Seanad debates

Wednesday, 16 November 2011

6:00 pm

Photo of Jimmy HarteJimmy Harte (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, for coming to the House. He is a regular visitor and as somebody who was a Member of the House, he knows the format and the value of having a Minister or Minister of State replying to Senators' queries. My issue is local to Letterkenny, with a problem immediately affecting four estates. The ESB has written to the residents associations and told them the ESB would switch off power to the sewerage pumps because money has not been paid. The residents made inquiries through the council and by their own research found that the developer had gone bust. The developer was from Northern Ireland and the receiver appears to have abandoned ship altogether. These residents had to go to the ESB and in the past day or two it was indicated that power would not be cut off immediately, although this had been scheduled for 20 November. There has been no indication of who will pay the bill.

The residents and possibly a school would be affected if the power is switched off. These residents bought their properties in good faith and never expected to arrive at such a position. As a member of Letterkenny Town Council and Donegal County Council for many years, I believe the council has a responsibility for residents and must ultimately pick up the tab because of the lack of a system. At a council meeting last year I asked how many bonds had been called upon and only one has ever been used. I question the value of having a bond and the way bonds have been administered in the planning process, which leaves much to be desired. To date nobody has got to grips with when a bond can be called in or if they can be used. There seems to be many conditions attached to calling in a bond.

My experience at the council leads me to believe there is an obligation to take over estates after seven years but in many cases the cost of doing so would be prohibitive. Will the Minister of State clarify the issue? Builders have gone bust in the Minister of State's constituency and the seven-year period is up. In some cases estates may be 25 or 30 years old but the council would not have taken over. At what stage is a council legally obliged to take over the running of an estate? In the Letterkenny case the developer is from outside the jurisdiction and has no means of paying the ESB. Who has to pay it and will it come back to the residents? Some of the houses may be owned by developers or investors with no real interest in the local area. Houses may also be empty. Such people will not pay up and I would not expect a resident to have to pay for a developer's obligation.

I know the financial position of local authorities is difficult but it is more difficult for residents and a family home should be sacrosanct. The previous Administration allowed this get out of hand to such a degree that this is only now hitting home. It is not a tragedy but it is an injustice.

Photo of Brian HayesBrian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Harte for raising this matter, which is very important in his part of the country and Letterkenny in County Donegal in particular. It is important to the affected residents.

A development which has not been completed in accordance with the planning permission is unauthorised development and may be subject to planning enforcement. These provisions apply to all residential developments, whether they are to be managed by a management company. In so far as the taking in charge of residential developments is concerned, section 180 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 provides that, where an estate is completed to the satisfaction of the planning authority in accordance with the planning permission, and any conditions attached to the permission, the planning authority must initiate taking in charge procedures as soon as possible following a request to do so by the developer or by the majority of the owners. Similarly, where an estate has not been completed to the standard outlined in the planning permission and the planning authority has not taken enforcement action within the appropriate period, section 180 also provides that the planning authority must initiate taking-in-charge procedures if requested to do so by the owners of the units concerned. The decision as to whether an estate should be taken in charge is ultimately one for the elected members of the planning authority.

Section 180 was amended in the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010 to provide that a planning authority may take in charge an unfinished estate at any time after the expiration of the planning permission, in situations where enforcement actions have failed or the authority has not taken enforcement action. Planning authorities were also specifically empowered in the 2010 Act to take in charge part of an estate, or some but not all of the facilities in an estate. Housing estates and apartment developments not taken in charge normally remain private developments until such time as the owners of such developments take the necessary steps to have the development taken over by the relevant local authority.

Where, as the Senator has suggested, in regard to a number of developments in the areas mentioned, a receiver has been appointed by a financial institution, the receiver assumes the obligations of the developer. In this case, because the receiver has been appointed and given the scale of the development, the receiver in this case is the de facto developer and the owner of the development in law and in terms of the existing planning and development Acts. It then becomes a matter for the receiver and the institution to consider what steps they may wish to take to complete the development and have it taken in charge. This may include the realisation of assets on other sites within the control of the overall group in receivership to fund any necessary works.

I apologise for the absence of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan. I suggest a transcript of the Senator's contribution be sent to him to see what further action, if any, can be taken by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in its dealings with Donegal County Council. In this instance, the first port of call is the local authority. The county council's relationship - of whatever description - with the receiver who, effectively, has become the de facto owner of the site and the units on it still has to be clarified.

Photo of Jimmy HarteJimmy Harte (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The question on the minds of the residents in the estates is: who will ultimately pay the ESB if the company decides next month to cut off the power because of non-payment? The amount is as yet unclear because there are different figures for different areas. Houses have been added and as such, the scale of the problem is unclear. Who will ultimately be responsible for paying the bill?

Photo of Brian HayesBrian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As I am not aware of the particulars of the case, I am slow to make a judgment on it. In the first instance, one would have to see a report from Donegal County Council to see where the matter stands in respect of unauthorised development. I will ask the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to revert to the Senator to see whether the question can be answered. I am not in possession of information or details on the case as to what action, if any, Donegal County Council has taken in the case. As I said, the county council is the first port of call. I will ask the relevant section in the Department to revert to the Senator on the matter.