital paperwork.
Waverley’s Tory Group – led by Cllr Jane Austin, who, like her namesake, loves a good story, is intent on making a drama out of a crisis, using the CIL controversy to batter the ruling administration. An administration that has already acknowledged the levy is complex and has pledged to review it urgently.
Most of the present Tory incumbents were not members when the following decision was made, and those who were conveniently forgot.
The Waverley Web recalls that in October 2018, the Conservative-led Council chose not to offer discretionary CIL relief. At the time, the Lib Dem representative, Cllr Paul Follows, voiced concerns about the policy’s rigidity and potential to unfairly burden homeowners and small-scale developers.
The then-‘new boy on the block’, as Tory councillors then referred to him, ignored his warnings, so they forged ahead with the policy by majority vote.
Cllr Lauren Atkins now wants the council to use a “common-sense approach” where administrative mistakes were made and genuine householder errors had occurred/ She urged to act immediately and “wipe the slate clean ” without delay using powers it already has.” Her amendment was lost.
Some councils, like Guildford, still operate the 106 legal agreement system for infrastructure improvements. Dunsfold Garden Village falls into that category, with squillions of liabilities.
In a nutshell, the Rainbow Administration proposed a motion to ensure that CIL continued to support sustainable development and fund infrastructure fairly and proportionately. Due to public concern, it wants to form a cross-party executive working group to focus on:
1. The Rationale for Introducing CIL in 2018 and examine why CIL was chosen over continued reliance in general on Section 106 agreements or alternative mechanisms, and whether the impact on individual homeowners was thoroughly considered.
2. The Absence of Discretionary Relief: To establish why the Council did not adopt an exceptional circumstances policy, which could have allowed flexibility in cases of hardship or genuine error by applicants and to explore legal and procedural options for introducing a policy.
3. To explore the legal and procedural options for withdrawing or amending CIL Liability Notices in exceptional circumstances, and whether a formal protocol could be introduced.
4. To consider changes to the current system, including introducing ‘an exceptional circumstances policy’ and ensuring that penalties are proportionate and fair.
The Executive and the Council would finally consider a Cross-Party Working Group’s recommendations.
What is happening in Waverley is happening elsewhere. It is the unintended consequence of legislation brought in by the government in 2018 and adopted by WBC shortly after to support local communities and provide them with improved facilities.
Waverley CIL Enforcement Policy adopted by WBC Tory Executive 17th December 2024:
The Devil is in the detail.
Not all development is liable for CIL – buildings where “people do not normally go” or intermittently inspect or maintain fixed plant or machinery are exempt. Or when completed, the development has a gross internal area of less than 100 sqm (unless it comprises one or more dwellings). Local Authority charging schedules also exclude other development types.
Recently, several cases have been identified where householders have been charged many thousands of pounds for modest house extensions on which they may have been exempt. But only if they complete the necessary paperwork proving their exemption.
Said Planning Portfolio Holder Cllr Liz Townsend.
Residential extensions and annexes can be subject to an exemption or relief where the relevant criteria are met and the correct process is followed. However, the legislation has been drafted so that residential extensions become liable for CIL if the correct process is not followed.
Mr and Mrs Dally are one such case – they unexpectedly faced a £70,000 CIL charge, with no right of appeal. 65-year-old Mr Dally was forced to increase his mortgage by £400 per month, pending full repayment when he turns 70. He may be forced to sell his home to settle the debt.
CIL is payable when building work starts, and those unaware or who have filed paperwork incorrectly are forced to find large amounts of money to avoid enforcement action, the threat of asset removal, or, in worst cases, the threat of imprisonment.
Despite banging on for hours about the complex issue, the Tory motion was lost, as it was explained that a complete, honest and transparent investigation by a cross-party group would urgently consider the issue, allow proper scrutiny and follow the legal route of making any possible changes to the council’s current policy. It would also separately deal with the controversy surrounding the multi-million-pound unspent monies in the CIL pot. Much of which is earmarked for projects not yet underway.
